“You’ve probably heard about the highway and rail blockades happening across the country,” Pallister wrote in the Thursday evening message, “including the one right here in Manitoba.”
Echoing actions in Ontario and Quebec, demonstrators had blocked commuter and freight travel west of Winnipeg to protest the RCMP removal of Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs and activists challenging the construction of a gas pipeline in northern B.C.
Pallister announced Wednesday his government would seek a court injunction to remove the Manitoba protesters from the rail line. By 2 p.m. Thursday, though, CN Railway had received approval of its own injunction and the occupation was ended.
Still, Pallister sent out his email four hours later.
“We respect the rights of protesters,” it proclaims. “But laws need to be applied.”
The message goes on to criticize Manitoba NDP Leader Wab Kinew for supporting “those behind the blockades,” alongside signing the “‘Leap Manifesto,’ a radical document calling for the shutdown of Canada’s entire resource sector!”
For the record, the Leap Manifesto is an apolitical document created in 2015 by more than 60 Indigenous, social welfare, food, environmental, labour, and faith-based (mostly Christian) organizations, and committed to by more than 52,000 celebrities, activists, and Canadians.
The document is “a call for a Canada based on caring for the Earth and one another,” and asks signees to commit to honouring treaties, building locally-based energy infrastructure, and supporting immigrants and workers to enter environmentally-friendly sectors. It also calls on governments to fund “caregiving, teaching, social work, the arts, and public-interest media,” a national child-care program, and institute a universal basic income.
In fairness, the manifesto also calls for an end to fossil fuel subsidies, creation of a carbon tax, cuts to military spending, and adopting a national “polluter pays” principle.
So it isn’t “a radical document calling for the shutdown of Canada’s entire resource sector,” but rather a political vision running counter to the Tory premier’s.
(Also, for the record, Kinew has tweeted some support for the Wet’suwet’en, but not much; no doubt complicated by the Manitoba NDP’s relationship with B.C.’s NDP government.)
The conclusion of Pallister’s email to party supporters, however, shows its true purpose.
“We won’t stand back while two-tier justice happens in our province. And we won’t hesitate to seek an injunction in the future, if this happens again. If you’re with us, please consider making a donation to help us stand up for ordinary Manitobans.”
Pallister’s monetization of Indigenous v. non-Indigenous conflict in Canada has to mark a new low. In the past, he’s alluded to Indigenous peoples being “night hunters,” scary downtown Winnipeg threats, or “lobby groups.”
His characterization of Indigenous activists as lawless illegals working in opposition to “ordinary Manitobans” — a wild West, with him as the sheriff — is divisive, exploitative, and irresponsible.
The conflict with the Wet’suwet’en over the Coastal GasLink pipeline is fairly straightforward. Canada and B.C. are acting like they own Wet’suwet’en land, make the laws which govern their relationship, and no one is allowed to disagree.
The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs say otherwise. They claim 22,000 square kilometres since “time immemorial,” and are backed-up by the 1997 Supreme Court decision on the Delgamuukw case — which not only recognized their land title but their leadership of the Wet’suwet’en Nation (not the chiefs and councils imposed by the Indian Act).
The Supreme Court told Canada over two decades ago it had to negotiate with the Wet’suwet’en. It has not happened.
Instead, the gas pipeline was planned and approved. To fulfill Canada’s constitutional obligation to “consult” with First Nations, B.C. offered Indian Act chiefs and councils “benefit agreements” (jobs and money).
Benefit agreements are not consent. They’re mostly payoffs meant to appease Canada’s own laws while Indigenous laws, land claims, and governments are ignored. SOURCE
A worker picks cherries from a tree on May 21, 2018 in Acampo, California.Photo: Getty
Not sure you’ve heard, but the planet is getting hotter. The heat is making farming harder in some places, but it’s also making it possible to bring agriculture into new areas. Farmers are growing food in northern Alberta, Canada. Russia plans to “use the advantages” of global warming to expand its agriculture northward. And by 2030, New England could have three times as much farmland as it does now. Finally, some good news!
Except maybe not. New research shows that expanding agriculture northward could screw up the environment and unleash a flood of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, worsening the climate crisis. The new study published in PLOS One on Wednesday shows that disturbing soils on new northern farmland could release 177 gigatons of carbon. That’s equivalent to more than a century’s worth of present-day carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S.
“This work highlights how we must approach the idea of developing new farmland very cautiously and be extremely mindful of potential negative environmental impacts,” the authors wrote.
The researchers used projections from 17 global climate models and found that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate, global temperatures could rise by 4.8 degrees Celsius (8.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century. That would open up as much as 9.3 million square miles of arable land in the northern part of the world as well as high altitude areas by 2080. Those new areas could support important food crops, including wheat, corn and soy. Yes, the findings are based on the upper end of carbon emissions scenarios, but even lower emissions scenarios will still warm the planet and create millions of acres of new potential farmland.
Farming isn’t inherently bad. After all, people need to eat. And if the world’s population grows to 10 billion by 2050, the world will need to produce 70 percent more food. The problem is how we farm. Soil traps carbon from the atmosphere, and when it’s turned over to create new farmland, some of that carbon gets released. That effect at a large scale, the researchers worry, could trigger runaway climate change.
To make matters worse, farming new frontiers could also pose problems for biodiversity, especially in tropical mountain regions that are newly warm enough to support agriculture. The predicted new farming frontiers cover some of the world’s most biodiverse regions and critical bird habitats. Agriculture that relies on fertilizer and fossil fuel-powered equipment also releases toxic byproducts into the local environment that can trickle downstream (see the Gulf of Mexico dead zone for a prime example of how had it can get). Farming higher in the mountains could pollute drinking water that more than 1.8 billion people rely on.
These effects are all bad on their own, but the climate crisis, biodiversity loss, and water pollution can compound the stress of each even further. Another recent study showed that these threats “have the potential to impact and amplify one another in ways that might cascade to create global systemic collapse.”
There arepolicies that could mitigate these effects, such as making sure that the world’s most carbon-rich soil is off limits, and reforesting the areas that are no longer suitable for agriculture. And since all the potential farmland the researchers identified isn’t ready to farm yet, the time to create those policies is now, before there’s money to be made off those new frontiers and things go full Wild West. SOURCE
A new generation of autonomous robots is helping plant breeders shape the crops of tomorrow.
Not only can the TerraSentia navigate under dense crop canopies, it can make many observations about plant health and yield as it drives through fields.Credit…Institute for Genomic Biology/University of Illinois
FARMER CITY, Illinois — In a research field off Highway 54 last autumn, corn stalks shimmered in rows 40-feet deep. Girish Chowdhary, an agricultural engineer at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, bent to place a small white robot at the edge of a row marked 103. The robot, named TerraSentia, resembled a souped up version of a lawn mower, with all-terrain wheels and a high-resolution camera on each side.
In much the same way that self-driving cars “see” their surroundings, TerraSentia navigates a field by sending out thousands of laser pulses to scan its environment. A few clicks on a tablet were all that were needed to orient the robot at the start of the row before it took off, squeaking slightly as it drove over ruts in the field.
“It’s going to measure the height of each plant,” Dr. Chowdhary said.
It would do that and more. The robot is designed to generate the most detailed portrait possible of a field, from the size and health of the plants, to the number and quality of ears each corn plant will produce by the end of the season, so that agronomists can breed even better crops in the future. In addition to plant height, TerraSentia can measure stem diameter, leaf-area index and “stand count” — the number of live grain- or fruit-producing plants — or all of those traits at once. And Dr. Chowdhary is working on adding even more traits, or phenotypes, to the list with the help of colleagues at EarthSense, a spinoff company that he created to manufacture more robots.
Traditionally, plant breeders have measured these phenotypes by hand, and used them to select plants with the very best characteristics for creating hybrids. The advent of DNA sequencing has helped, enabling breeders to isolate genes for some desirable traits, but it still takes a human to assess whether the genes isolated from the previous generation actually led to improvements in the next one.
A blossoming of bots
“The idea is that robots can automate the phenotyping process and make these measurements more reliable,” Dr. Chowdhary said. In doing so, the TerraSentia and others like it can help optimize the yield of farms far beyond what humans alone have been able to accomplish.
Lately, smaller, more dexterous robots have emerged in droves. In 2014, the French company Naïo released 10 prototypes of a robot named Oz that is just three feet long and weighs roughly 300 pounds. It assembles phenotypes of vegetable crops even as it gobbles up weeds. EcoRobotix, based in Switzerland, makes a solar-powered robot that rapidly identifies crops and weeds; the device resembles an end table on wheels. The household appliance-maker Bosch has also tested a robot called BoniRob for analyzing soil and plants.
“All of a sudden, people are starting to realize that data collection and analysis tools developed during the 90s technology boom can be applied to agriculture,” said George A. Kantor, a senior systems scientist at Carnegie Mellon University, who is using his own research to develop tools for estimating crop yields.
The TerraSentia is among the smallest of the farmbots available today. At 12.5 inches wide and roughly the same height, the 30-pound robot fits well between rows of various crops. It also focuses on gathering data from much earlier in the agricultural pipeline: The research plots where plant breeders select the varieties that ultimately make it to market.
The data collected by the TerraSentia is changing breeding from a reactionary process into a more predictive one. Using the robot’s advanced machine-learning skills, scientists can collate the influence of hundreds, even thousands, of factors on a plant’s future traits, much like doctors utilize genetic tests to understand the likelihood of a patient developing breast cancer or Type 2 diabetes.
“Using phenotyping robots, we can identify the best-yielding plants before they even shed pollen,” said Mike Gore, a plant biologist at Cornell University. He added that doing so can potentially cut in half the time needed to breed a new cultivar — a plant variety produced by selective breeding — from roughly eight years to just four.
Sowing a niche
The demands on agriculture are rising globally. The human population is expected to climb to 9.8 billion by 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100, according to the United Nations. To feed the world — with less land, fewer resources and in the face of climate change — farmers will need to augment their technological intelligence.
“There’s definitely a niche for this kind of robot,” said Neil Hausmann, who oversees research and development at Corteva. “It provides standardized, objective data that we use to make a lot of our decisions. We use it in breeding and product advancement, in deciding which product is the best, which ones to move forward and which ones will have the right characteristics for growers in different parts of the country.”
Dr. Chowdhary and his colleagues hope that partnerships with big agribusinesses and academic institutions will help subsidize the robots for smallholder farmers. “Our goal is to eventually get the cost of the robots under $1,000,” he said.
Farmers don’t need special expertise to operate the TerraSentia, either, Dr. Chowdhary said. The robot is almost fully autonomous. Growers with thousands of acres of land can have several units survey their crops, but a farmer in a developing country with only five acres of land could use one just as easily. The TerraSentia has already been tested in a wide variety of fields, including corn, soybean, sorghum, cotton, wheat, tomatoes, strawberries, citrus crops, apple orchards, almond farms and vineyards.
But some experts question whether such robots will ever truly be targeted to small farms, or a sufficiently affordable option. “For the kind of agriculture that smallholders tend to engage in, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and parts of Latin America, there are a lot of barriers to the adoption of new technologies,” said Kyle Murphy, a policy and agricultural development analyst at the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab at M.I.T. He added that robots like the TerraSentia may be more likely to help smallholder farmers indirectly, by promoting the development of better or more suitable crops.
The road to improvement
Before the TerraSentia can advance crop breeding for a wide swath of farmers, it must perfect a few more skills. Occasionally, it trips over branches and debris on the ground, or its wheels get stuck in muddy soil, requiring the user to walk behind the rover and right its course as needed. “Hopefully, by next year we’ll be able to train the TerraSentia so even more so users won’t have to be anywhere in the field,” Dr. Chowdhary said.
For the moment, the TerraSentia keeps a leisurely pace, less than one mile an hour. This allows its cameras to capture slight changes in pixels to measure the plants’ leaf-area index and recognize signs of disease. Dr. Chowdhary and his colleagues at EarthSense are hoping that advancements in camera technology will eventually add to the robot’s speed.
The team is also building a maintenance barn, where the TerraSentia can dock after a long day. There, its battery can be swapped with a fully charged one, and its wheels and sensors can be sprayed clean. But for now, a farmer simply dumps the robot in the back of a truck, takes it home and uploads its data to the cloud for analysis.
The main office of EarthSense, in Urbana, Illinois, is full of early versions of robotic technology that didn’t quite pan out. Initial prototypes of TerraSentia lacked a proper suspension system, so the robot jumped into the air and disrupted the video streams whenever researchers set it loose in a deeply rutted field. Another design kept melting from the heat of the robot’s motors, until they switched plastics and added metal shielding.
Those early, cracked chassis are now stacked on a shelf, like a museum display: a reminder of the need for improvement, but also of the excitement that the robot has generated.
“A lot people who tried the early prototypes still came back to us, even after having robots that essentially broke on them all the time,” Dr. Chowdhary said. “That’s how badly they needed these things.” SOURCE
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer speaks to media on Parliament Hill on Feb. 14, 2020. Photo by Kamara Morozuk
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer appeared in the halls of Canada’s seat of power Friday, walked up to the microphone and cameras waiting for him to address a national audience and told those who have been standing in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en to “check their privilege.”
The Gidimt’en camp of members of the Wet’suwet’en Nation told National Observer that kind of statement is “racist and absurd” when many Indigenous communities have been discriminated against or lack access to basic services.
Scheer was responding to the news this week that blockades of key rail lines — in protest of the RCMP’s arrests of Wet’suwet’en members in British Columbia in order to clear the route for a gas pipeline — are putting pressure on some industry employees.
He seized on numbers cited by transportation-sector union Teamsters Canada that “up to 6,000 workers” could be out of work as a result of a decision by Canadian National (CN) Railway to shut down eastern operations, as well as Via Rail’s cancellation of passenger-train service across the country. More than 400 trains have been cancelled in the past week, CN has said.
“These protesters, these activists, may have the luxury of spending days at a time at a blockade, but they need to check their privilege,” Scheer told reporters, who had gathered outside the House of Commons chamber on Parliament Hill in order to broadcast his views.
“They need to check their privilege, and let people whose jobs depend on the railway system, small businesses and farmers do their jobs.”
Asked what she thought of Scheer’s statement, Molly Wickham, spokeswoman for the Gidimt’en camp of Wet’suwet’en Nation members, said the Tory leader’s words made little sense.
“All of Canada is subsidized by Indigenous people. All Canadian industries and transportation infrastructure rely on the theft of Indigenous land for their existence,” she said. “Calling Indigenous land defenders ‘privileged’ when so many of our communities are denied basic human rights and services is racist and absurd.”
Marc Miller says he will speak with the prime minister tonight, discuss next steps with cabinet
Marc Miller meets with Mohawk leaders to discuss Ontario rail blockade. 1:04
The federal Indigenous Services Minister wrapped up daylong meetings with members of the Mohawk First Nation Saturday evening saying “modest progress” had been made in talks to end a blockade that has brought rail service throughout much of Eastern Canada to a virtual standstill.
Marc Miller said he plans to take what he learned after the meeting on Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory back to Ottawa to share with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and cabinet.
He said the talks were productive, but there was no news on whether the protest was going to end.
Marc Miller and members of the Mohawk First Nation began discussions Saturday morning at the site where a handful of protestors were camped out for the 10th straight day in solidarity with the hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en First Nation in British Columbia, who oppose the development of a liquefied natural gas pipeline crossing their traditional territory.
Representatives from 20 First Nations along the pipeline route — including the elected chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en — signed agreements with Coastal GasLink consenting to the project. However, the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs say those councils were established by the Indian Act and only have authority over reserve lands.
After meeting with the group for about an hour at the Wyman Rd. CN Rail crossing, about 200 kilometres east of Toronto, the discussion moved to the Mohawk Community Centre on Mohawk Tyendinaga Territory.
The meeting was described as “emotional” at times, according to people inside the room who spoke to CBC News.
Miller said upon arriving that he didn’t know whether he could convince the Mohawk to end the blockade and allow the resumption of rail services, but said he was there to start a dialogue.
“This is a situation that is very tense, very volatile, there are some people that have been standing out there for days, so today is a chance to talk and have a real discussion,” said Miller before the meeting.
“We’re a nation of people that have stopped talking to each other. We tweet. We make statements on Facebook. We go around asking, condemning, but we’re not talking.”
Train services suspended across Eastern Canada
The Ontario blockade, combined with similar efforts in B.C. and Quebec, resulted in Via Rail suspending passenger train service nationwide and Canadian National Railway Co. shutting down freight operations for Eastern Canada on Friday.
The Mohawk agreed to meet with Miller after he sent an invitation to some Mohawk leaders on Wednesday. Miller requested the meeting, he said, to “polish the silver covenant chain,” which the Mohawks say refers to one of the original agreements between the First Nation and the Crown.
Miller acknowledged the difficulties that the blockades have caused for travellers and businesses, but stressed that the government’s approach was to negotiate, rather than have police dismantle them.
“All of Canada is hurting, the economy is slowing down,” said Miller. “Everyone knows the reports about supply shortages, but we can’t move forward without dialogue and that’s we’re going to do today.”
The approach worked in B.C., where protestors blocking CN train tracks near New Hazelton in northern B.C., agreed to end their protest after both the provincial and federal governments agreed to sit down with Gitxsan hereditary chiefs.
Still, with new blockades and protests popping up in different places almost daily, the Liberal government risks losing control of the situation.
A growing number of business leaders and industry groups called for government or police intervention in the shutdowns, and federal Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer took up the cry on Friday.
“Law enforcement should enforce the law,” he said. “We have court orders, we have court injunctions. They need to be respected.”
Canadian National Railway obtained a court injunction to end the demonstration on Feb. 7, but the Ontario Provincial Police have not enforced it.
WATCH | Coastal GasLink: Exploring Indigenous support and opposition
The $6-billion, 670-kilometre Coastal GasLink pipeline has received approval from the province, and 20 First Nations band councils, but the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs say those band councils are only responsible for the territory within their individual reserves. 11:52
Ontario Provincial Police defended their handling of the situation, saying officers have been in talks with the protesters throughout the week — a move that’s in line with the force’s framework on resolving conflicts with Indigenous communities.
“The proper use of police discretion is a valid, appropriate approach to de-escalating situations such as this,” spokesperson Bill Dickson said in a statement. “The proper exercise of police discretion should not be confused with a lack of enforcement.”
“Also remember that they have to take into account some history here when we’re talking about what happened at Ipperwash,” he said, referring to a violent 1995 standoff that resulted in the death of Indigenous activist Dudley George. “It is their decision about how to approach that.”
Trudeau agreed, noting that police forces have the right to use their discretion when addressing such situations.
“We are not the kind of country where politicians tell police what to do in operational matters,” Trudeau said at a press conference in Germany. SOURCE
Alternate route was too costly and posed greater environmental risks, company says
In January, RCMP enforced an injunction, ordering people to stop preventing Coastal GasLink workers from accessing a road and bridge in northern B.C. A second round of injunction enforcement occurred earlier this month. (Chantelle Bellrichard/CBC)
As rallies spring up across Canada to support Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs fighting the Coastal GasLink pipeline in northern B.C., an increasing number of people are wondering: Why doesn’t the company use an alternate route to avoid opposition?
Former NDP MP Nathan Cullen raised the idea several times when he was still an elected representative for the region. More recently, Green Party MP Paul Manley returned from a January visit to the region with the idea — one he said came from the hereditary chiefs themselves.
“The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs provided alternative routes to Coastal GasLink that would have been acceptable to them as a pipeline corridor,” he said in a statement last month.
“Coastal GasLink decided that it did not want to take those acceptable options and instead insisted on a route that drives the pipeline through ecologically pristine and culturally important areas.”
The $6-billion, 670-kilometre Coastal GasLink pipeline would move natural gas from near Dawson Creek, in northeastern B.C., to a coastal LNG Canada export terminal in Kitimat. It is a key component of a $40-billion project announced by the federal and provincial governments last fall.
Manley’s statement has since gone viral, but little about the alternate path proposed by the hereditary chiefs has been reported. Here is what CBC has learned about that route, and the reasons given for its rejection.
Coastal GasLink’s selection process
In an interview with reporters on Jan. 27, Coastal GasLink president David Pfeiffer was asked why the company wouldn’t move the pipeline’s path in order to avoid conflict.
“We spent many years assessing multiple routes through the Wet’suwet’en Territory, about six years,” Pfeiffer said. “The current route was selected as the most technically viable and one that minimized impact to the environment.”
He said the company explored multiple alternative routes after getting feedback from local First Nations and Indigenous leaders, including the Office of the Wet’suwet’en, a non-profit governed by Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs and used to manage lands and resources throughout their territory.
The company says the detour was selected after receiving feedback from Indigenous groups in the area.
The Wet’suwet’en alternative
During the planning stages of the pipeline, the Office of the Wet’suwet’en presented Coastal GasLink with an alternate route through its territory referred to as “The McDonnell Lake route.”
According to Mike Ridsdale, the Office of the Wet’suwet’en’s environmental assessment co-ordinator, that route would have followed a path through Wet’suwet’en territory eyed for use by Pacific Northern Gas for an expansion and looping project.
Manley has confirmed this is the route he was referencing in his statement.
Ridsdale said the route follows “already heavily disturbed areas along the Highway 16 corridor, and away from highly known cultural areas, as well as away from the Skeena headwaters of salmon spawning areas that the Wet’suwet’en rely on.”
Why it was rejected
In a letter provided to CBC by the Office of Wet’swuwet’en, Coastal GasLink says it explored the possibility of using the McDonnell Lake route through aerial and computer reviews, and by meeting with representatives of Pacific Northern Gas.
The letter — dated Aug. 21, 2014 — also outlines reasons Coastal GasLink rejected the route, including:
It would increase the pipeline’s length by as much as 89 kilometers, upping both the environmental impact and as much as $800 million in capital costs.
The pipeline’s diameter, at 48 inches, is too large to safely be installed along the route. (Pacific Northern’s pipeline is between 10 and 12 inches, and the proposed upgrade would be 24 inches.)
The McDonnell Lake route would be closer to the urban B.C. communities of Smithers, Houston, Terrace and Kitimat.
Re-routing the pipeline would impact an additional four First Nations who had not already been consulted by Coastal GasLink, which would add up to one year of delays to the construction process.
“From our perspective, the route was not feasible on the basis of those significant environmental and technical issues and therefore route examination ceased,” said Coastal GasLink spokesperson Terry Cunha in a followup email to CBC.
Those same reasons were laid out in the B.C. Supreme Court injunction issued Dec. 31, 2019, which allowed Coastal GasLink to proceed with construction of the pipeline.
In a 2014 submission to Coastal GasLink and B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Office, the Office of the Wet’suwet’en cites Coastal GasLink’s rejection of the McDonnell Lake route as a sign the company is unwilling to work with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs.
Ridsdale said the Office of the Wet’suwet’en also proposed a second route, known as the Kemano, because then the pipeline would have travelled through an area already damaged by flooding from the Rio Tinto Alcan project.
He also said the route ultimately selected by Coastal GasLink travels a portion of terrain known as the “Icy Pass route,” and provided documentation from another pipeline company rejecting the Icy Pass route because of the high risk of erosion, slides and the need to construct numerous new access roads.
There is no mention of the Kemano or Icy Pass routes in either the 2014 submission from the Office of the Wet’suwet’en, nor in the B.C. Supreme Court injunction.
In that same 2014 letter, which Coastal GasLink has now published on its website, the company suggested using a “Morice River North” alternate route for approximately 55 km of the pipeline, which it said would take construction three to five kilometers away from the Unist’ot’en healing centre established by the hereditary chiefs in 2015.
In a statement posted on its website, Coastal GasLink said it never received a response to this offer, nor to any other aspects of the letter.
The Office of the Wet’suwet’en also did not respond to CBC’s query asking for a response to Coastal GasLink’s reasoning for rejecting the McDonnell Lake route.
“The route that has been selected reflects the best engineering, environmental, cultural and economically feasible criteria possible” Coastal GasLink said in an emailed statement to CBC.
“There is no route available to CGL that would avoid traditional Wet’suwet’en territory.… To change the route to avoid Wet’suwet’en territory at this date would require major environmental assessment work, which would not be feasible under the timelines to which we have committed.”