sa¹ú¼Ê´«Ã½

Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Editorial: New risks for Greenpeace

A group of environmental activists took a risk in 1971 when they set sail from Vancouver in a chartered fishing boat they had renamed Greenpeace in an attempt to stop the U.S.

A group of environmental activists took a risk in 1971 when they set sail from Vancouver in a chartered fishing boat they had renamed Greenpeace in an attempt to stop the U.S. from conducting an underground nuclear weapons test at Amchitka, one of Alaska’s Aleutian Islands.

They financed the expedition largely through a benefit concert that included performances by Joni Mitchell, James Taylor, Chilliwack and Phil Ochs.

The expedition appeared to be a failure — Greenpeace was turned back by the American navy and the U.S. detonated its largest-ever underground nuclear explosion without hindrance. But the voyage stirred up public interest that continued to grow. More nuclear tests planned for Amchitka were cancelled and the island was later declared a bird sanctuary.

From that beginning, Greenpeace has become the world’s most prominent environmental organization.

Once, its office was the back room of a store in Kitsilano in Vancouver. Now, its headquarters are in the Netherlands and it has offices in 40 countries.

This week, it was revealed that a Greenpeace investment expert, acting without authorization and since fired, took another kind of risk and lost more than $5 million in a rash speculation in the currency market. But that’s not a huge problem — Greenpeace brings in more than $400 million in revenues each year.

We applaud its success, but it’s more than a little disconcerting to realize that a grassroots movement supported by ordinary people has grown so big that a staff member can gamble that much money.