Has Canada sold out the environment? On Earth Day (April 22), most environmental doomsayers take the opportunity to answer an unqualified "yes." To support this claim they cite budget cuts to environmental protection, the failure of the last Parliament to pass a new Environmental Protection Act, failure to pass an Endangered Species Act and the federal government's decision to choose voluntary emission reduction programs over command-and-control regulations. Their biggest beef over the past year has been Canada's failure to meet its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels.

This list may seem convincing, but before jumping on the doomsday bandwagon, let us consider a few facts.

First, instead of condemning Canada for not passing more environmental regulations, doesn't it make more sense to examine Canada's record at reducing pollution? By this measure, our performance is impressive. Environmental Indicators 1998, a 70-page study done by The Fraser Institute that examines environmental trends in Canada and the United States, shows that since 1980, environmental quality in Canada has improved by about 11 percent.

Average air quality showed the most dramatic improvement, with 30.1 percent less pollution in the air today than 15 years ago. For example, the amount of sulphur dioxide measured in the air decreased by 44.5 percent, lead fell 94 percent, and carbon monoxide fell 57.2 percent. Canadian water pollution also declined by a substantial 27.1 percent relative to 1980 levels. Other indicators of improving environmental conditions include an increase in forests, as growth exceeds tree harvesting, and an increase in the amount of land set aside for parks and wilderness. When evaluating Canada's commitment to the environment, our actions should be given credit.

Second, environmentalists should be applauding the failure of bills like the Endangered Species Act. While the intent of the bill, which is to save endangered species, is noble, the outcome in terms of species protection would have been disastrous. The proposed bill would have destroyed incentives for property owners to protect endangered species or their habitat. The US Endangered Species Act, which was passed in 1973, has not saved a single species, but has nevertheless cost billions of dollars. Those dollars could have been spent addressing serious environmental problems. In fact, the legislation has caused the death of many endangered animals. How? In order to protect themselves from uncompensated regulatory seizures, some US landowners have resorted to what is known as a "shoot, shovel, and shut-up" policy. The moral of the story? Don't confuse more regulations, even well-intentioned ones, with higher levels of environmental quality. Canadians should be proud that we care enough about the fate of endangered species not to repeat the mistakes of our neighbours to the south.

Finally, condemning Canada for failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels is only reasonable if you believe the apocalyptic global warming myth. This myth claims that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity and it has the potential to destroy the planet. Scientists do not buy it. In a Gallup poll of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society, 83 percent of scientists disagreed when asked "Do scientists think human actions are causing global warming?" They have good reason to be sceptical. While ground-level temperature measurements show a warming of between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1850, global satellite data show no evidence of warming since those measurements began in 1979. In fact, the satellite data detect a slight global cooling. The ground-level temperature measurements, it turns out, may be just detecting local warming near urban centres. Another problem with the man-is-cooking-the-planet theory is that most of the warming that has occurred over the past 150 years occurred prior to 1940, whereas most of the increase in green-house gas emissions occurred after 1940. Clearly, the evidence does not support the catastrophic global warming theory. Good scientists reject theories that evidence does not support. Responsible governments should too.

Canadians can be proud of their environmental record. Through our actions we have improved our environment, including the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we use. Through careful thought we have not passed legislation that would, in effect, threaten endangered species. In light of the science, we have not introduced draconian regulations to reduce greenhouse gases—reductions that would be costly and impede our ability to address other environmental concerns.

Canada has not sold out the environment. We have protected and enhanced it. The only sell-outs are the environmentalists who refuse to acknowledge the facts and who seem to get lost amidst the rhetoric and doom.