document_title: Batman (1966 film)

question_text: who played the penguin in the original batman

text: Batman (1966 film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: When Batman and Robin get a tip that Commodore Schmidlapp is in danger aboard his yacht, they launch a rescue mission using the Batcopter. As Batman descends on the bat-ladder to land on the yacht, it suddenly vanishes beneath him. He rises out of the sea with a shark attacking his leg. After Batman dislodges it with bat-shark repellent, the shark explodes. Batman and Robin head back to Commissioner Gordon's office, where they deduce that the tip was a set-up by the United Underworld, a gathering of four of the most powerful villains in Gotham City (The Joker, The Penguin, The Riddler, and The Catwoman).

text: The United Underworld equip themselves with a dehydrator that can turn humans into dust (an invention of Schmidlapp, who is unaware that he has been kidnapped), a submarine made to resemble a penguin, and their three pirate henchmen (Bluebeard, Morgan and Quetch). It is revealed the yacht was really a projection. When Batman and Robin return to a buoy concealing a projector, they are trapped on the buoy by a magnet and targeted by torpedoes. They use a radio-detonator to destroy two of the missiles, and a porpoise sacrifices itself to intercept the last one. The Catwoman, disguised as Soviet journalist "Miss Kitka", helps the group kidnap Bruce Wayne and pretends to be kidnapped with him, as part of a plot to lure Batman and finish him off with another of the Penguin's explosive animals (not knowing that Bruce Wayne is Batman's alter-ego). After Bruce Wayne escapes captivity, the Penguin disguises himself as the Commodore and schemes his way into the Batcave along with five dehydrated henchmen. This plan fails when the henchmen unexpectedly disappear into antimatter once struck: The Penguin mistakenly rehydrated them with heavy water, used to recharge the Batcave's atomic pile.

text: Ultimately, Batman and Robin are unable to prevent the kidnapping of the dehydrated United World Organization's Security Council. Giving chase in the batboat to retrieve them (and Miss Kitka, presumed by the duo as still captive), Robin uses a sonic charge weapon to disable Penguin's submarine and force it to surface, where a fist fight ensues. Although Batman and Robin win the fight, Batman is heartbroken to find out that his "true love" Miss Kitka is actually the Catwoman when her mask falls off. Commodore Schmidlapp accidentally breaks the vials containing the powdered Council members, mixing them together.

text: Batman sets to work, constructing an elaborate filter to separate the mingled dust. Robin asks him whether it might be in the world's best interests for them to alter the dust samples, so that humans can no longer harm one another. In response, Batman says that they cannot do so, reminding Robin of the fate of the Penguin's henchmen and their tainted rehydration, and can only hope for people in general to learn to live together peacefully on their own.

text: With the world watching, the Security Council is re-hydrated. All of the members are restored alive and well, continuing to squabble among themselves and totally oblivious of their surroundings, but each of them now speaks the language and displays the stereotypical mannerisms of a nation other than their own. Batman quietly expresses his sincere hope to Robin that this "mixing of minds" does more good than it does harm. The duo quietly leave United World Headquarters by climbing out of the window and descending on their batropes.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Adam West as Bruce Wayne / Batman
Burt Ward as Dick Grayson / Robin
Lee Meriwether as The Catwoman (Miss Kitka)
Cesar Romero as The Joker
Burgess Meredith as The Penguin
Frank Gorshin as The Riddler
Alan Napier as Alfred Pennyworth
Neil Hamilton as Commissioner James Gordon
Stafford Repp as Chief Miles O'Hara
Madge Blake as Aunt Harriet Cooper
Reginald Denny as Commodore Schmidlapp
Milton Frome as Vice Admiral Fangschleister
Gil Perkins as Bluebeard
Dick Crockett as Morgan
George Sawaya as Quetch
Van Williams (uncredited voice) as President Lyndon B. Johnson[4]

text: The film includes most members of the original TV cast: the actors for Batman, Robin, Alfred, Gordon, O'Hara, Aunt Harriet, the Joker, the Penguin, and the Riddler all reprised their roles. Though Julie Newmar had at this point played Catwoman in two episodes of season one in the TV series, she had other commitments at that time[5] and was replaced by Lee Meriwether in the film. According to the Biography special Catwoman: Her Many Lives, aired on July 20, 2004, it was stated that Newmar was unable to reprise her role due to a reported back injury. Catwoman was nonetheless played by Newmar once again in the following eleven episodes of season two of the series; Eartha Kitt would then play Catwoman in three episodes of season three.

text: In his autobiography, Adam West writes of his asking for more money to do the film and that the producers countered with the fact that another actor would be hired. Batman was Denny's final film appearance. Jack LaLanne has a cameo as a man on a rooftop with bikini-clad women.[6]

text: Production[edit]

text: William Dozier wanted to make a big-screen film to generate interest in his proposed Batman TV series by having the feature in theaters while the first season of the series was rolling before the cameras. The studio, 20th Century Fox, refused because it would have to cover the entire cost of a movie, while it would only have to share the cost of a TV series (a much less risky proposition).[7]

text: The film features many characters from the show. It was written by series writer Lorenzo Semple, Jr. and directed by Leslie H. Martinson.[8] Martinson had directed a pair of the television series season one episodes: "The Penguin Goes Straight" and "Not Yet, He Ain't".

text: Tone[edit]

text: Even though it is often described (like many contemporary shows) as a parody of a popular comic-book character, some commentators believe that its comedy is not so tightly confined. They felt the film's depiction of the Caped Crusader "captured the feel of the contemporary comics perfectly".[9] The film was, they remind us, made at a time when "the Batman of the Golden Age comics was already essentially neutered."[10]

text: Certain elements verge into direct parody of the history of Batman. The movie, like the TV series, is strongly influenced by the comparatively obscure 1940s serials of Batman, such as the escapes done almost out of luck.[10] The penchant for giving devices a "Bat-" prefix and the dramatic use of stylized title cards during fight scenes acknowledge some of the conventions that the character had accumulated in various media. However, the majority of Batman's campier moments can be read as a broader parody on contemporary mid-1960s culture in general.[11]

text: Furthermore, the movie represented Batman's first major foray into Cold War issues paying heavy attention to Polaris Missiles, war surplus submarines and taking a poke at the Pentagon. The inclusion of a glory-hunting presidential character and the unfavorable portrayal of Security Council Members marked Batman's first attempts to poke fun at domestic and international politics.[12]

text: Vehicles[edit]

text: Besides the Batmobile, other vehicles used by The Dynamic Duo include:

text:
Batcycle with side car
Batboat, provided by Glastron
Batcopter

text: Of the three new Batvehicles which first appeared in the Batman film, only the Batcycle properly crossed over into the TV series as the budgetary limits of the TV series precluded the full use of the others. While the Batcopter and Batboat from the movie appeared briefly in episodes (including a use of the Batboat in the conclusion of the first post-film two-parter: "Walk the Straight and Narrow"), they primarily did so in the form of stock-footage scenes from the film intercut into the series.

text: Soundtrack[edit]

text: Nelson Riddle's original score to Batman the Movie was released in 2010 by La-La Land Records and Fox Music. The album contains the entire score as heard in the film in chronological order as well as an unreleased cue. This limited edition includes a lavishly illustrated color booklet which features exclusive liner notes by Brian Baterwhite. This Limited Edition was of 2000 units.

text: It was newly re-issued in 2016. While the program and master of this release is identical to the 2010 release, this reissue features all-new exclusive liner notes by John Takis and art design by Jim Titus. This new Limited Edition is of 2500 units.

text: Track listing

text:
Acknowledgment/Main Title 2:31
Batmobile To Airport 2:01
A Good Job 2:22
Roger Wilco (2:45)
Just Ring/Yo Ho, Sir/Let’s Find Out 2:21
Tricky Buoy 3:24
Torpedoes 2:35
Holy Polaris 1:01
Kitka 1:13
Dark Eyes (Source) 0:21
Plaisir D’amour (Source) 1:25
Bruce And Kitka* 0:44
Shades Of Smolensic 3:20
Jet Umbrellas 1:50
Filthy Criminals 1:34
Chamber 17 1:14
Credulous Creatures/Fine Finkish Friends 2:19
Dehydrated 1:36
Stand Clear 2:10
Flee For Your Life 2:38
False Feathers/Swallow This Pill 3:19
My Very Paradise 2:06
The Grotto/A Stitch In Time 3:09
Emergency Operation 2:55
Small Craft 3:30
Attack (3:23)
Take It In Tow 0:56
Vials 4:23
End Title 1:10

tag: ol

text: Bonus Tracks

text:
“Again” 2:05
Submarine Battle (Edited Music)* 4:37
Batman Theme 0:46

text: Previously Unreleased

text: Total Time: 72:13

text: Release[edit]

text: Batman premiered at the Paramount Theatre in Austin, Texas on July 30, 1966 (between the first and second seasons of the TV series); it was moderately successful at the box office. The Batboat featured in the film was created by Austin-based company Glastron, whose payment was in having the film premiere in their hometown. In conjunction with the premiere, Jean Boone of Austin CBS affiliate station KTBC interviewed the film's cast, including Lee Meriwether, Cesar Romero, and Adam West.[13]

text: ABC, the network which previously aired the Batman television series, first broadcast the film on the July 4, 1971 edition of The ABC Sunday Night Movie; the film was quickly rebroadcast on ABC September 4 of that year. The film debuted on home video via formats VHS and Betamax release in 1985 by Playhouse Video, in 1989 by CBS/Fox Video, and in 1994 by Fox Video. The film was released on DVD in 2001, and re-released July 1, 2008 on DVD and on Blu-ray.[14]

text: Reception[edit]

text: The film has received generally positive reviews over the years. On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an 80% rating based on 30 reviews, with an average rating of 6.2/10. The site's consensus states: "Batman: The Movie elevates camp to an art form -- and has a blast doing it, every gloriously tongue-in-cheek inch of the way."[15] Bill Gibron of Filmcritic.com gave the film 3 out of 5 stars: "Unlike other attempts at bringing these characters to life...the TV cast really captures the inherent insanity of the roles."[16] Variety magazine stated on their review that "the intense innocent enthusiasm of Cesar Romero, Burgess Meredith and Frank Gorshin as the three criminals is balanced against the innocent calm of Adam West and Burt Ward, Batman and Robin respectively."[17]


document_title: Algae eater

question_text: what is the name of the fish that eats algae

root

text: Algae eater

text: This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text:
Algae eater, also called an algivore, is a common name for many bottom-dwelling fish that feed on algae. Algae eaters are important for the fishkeeping hobby and many are commonly kept by hobbyists.
Some of the common and most popular freshwater algae eaters in aquariums include:[1]

tag: p

text:
Fishes of the genus Gyrinocheilus, family Gyrinocheilidae. There are three species in this genus with the Chinese algae eater, Gyrinocheilus aymonieri, the most common. Small specimens make good community fish but may become territorial when older.
The Siamese algae eater, Crossocheilus siamensis, is a more gregarious and tolerant cyprinid that ranges up to 15 cm. It is the only fish that will graze on "black brush algae" (freshwater Rhodophyta, or red algae), but even so will eat anything else in preference.
American-flag fish, Jordanella floridae, are also dependable algae-eating fish.
Many loricariid catfish of South America, such as genera Otocinclus, Ancistrus, and Plecostomus, constantly graze algae and biofilm, although many species of "plecos", which attain an adult length of over 10 inches, eat much less frequently as they near adulthood.
Some freshwater shrimp are also excellent algae eaters.  One shrimp well known for its ability to clean an aquarium is the Amano Shrimp.
Most species of freshwater snails, discounting most adult specimens of species belonging to the family Ampullariidae, which primarily subsist on aquatic plants as adults.

tag: ul

text: Some of the common and most popular saltwater aquarium algae eaters include:[2]

text:
Surgeon fish or tangs are also known for their appetite for algae.
Rabbitfish which eat most algae, including cyanobacteria, diatoms, and hair algae.
Fishes in the  suborder blennioidei are blennies.
Crabs of the genera Mithraculus and Mithrax.
Sea urchins.
Some snail species such as the Turbo, Astraea, Turban and Nerite snails.[3]


document_title: Ornithology

question_text: english ornothologist who wrote a history of british birds

text: Ornithology

text: Etymology[edit]

text: The word "ornithology" comes from the late 16th-century Latin ornithologia meaning "bird science" from the Greek ὄρνις ornis ("bird") and λόγος logos ("theory, science, thought").[5]

text: History[edit]

text: The history of ornithology largely reflects the trends in the history of biology, as well as many other scientific disciplines, including ecology, anatomy, physiology, paleontology, and more recently, molecular biology. Trends include the move from mere descriptions to the identification of patterns, thus towards elucidating the processes that produce these patterns.

text: Early knowledge and study[edit]

text: Humans have had an observational relationship with birds since prehistory, with some stone-age drawings being amongst the oldest indications of an interest in birds.[6][7] Birds were perhaps important as food sources, and bones of as many as 80 species have been found in excavations of early Stone Age settlements.[8][9][10] Waterbird and seabird remains have also been found in shell mounds on the island of Oronsay off the coast of Scotland.[6]

text: Cultures around the world have rich vocabularies related to birds.[11] Traditional bird names are often based on detailed knowledge of the behaviour, with many names being onomatopoeic, and still in use.[12] Traditional knowledge may also involve the use of birds in folk medicine[13] and knowledge of these practices are passed on through oral traditions (see ethno-ornithology).[14][15] Hunting of wild birds as well as their domestication would have required considerable knowledge of their habits. Poultry farming and falconry were practised from early times in many parts of the world. Artificial incubation of poultry was practised in China around 246 BC and around at least 400 BC in Egypt.[16] The Egyptians also made use of birds in their hieroglyphic scripts, many of which, though stylized, are still identifiable to species.[17]

text: Early written records provide valuable information on the past distributions of species. For instance, Xenophon records the abundance of the ostrich in Assyria (Anabasis, i. 5); this subspecies from Asia Minor is extinct and all extant ostrich races are today restricted to Africa. Other old writings such as the Vedas (1500–800 BC) demonstrate the careful observation of avian life histories and include the earliest reference to the habit of brood parasitism by the Asian koel (Eudynamys scolopacea).[18] Like writing, the early art of China, Japan, Persia, and India also demonstrate knowledge, with examples of scientifically accurate bird illustrations.[19]

text: Aristotle in 350 BC in his Historia Animalium[20] noted the habit of bird migration, moulting, egg laying, and lifespans, as well as compiling a list of 170 different bird species. However, he also introduced and propagated several myths, such as the idea that swallows hibernated in winter, although he noted that cranes migrated from the steppes of Scythia to the marshes at the headwaters of the Nile. The idea of swallow hibernation became so well established that even as late as in 1878, Elliott Coues could list as many as 182 contemporary publications dealing with the hibernation of swallows and little published evidence to contradict the theory.[21][22] Similar misconceptions existed regarding the breeding of barnacle geese. Their nests had not been seen, and  they were believed to grow by transformations of goose barnacles, an idea that became prevalent from around the 11th century and noted by Bishop Giraldus Cambrensis (Gerald of Wales) in Topographia Hiberniae (1187).[23] Around 77 AD, Pliny the Elder described birds, among other creatures, in his Historia Naturalis.[24]

text: The earliest record of falconry comes from the reign of Sargon II (722–705 BC) in Assyria. Falconry is thought to have made its entry to Europe only after AD 400, brought in from the east after invasions by the Huns and Alans. Starting from the eighth century, numerous Arabic works on the subject and general ornithology were written, as well as translations of the works of ancient writers from Greek and Syriac. In the 12th and 13th centuries,  crusades and conquest had subjugated Islamic territories in southern Italy, central Spain, and the Levant under European rule, and for the first time translations into Latin of the great works of Arabic and Greek scholars were made with the help of Jewish and Muslim scholars, especially in Toledo, which had fallen into Christian hands in 1085 and whose libraries had escaped destruction. Michael Scotus from Scotland made a Latin translation of Aristotle's work on animals from Arabic here around 1215, which was disseminated widely and was the first time in a millennium that this foundational text on zoology became available to Europeans. Falconry was popular in the Norman court in Sicily, and a number of works on the subject were written in Palermo. Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1194–1250) learned about an falconry during his youth in Sicily and later built up a menagerie and sponsored translations of Arabic texts, among which the popular Arabic work known as the Liber Moaminus by an unknown author which was translated into Latin by Theodore of Antioch from Syria in 1240-1241 as the De Scientia Venandi per Aves, and also Michael Scotus (who had removed to Palermo) translated Ibn Sīnā's Kitāb al-Ḥayawān of 1027 for the Emperor, a commentary and scientific update of Aristotle's work which was part of Ibn Sīnā's massive Kitāb al-Šifāʾ. Frederick II eventually wrote his own treatise on falconry, the De arte venandi cum avibus, in which he related his ornithological observations and the results of the hunts and experiments his court enjoyed performing.[25][26]

text: Several early German and French scholars compiled old works and conducted new research on birds. These included Guillaume Rondelet, who described his observations in the Mediterranean, and Pierre Belon, who described the fish and birds that he had seen in France and the Levant. Belon's Book of Birds (1555) is a folio volume with descriptions of some 200 species. His comparison of the skeleton of humans and birds is considered as a landmark in comparative anatomy.[27] Volcher Coiter (1534–1576), a Dutch anatomist, made detailed studies of the internal structures of birds and produced a classification of birds, De Differentiis Avium (around 1572), that was based on structure and habits.[28] Konrad Gesner wrote the Vogelbuch and Icones avium omnium around 1557. Like Gesner, Ulisse Aldrovandi, an encyclopedic naturalist, began a 14-volume natural history with three volumes on birds, entitled ornithologiae hoc est de avibus historiae libri XII, which was published from 1599 to 1603. Aldrovandi showed great interest in plants and animals, and his work included 3000 drawings of fruits, flowers, plants, and animals, published in 363 volumes. His Ornithology alone covers 2000 pages and included such aspects as the chicken and poultry techniques. He used a number of traits including behaviour, particularly bathing and dusting, to classify bird groups.[29][30][31]

text: William Turner's Historia Avium (History of Birds), published at Cologne in 1544, was an early ornithological work from England. He noted the commonness of kites in English cities where they snatched food out of the hands of children. He included folk beliefs such as those of anglers. Anglers believed that the osprey emptied their fishponds and would kill them, mixing the flesh of the osprey into their fish bait. Turner's work reflected the violent times in which he lived, and stands in contrast to later works such as Gilbert White's The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne that were written in a tranquil era.[27][33]

text: In the 17th century, Francis Willughby (1635–1672) and John Ray (1627–1705) came up with the first major system of bird classification that was based on function and morphology rather than on form or behaviour. Willughby's Ornithologiae libri tres (1676) completed by John Ray is sometimes considered to mark the beginning of scientific ornithology. Ray also worked on Ornithologia, which was published posthumously in 1713 as Synopsis methodica avium et piscium.[34] The earliest list of British birds, Pinax Rerum Naturalium Britannicarum, was written by Christopher Merrett in 1667, but authors such as John Ray considered it of little value.[35] Ray did, however, value the expertise of the naturalist Sir Thomas Browne (1605–82), who not only answered his queries on ornithological identification and nomenclature, but also those of Willoughby and Merrett in letter correspondence. Browne himself in his lifetime kept an eagle, owl, cormorant, bittern, and ostrich, penned a tract on falconry, and introduced the words "incubation" and "oviparous" into the English language.[36][37]

text: Towards the late 18th century, Mathurin Jacques Brisson (1723–1806) and Comte de Buffon (1707–1788) began new works on birds. Brisson produced a six-volume work Ornithologie in 1760 and Buffon's included nine volumes (volumes 16–24) on birds Histoire naturelle des oiseaux (1770–1785) in his work on science Histoire naturelle générale et particulière (1749–1804). Jacob Temminck sponsored François Le Vaillant [1753–1824] to collect bird specimens in Southern Africa and Le Vaillant's six-volume Histoire naturelle des oiseaux d'Afrique (1796–1808) included many non-African birds. His other bird books produced in collaboration with the artist Barraband are considered among the most valuable illustrated guides ever produced. Louis Jean Pierre Vieillot (1748–1831) spent 10 years studying North American birds and wrote the Histoire naturelle des oiseaux de l'Amerique septentrionale (1807–1808?). Vieillot pioneered in the use of life histories and habits in classification.[38] Alexander Wilson composed a nine-volume work, American Ornithology, published 1808-14—the first such record of North American birds, significantly antedating Audubon. In the early 19th century, Lewis and Clark studied and identified many birds in the western United States. John James Audubon, born in 1785, observed and painted birds in France and later in the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. From 1827 to 1838, Audubon published The Birds of America, which was engraved by Robert Havell, Sr. and his son Robert Havell, Jr. Containing 435 engravings, it is often regarded as the greatest ornithological work in history.

text: Scientific studies[edit]

text:
The emergence of ornithology as a scientific discipline began in the 18th century, when Mark Catesby published his two-volume Natural History of Carolina, Florida, and the Bahama Islands, a landmark work which included 220 hand-painted engravings and was the basis for many of the species Carl Linnaeus described in the 1758 Systema Naturae. Linnaeus' work revolutionised bird taxonomy by assigning every species a binomial name, categorising them into different genera.
However, ornithology did not emerge as a specialised science until the Victorian era—with the concept of natural history, and the collection of natural objects such as bird eggs and skins.[39][40] This specialization led to the formation in Britain of the British Ornithologists' Union in 1858. In 1859, the members founded its journal The Ibis. The sudden spurt in ornithology was also due in part to colonialism. At 100 years later, in 1959, R. E. Moreau noted that ornithology in this period was preoccupied with the geographical distributions of various species of birds.[41]

text: No doubt the preoccupation with widely extended geographical ornithology, was fostered by the immensity of the areas over which British rule or influence stretched during the 19th century and for some time afterwards.

text: The bird collectors of the Victorian era observed the variations in bird forms and habits across geographic regions, noting local specialization and variation in widespread species. The collections of museums and private collectors grew with contributions from various parts of the world. The naming of species with binomials and the organization of birds into groups based on their similarities became the main work of museum specialists. The variations in widespread birds across geographical regions caused the introduction of trinomial names.

text: The search for patterns in the variations of birds was attempted by many. Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775–1854), his student Johann Baptist von Spix (1781–1826), and several others believed that a hidden and innate mathematical order existed in the forms of birds. They believed that a "natural" classification was available and superior to "artificial" ones. A particularly popular idea was the Quinarian system popularised by Nicholas Aylward Vigors (1785–1840), William Sharp Macleay (1792–1865), William Swainson, and others. The idea was that nature followed a "rule of five" with five groups nested hierarchically. Some had attempted a rule of four, but Johann Jakob Kaup (1803–1873) insisted that the number five was special, noting that other natural entities such as the senses also came in fives. He followed this idea and demonstrated his view of the order within the crow family. Where he failed to find five genera, he left a blank insisting that a new genus would found to fill these gaps. These ideas were replaced by more complex "maps" of affinities in works by Hugh Edwin Strickland and Alfred Russel Wallace.[43][44] A major advance was made by Max Fürbringer in 1888, who established a comprehensive phylogeny of birds based on anatomy, morphology, distribution, and biology. This was developed further by Hans Gadow and others.[45][46]

text: The Galapagos finches were especially influential in the development of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. His contemporary Alfred Russel Wallace also noted these variations and the geographical separations between different forms leading to the study of biogeography. Wallace was influenced by the work of Philip Lutley Sclater on the distribution patterns of birds.[47]

text: For Darwin, the problem was how species arose from a common ancestor, but he did not attempt to find rules for delineation of species. The species problem was tackled by the ornithologist Ernst Mayr, who was able to demonstrate that geographical isolation and the accumulation of genetic differences led to the splitting of species.[48][49]

text: Early ornithologists were preoccupied with matters of species identification. Only systematics counted as true science and field studies were considered inferior through much of the 19th century.[50] In 1901, Robert Ridgway wrote in the introduction to The Birds of North and Middle America that:

text: There are two essentially different kinds of ornithology: systematic or scientific, and popular. The former deals with the structure and classification of birds, their synonymies, and technical descriptions. The latter treats of their habits, songs, nesting, and other facts pertaining to their life histories.

text: This early idea that the study of living birds was merely recreation held sway until ecological theories became the predominant focus of ornithological studies.[2][41] The study of birds in their habitats was particularly advanced in Germany with bird ringing stations established as early as 1903. By the 1920s, the Journal für Ornithologie included many papers on the behaviour, ecology, anatomy, and physiology, many written by Erwin Stresemann. Stresemann changed the editorial policy of the journal, leading both to a unification of field and laboratory studies and a shift of research from museums to universities.[50] Ornithology in the United States continued to be dominated by museum studies of morphological variations, species identities, and geographic distributions, until it was influenced by Stresemann's student Ernst Mayr.[51] In Britain, some of the earliest ornithological works that used the word ecology appeared in 1915.[52] The Ibis, however, resisted the introduction of these new methods of study, and  no paper on ecology appeared until 1943.[41] The work of David Lack on population ecology was pioneering. Newer quantitative approaches were introduced for the study of ecology and behaviour, and this was not readily accepted. For instance, Claud Ticehurst wrote:

text: Sometimes it seems that elaborate plans and statistics are made to prove what is commonplace knowledge to the mere collector, such as that hunting parties often travel more or less in circles.

text: David Lack's studies on population ecology sought to find the processes involved in the regulation of population based on the evolution of optimal clutch sizes. He concluded that population was regulated primarily by density-dependent controls, and also suggested that natural selection produces life-history traits that maximize the fitness of individuals. Others, such as Wynne-Edwards, interpreted population regulation as a mechanism that aided the "species" rather than individuals. This led to widespread and sometimes bitter debate on what constituted the "unit of selection".[48] Lack also pioneered the use of many new tools for ornithological research, including the idea of using radar to study bird migration.

text: Birds were also widely used in studies of the niche hypothesis and Georgii Gause's competitive exclusion principle. Work on resource partitioning and the structuring of bird communities through competition were made by Robert MacArthur. Patterns of biodiversity also became a topic of interest. Work on the relationship of the number of species to area and its application in the study of island biogeography was pioneered by E. O. Wilson and Robert MacArthur.[48] These studies led to the development of the discipline of landscape ecology.

text: John Hurrell Crook studied the behaviour of weaverbirds and demonstrated the links between ecological conditions, behaviour, and social systems.[48][53][54] Principles from economics were introduced to the study of biology by Jerram L. Brown in his work on explaining territorial behaviour. This led to more studies of behaviour that made use of cost-benefit analyses.[55] The rising interest in sociobiology also led to a spurt of bird studies in this area.[48][56]

text: The study of imprinting behaviour in ducks and geese by Konrad Lorenz and the studies of instinct in herring gulls by Nicolaas Tinbergen led to the establishment of the field of ethology. The study of learning became an area of interest and the study of bird songs has been a model for studies in neuroethology. The study of hormones and physiology in the control of behaviour has also been aided by bird models. These have helped in finding the proximate causes of circadian and seasonal cycles. Studies on migration have attempted to answer questions on the evolution of migration, orientation, and navigation.[48]

text: The growth of genetics and the rise of molecular biology led to the application of the gene-centered view of evolution to explain avian phenomena. Studies on kinship and altruism, such as helpers, became of particular interest. The idea of inclusive fitness was used to interpret observations on behaviour and life history, and birds were widely used models for testing hypotheses based on theories postulated by W. D. Hamilton and others.[48]

text: The new tools of molecular biology changed the study of bird systematics, which changed from being based on phenotype to the underlying genotype. The use of techniques such as DNA-DNA hybridization to study evolutionary relationships was pioneered by Charles Sibley and Jon Edward Ahlquist, resulting in what is called the Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy. These early techniques have been replaced by newer ones based on mitochondrial DNA sequences and molecular phylogenetics approaches that make use of computational procedures for sequence alignment, construction of phylogenetic trees, and calibration of molecular clocks to infer evolutionary relationships.[57][58] Molecular techniques are also widely used in studies of avian population biology and ecology.[59]

text: Rise to popularity[edit]

text: The use of field glasses or telescopes for bird observation began in the 1820s and 1830s, with pioneers such as J. Dovaston (who also pioneered in the use of bird feeders), but instruction manuals did not begin to insist on the use of optical aids such as "a first-class telescope" or "field glass" until the 1880s.[60][61]

text: The rise of field guides for the identification of birds was another major innovation. The early guides such as those of Thomas Bewick (two volumes) and William Yarrell (three volumes) were cumbersome, and mainly focused on identifying specimens in the hand. The earliest of the new generation of field guides was prepared by Florence Merriam, sister of Clinton Hart Merriam, the mammalogist. This was published in 1887 in a series Hints to Audubon Workers:Fifty Birds and How to Know Them in Grinnell's Audubon Magazine.[51] These were followed by new field guides including classics by Roger Tory Peterson.[62]

text: The interest in birdwatching grew in popularity in many parts of the world, and the possibility for amateurs to contribute to biological studies was soon realized. As early as 1916, Julian Huxley wrote a two-part article in The Auk, noting the tensions between amateurs and professionals, and suggested the possibility that the "vast army of bird lovers and bird watchers could begin providing the data scientists needed to address the fundamental problems of biology."[63][64]

text: Organizations were started in many countries, and these grew rapidly in membership, most notable among them being the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) in Britain and the Audubon Society in the US, which started in 1885. Both these organizations were started with the primary objective of conservation. The RSPB, born in 1889, grew from a small group of women in Croydon, who met regularly and called themselves the "Fur, Fin, and Feather Folk" and who took a pledge "to refrain from wearing the feathers of any birds not killed for the purpose of food, the ostrich only exempted." The organization did not allow men as members initially, avenging a policy of the British Ornithologists' Union to keep out women.[39] Unlike the RSPB, which was primarily conservation oriented, the British Trust for Ornithology was started in 1933 with the aim of advancing ornithological research. Members were often involved in collaborative ornithological projects. These projects have resulted in atlases which detail the distribution of bird species across Britain.[3] In the United States, the Breeding Bird Surveys, conducted by the US Geological Survey, have also produced atlases with information on breeding densities and changes in the density and distribution over time. Other volunteer collaborative ornithology projects were subsequently established in other parts of the world.[65]

text: Techniques[edit]

text: The tools and techniques of ornithology are varied, and new inventions and approaches are quickly incorporated. The techniques may be broadly dealt under the categories of those that are applicable to specimens and those that are used in the field, but the classification is rough and many analysis techniques are usable both in the laboratory and field or may require a combination of field and laboratory techniques.

text: Collections[edit]

text: The earliest approaches to modern bird study involved the collection of eggs, a practice known as oology. While collecting became a pastime for many amateurs, the labels associated with these early egg collections made them unreliable for the serious study of bird breeding. To preserve eggs, a tiny hole was made and the contents extracted. This technique became standard with the invention of the blow drill around 1830.[39] Egg collection is no longer popular; however, historic museum collections have been of value in determining the effects of pesticides such as DDT on physiology.[66][67] Museum bird collections continue to act as a resource for taxonomic studies.[68]

text: The use of bird skins to document species has been a standard part of systematic ornithology. Bird skins are prepared by retaining the key bones of the wings, legs, and skull along with the skin and feathers. In the past, they were treated with arsenic to prevent fungal and insect (mostly dermestid) attack. Arsenic, being toxic, was replaced by less-toxic borax. Amateur and professional collectors became familiar with these skinning techniques and started sending in their skins to museums, some of them from distant locations. This led to the formation of huge collections of bird skins in museums in Europe and North America. Many private collections were also formed. These became references for comparison of species, and the ornithologists at these museums were able to compare species from different locations, often places that they themselves never visited. Morphometrics of these skins, particularly the lengths of the tarsus, bill, tail, and wing became important in the descriptions of bird species. These skin collections have been used in more recent times for studies on molecular phylogenetics by the extraction of ancient DNA. The importance of type specimens in the description of species make skin collections a vital resource for systematic ornithology. However, with the rise of molecular techniques,  establishing the taxonomic status of new discoveries, such as the Bulo Burti boubou (Laniarius liberatus, no longer a valid species) and the Bugun liocichla (Liocichla bugunorum), using blood, DNA and feather samples as the holotype material, has now become possible.

text: Other methods of preservation include the storage of specimens in spirit. Such wet specimens have special value in physiological and anatomical study, apart from providing better quality of DNA for molecular studies.[69] Freeze drying of specimens is another technique that has the advantage of preserving stomach contents and anatomy, although it tends to shrink, making it less reliable for morphometrics.[70][71]

text: In the field[edit]

text: The study of birds in the field was helped enormously by improvements in optics. Photography made it possible to document birds in the field with great accuracy. High-power spotting scopes today allow observers to detect minute morphological differences that were earlier possible only by examination of the specimen "in the hand".[72]

text: The capture and marking of birds enable detailed studies of life history. Techniques for capturing birds are varied and include the use of bird liming for perching birds, mist nets for woodland birds, cannon netting for open-area flocking birds, the bal-chatri trap for raptors,[73] decoys and funnel traps for water birds.[74][75]

text: The bird in the hand may be examined and measurements can be made, including standard lengths and weights. Feather moult and skull ossification provide indications of age and health. Sex can be determined by examination of anatomy in some sexually nondimorphic species. Blood samples may be drawn to determine hormonal conditions in studies of physiology, identify DNA markers for studying genetics and kinship in studies of breeding biology and phylogeography. Blood may also be used to identify pathogens and arthropod-borne viruses. Ectoparasites may be collected for studies of coevolution and zoonoses.[76] In many cryptic species, measurements (such as the relative lengths of wing feathers in warblers) are vital in establishing identity.

text: Captured birds are often marked for future recognition. Rings or bands provide long-lasting identification, but require capture for the information on them to be read. Field-identifiable marks such as coloured bands, wing tags, or dyes enable short-term studies where individual identification is required. Mark and recapture techniques make demographic studies possible. Ringing has traditionally been used in the study of migration. In recent times, satellite transmitters provide the ability to track migrating birds in near-real time.[77]

text: Techniques for estimating population density include point counts[disambiguation needed], transects, and territory mapping. Observations are made in the field using carefully designed protocols and the data may be analysed to estimate bird diversity, relative abundance, or absolute population densities.[78] These methods may be used repeatedly over large timespans to monitor changes in the environment.[79] Camera traps have been found to be a useful tool for the detection and documentation of elusive species, nest predators and in the quantitative analysis of frugivory, seed dispersal and behaviour.[80][81]

text: In the laboratory[edit]

text: Many aspects of bird biology are difficult to study in the field. These include the study of behavioural and physiological changes that require a long duration of access to the bird. Nondestructive samples of blood or feathers taken during field studies may be studied in the laboratory. For instance, the variation in the ratios of stable hydrogen isotopes across latitudes makes establishing the origins of migrant birds possible using mass spectrometric analysis of feather samples.[82] These techniques can be used in combination with other techniques such as ringing.[83]

text: The first attenuated vaccine developed by Louis Pasteur, for fowl cholera, was tested on poultry in 1878.[84] Anti-malarials were tested on birds which harbour avian-malarias.[85] Poultry continues to be used as a model for many studies in non-mammalian immunology.[86]

text: Studies in bird behaviour include the use of tamed and trained birds in captivity. Studies on bird intelligence and song learning have been largely laboratory-based. Field researchers may make use of a wide range of techniques such as the use of dummy owls to elicit mobbing behaviour, and dummy males or the use of call playback to elicit territorial behaviour and thereby to establish the boundaries of bird territories.[87]

text: Studies of bird migration including aspects of navigation, orientation, and physiology are often studied using captive birds in special cages that record their activities. The Emlen funnel, for instance, makes use of a cage with an inkpad at the centre and a conical floor where the ink marks can be counted to identify the direction in which the bird attempts to fly. The funnel can have a transparent top and visible cues such as the direction of sunlight may be controlled using mirrors or the positions of the stars simulated in a planetarium.[88]

text: The entire genome of the domestic fowl (Gallus gallus) was sequenced in 2004, and was followed in 2008 by the genome of the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata).[89]  Such whole-genome sequencing projects allow for studies on evolutionary processes involved in speciation.[90] Associations between the expression of genes and behaviour may be studied using candidate genes. Variations in the exploratory behaviour of great tits (Parus major) have been found to be linked with a gene orthologous to the human gene DRD4 (Dopamine receptor D4) which is known to be associated with novelty-seeking behaviour.[91] The role of gene expression in developmental differences and morphological variations have been studied in Darwin's finches. The difference in the expression of Bmp4 have been shown to be associated with changes in the growth and shape of the beak.[92][93]

text: The chicken has long been a model organism for studying vertebrate developmental biology. As the embryo is readily accessible, its development can be easily followed (unlike mice). This also allows the use of electroporation for studying the effect of adding or silencing a gene. Other tools for perturbing their genetic makeup are chicken embryonic stem cells and viral vectors.[94]

text: Collaborative studies[edit]

text: With the widespread interest in birds,  use of a large number of people to work on collaborative ornithological projects that cover large geographic scales has been possible.[95][96] These citizen science projects include nationwide projects such as the Christmas Bird Count,[97] Backyard Bird Count,[98] the North American Breeding Bird Survey, the Canadian EPOQ[99] or regional projects such as the Asian Waterfowl Census and Spring Alive in Europe. These projects help to identify distributions of birds, their population densities and changes over time, arrival and departure dates of migration, breeding seasonality, and even population genetics.[100] The results of many of these projects are published as bird atlases. Studies of migration using bird ringing or colour marking often involve the cooperation of people and organizations in different countries.[101]

text: Applications[edit]

text: Wild birds impact many human activities, while domesticated birds are important sources of eggs, meat, feathers, and other products. Applied and economic ornithology aim to reduce the ill effects of problem birds and enhance gains from beneficial species.

text: The role of some species of birds as pests has been well known, particularly in agriculture. Granivorous birds such as the queleas in Africa are among the most numerous birds in the world, and foraging flocks can cause devastation.[102][103] Many insectivorous birds are also noted as beneficial in agriculture. Many early studies on the benefits or damages caused by birds in fields were made by analysis of stomach contents and observation of feeding behaviour.[104] Modern studies aimed to manage birds in agriculture make use of a wide range of principles from ecology.[105] Intensive aquaculture has brought humans in conflict with fish-eating birds such as cormorants.[106]

text: Large flocks of pigeons and starlings in cities are often considered as a nuisance, and techniques to reduce their populations or their impacts are constantly innovated.[107][108] Birds are also of medical importance, and their role as carriers of human diseases such as Japanese encephalitis, West Nile virus, and influenza H5N1 have been widely recognised.[109][110] Bird strikes and the damage they cause in aviation are of particularly great importance, due to the fatal consequences and the level of economic losses caused. The airline industry incurs worldwide damages of an estimated US$1.2 billion each year.[111]

text: Many species of birds have been driven to extinction by human activities. Being conspicuous elements of the ecosystem, they have been considered as indicators of ecological health.[112] They have also helped in gathering support for habitat conservation.[113] Bird conservation requires specialized knowledge in aspects of biology and ecology, and may require the use of very location-specific approaches. Ornithologists contribute to conservation biology by studying the ecology of birds in the wild and identifying the key threats and ways of enhancing the survival of species.[114] Critically endangered species such as the California condor have had to be captured and bred in captivity. Such ex situ conservation measures may be followed by reintroduction of the species into the wild.[115]


document_title: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

question_text: how long is the canadian charter of rights and freedoms

text: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

text: Features[edit]

text:
Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms

Part of the Constitution Act, 1982.

Preamble

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

1

Fundamental Freedoms

2

Democratic Rights

3, 4, 5

Mobility Rights

6

Legal Rights

7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

Equality Rights

15

Official Languages of Canada

16, 16.1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

Minority Language Education Rights

23

Enforcement

24

General

25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

Application of Charter

32, 33

Citation

34

v
t
e

text: Under the Charter, people physically present in Canada have numerous civil and political rights. Most of the rights can be exercised by any legal person (the Charter does not define the corporation as a "legal person"),[3] but a few of the rights belong exclusively to natural persons, or (as in sections 3 and 6) only to citizens of Canada. The rights are enforceable by the courts through section 24 of the Charter, which allows courts discretion to award remedies to those whose rights have been denied. This section also allows courts to exclude evidence in trials if the evidence was acquired in a way that conflicts with the Charter and might damage the reputation of the justice system. Section 32 confirms that the Charter is binding on the federal government, the territories under its authority, and the provincial governments. The rights and freedoms enshrined in 34 sections of the Charter include:

text: Exceptions[edit]

text: Precluding all the freedoms and forming the basis of the Charter, the very first section, known as limitations clause, allows governments to justify certain infringements of Charter rights. Every case in which a court discovers a violation of the Charter would therefore require a section 1 analysis to determine if the law can still be upheld. Infringements are upheld if the purpose for the government action is to achieve what would be recognized as an urgent or important objective in a free society, and if the infringement can be "demonstrably justified." Section 1 has thus been used to uphold laws against objectionable conduct such as hate speech (e.g., in R. v. Keegstra) and obscenity (e.g., in R. v. Butler). Section 1 also confirms that the rights listed in the Charter are guaranteed.

text: In addition, some of these rights are also subjected to the notwithstanding clause (section 33). The notwithstanding clause authorizes governments to temporarily override the rights and freedoms in sections 2 and 7–15 for up to five years, subject to renewal. The Canadian federal government has never invoked it, and some have speculated that its use would be politically costly.[4] In the past, the notwithstanding clause was invoked routinely by the province of Quebec (which did not support the enactment of the Charter but is subject to it nonetheless). The provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta have also invoked the notwithstanding clause, to end a strike and to protect an exclusively heterosexual definition of marriage,[5] respectively. (Note that Alberta's use of the notwithstanding clause is of no force or effect, since the definition of marriage is federal not provincial jurisdiction.)[6] The territory of Yukon also passed legislation once that invoked the notwithstanding clause, but the legislation was never proclaimed in force.[7]

text: Fundamental freedoms[edit]

text: Democratic rights[edit]

text: Generally, the right to participate in political activities and the right to a democratic form of government are protected:

text: Mobility rights[edit]

text: Legal rights[edit]

text: Rights of people in dealing with the justice system and law enforcement are protected, namely:

text: Equality rights[edit]

text: Language rights[edit]

text: Generally, people have the right to use either the English or French language in communications with Canada's federal government and certain provincial governments. Specifically, the language laws in the Charter include:

text: Minority language education rights[edit]

text: Other sections[edit]

text: Various provisions help to clarify how the Charter works in practice. These include,

text: Finally, Section 34: states that Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, containing the first 34 sections of the Act, may be collectively referred to as the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".

text: History[edit]

text: Many of the rights and freedoms that are protected under the Charter, including the rights to freedom of speech, habeas corpus and the presumption of innocence,[8] have their roots in a set of Canadian laws and legal precedents[9] sometimes known as the Implied Bill of Rights. Many of these rights were also included in the Canadian Bill of Rights, which the Canadian Parliament enacted in 1960. However, the Canadian Bill of Rights had a number of shortcomings. Unlike the Charter, it was an ordinary Act of Parliament, which could be amended by a simple majority of Parliament, and it was applicable only to the federal government. The courts also chose to interpret the Bill of Rights conservatively, only on rare occasions applying it to find a contrary law inoperative. The Bill of Rights did not contain all of the rights that are now included in the Charter, omitting, for instance, the right to vote[10] and freedom of movement within Canada.[11]

text: The centennial of Canadian Confederation in 1967 aroused greater interest within the government in constitutional reform. Said reforms would include improving safeguards of rights, as well as patriation of the Constitution, meaning the British Parliament would no longer have to approve constitutional amendments. Subsequently, Attorney General Pierre Trudeau appointed law professor Barry Strayer to research a potential bill of rights. While writing his report, Strayer consulted with a number of notable legal scholars, including Walter Tarnopolsky. Strayer's report advocated a number of ideas that were later incorporated into the Charter, including protection for language rights. Strayer also advocated excluding economic rights. Finally, he recommended allowing for limits on rights. Such limits are included in the Charter's limitation and notwithstanding clauses.[12] In 1968, Strayer was made the Director of the Constitutional Law Division of the Privy Council Office and in 1974 he became Assistant Deputy Minister of Justice. During those years, Strayer played a role in writing the bill that was ultimately adopted.

text: Meanwhile, Trudeau, who had become Liberal leader and prime minister in 1968, still very much wanted a constitutional bill of rights. The federal government and the provinces discussed creating one during negotiations for patriation, which resulted in the Victoria Charter in 1971. This never came to be implemented. However, Trudeau continued with his efforts to patriate the Constitution, and promised constitutional change during the 1980 Quebec referendum. He would succeed in 1982 with the passage of the Canada Act 1982. This enacted the Constitution Act, 1982.

text: The inclusion of a charter of rights in the Constitution Act was a much-debated issue. Trudeau spoke on television in October 1980,[13] and announced his intention to constitutionalize a bill of rights that would include fundamental freedoms, democratic guarantees, freedom of movement, legal rights, equality and language rights.[14] He did not want a notwithstanding clause. While his proposal gained popular support,[15] provincial leaders opposed the potential limits on their powers. The federal Progressive Conservative opposition feared liberal bias among judges, should courts be called upon to enforce rights.[16] Additionally, the British Parliament cited their right to uphold Canada's old form of government.[17] At a suggestion of the Conservatives, Trudeau's government thus agreed to a committee of Senators and MPs to further examine the bill of rights as well as the patriation plan. During this time, 90 hours were spent on the bill of rights alone, all filmed for television,[15] while civil rights experts and advocacy groups put forward their perceptions on the Charter's flaws and omissions and how to remedy them.[15] As Canada had a parliamentary system of government, and as judges were perceived not to have enforced rights well in the past, it was questioned whether the courts should be named as the enforcers of the Charter, as Trudeau wanted. Conservatives argued that elected politicians should be trusted instead. It was eventually decided that the responsibility should go to the courts. At the urging of civil libertarians, judges could even now exclude evidence in trials if acquired in breach of Charter rights in certain circumstances, something the Charter was not originally going to provide for. As the process continued, more features were added to the Charter, including equality rights for people with disabilities, more sex equality guarantees and recognition of Canada's multiculturalism. The limitations clause was also reworded to focus less on the importance of parliamentary government and more on justifiability of limits in free societies; the latter logic was more in line with rights developments around the world after World War II.[18]

text: In its decision in the Patriation Reference (1981), the Supreme Court of Canada had ruled there was a tradition that some provincial approval should be sought for constitutional reform. As the provinces still had doubts about the Charter's merits, Trudeau was forced to accept the notwithstanding clause to allow governments to opt out of certain obligations. The notwithstanding clause was accepted as part of a deal called the Kitchen Accord, negotiated by the federal Attorney General Jean Chrétien, Ontario's justice minister Roy McMurtry and Saskatchewan's justice minister Roy Romanow. Pressure from provincial governments (which in Canada have jurisdiction over property) and from the country's left wing, especially the New Democratic Party, also prevented Trudeau from including any rights protecting private property.[19]

text: Nevertheless, Quebec did not support the Charter (or the Canada Act 1982), with "conflicting interpretations" as to why. The opposition could have owed to the Parti Québécois leadership being allegedly uncooperative, because it was more committed to gaining sovereignty for Quebec. It could have owed to Quebec leaders being excluded from the negotiation of the Kitchen Accord, which they saw as being too centralist. It could have owed to provincial leaders' objections to the Accord's provisions relating to the process of future constitutional amendment.[20] They also opposed the inclusion of mobility rights and minority language education rights.[21] The Charter is still applicable in Quebec because all provinces are bound by the Constitution. However, Quebec's opposition to the 1982 patriation package has led to two failed attempts to amend the Constitution (the Meech Lake Accord and Charlottetown Accord) which were designed primarily to obtain Quebec's political approval of the Canadian constitutional order.

text: While the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, it was not until 1985 that the main provisions regarding equality rights (section 15) came into effect. The delay was meant to give the federal and provincial governments an opportunity to review pre-existing statutes and strike potentially unconstitutional inequalities.

text: The typography of the physical document pictured here, and still distributed today, was typeset by Ottawa's David Berman intentionally in Carl Dair's Cartier typeface: at the time the most prominent Canadian typeface, having been commissioned by the Governor-General as a celebration of Canada's centenary in 1967.

text: The Charter has been amended since its enactment. Section 25 was amended in 1983 to explicitly recognize more rights regarding Aboriginal land claims, and section 16.1 was added in 1993. There have also been a number of unsuccessful attempts to amend the Charter, including the failed Charlottetown Accord of 1992. The Charlottetown Accord would have specifically required the Charter to be interpreted in a manner respectful of Quebec's distinct society, and would have added further statements to the Constitution Act, 1867 regarding racial and sexual equality and collective rights, and about minority language communities. Though the Accord was negotiated among many interest groups, the resulting provisions were so vague that Trudeau, then out of office, feared they would actually conflict with and undermine the Charter's individual rights. He felt judicial review of the rights might be undermined if courts had to favour the policies of provincial governments, as governments would be given responsibility over linguistic minorities. Trudeau thus played a prominent role in leading the popular opposition to the Accord.[22]

text: Interpretation and enforcement[edit]

text: The task of interpreting and enforcing the Charter falls to the courts, with the Supreme Court of Canada being the ultimate authority on the matter.

text: With the Charter's supremacy confirmed by section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, the courts continued their practice of striking down unconstitutional statutes or parts of statutes as they had with earlier case law regarding federalism. However, under section 24 of the Charter, courts also gained new powers to enforce creative remedies and exclude more evidence in trials. Courts have since made many important decisions, including R. v. Morgentaler (1988), which struck down Canada's abortion law, and Vriend v. Alberta (1998), in which the Supreme Court found the province's exclusion of homosexuals from protection against discrimination violated section 15. In the latter case, the Court then read the protection into the law.

text: Courts may receive Charter questions in a number of ways. Rights claimants could be prosecuted under a criminal law that they argue is unconstitutional. Others may feel government services and policies are not being dispensed in accordance with the Charter, and apply to lower-level courts for injunctions against the government (as was the case in Doucet-Boudreau v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Education)). A government may also raise questions of rights by submitting reference questions to higher-level courts; for example, Prime Minister Paul Martin's government approached the Supreme Court with Charter questions as well as federalism concerns in the case Re Same-Sex Marriage (2004). Provinces may also do this with their superior courts. The government of Prince Edward Island initiated the Provincial Judges Reference by asking its provincial Supreme Court a question on judicial independence under section 11.

text: In several important cases, judges developed various tests and precedents for interpreting specific provisions of the Charter. These include the Oakes test for section 1, set out in the case R. v. Oakes (1986), and the (now defunct[23]) Law test for section 15, developed in Law v. Canada (1999). Since Re B.C. Motor Vehicle Act (1985), various approaches to defining and expanding the scope of fundamental justice (the Canadian name for natural justice or due process) under section 7 have been adopted. (For more information, see the articles on each Charter section).

text: In general, courts have embraced a purposive interpretation of Charter rights.[24] This means that since early cases like Hunter v. Southam (1984) and R. v. Big M Drug Mart (1985), they have concentrated not on the traditional, limited understanding of what each right meant when the Charter was adopted in 1982, but rather on changing the scope of rights as appropriate to fit their broader purpose.[24] This is tied to the generous interpretation of rights, as the purpose of the Charter provisions is assumed to be to increase rights and freedoms of people in a variety of circumstances, at the expense of the government powers.[24] Constitutional scholar Peter Hogg has approved of the generous approach in some cases, although for others he argues the purpose of the provisions was not to achieve a set of rights as broad as courts have imagined.[24] Indeed, this approach has not been without its critics. Alberta politician Ted Morton and political scientist Rainer Knopff have been very critical of this phenomenon. Although they feel the basis for the approach, the living tree doctrine (the classical name for generous interpretations of the Canadian Constitution), is sound, they argue Charter case law has been more radical. When the living tree doctrine is applied right, the authors claim, "The elm remained an elm; it grew new branches but did not transform itself into an oak or a willow." The doctrine can be used, for example, so a right is upheld even when a government threatens to violate it with new technology, as long as the essential right remains the same; but the authors claim that the courts have used the doctrine to "create new rights." As an example, the authors note that the Charter right against self-incrimination has been extended to cover scenarios in the justice system that had previously been unregulated by self-incrimination rights in other Canadian laws.[25]

text: Another general approach to interpreting Charter rights is to consider international legal precedents with countries that have specific rights protections, such as the United States Bill of Rights (an influence on aspects of the Charter) and the Constitution of South Africa. However, international precedent is only of guiding value, and is not binding. For example, the Supreme Court has referred to the Charter and the American Bill of Rights as being "born to different countries in different ages and in different circumstances."[26]

text: Public interest groups frequently intervene in cases to make arguments on how to interpret the Charter. Some examples are the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Mental Health Association, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF), and REAL Women of Canada. The purpose of such interventions is to assist the court and to attempt to influence the court to render a decision favourable to the legal interests of the group.

text: A further approach to the Charter, taken by the courts, is the dialogue principle, which involves greater participation by elected governments. This approach involves governments drafting legislation in response to court rulings and courts acknowledging the effort if the new legislation is challenged.

text: Comparisons with other human rights documents[edit]

text: Some Canadian Members of Parliament saw the movement to entrench a charter as contrary to the British model of Parliamentary supremacy. Others would say that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) has now limited British parliamentary power to a greater degree than the Canadian Charter limited the power of the Canadian Parliament and provincial legislatures. Hogg has speculated that the British adopted the Human Rights Act 1998, which allows the ECHR to be enforced directly in domestic courts, partly because they were inspired by the similar Canadian Charter.[27]

text: The Canadian Charter bears a number of similarities to the European Convention, specifically in relation to the limitations clauses contained in the European document.[28] Because of this similarity with European human rights law, the Supreme Court of Canada turns not only to the Constitution of the United States case law in interpreting the Charter, but also to European Court of Human Rights cases.

text: The core distinction between the United States Bill of Rights and Canadian Charter is the existence of the limitations and notwithstanding clauses. Canadian courts have consequently interpreted each right more expansively.[29] However, due to the limitations clause, where a violation of a right exists, the law will not necessarily grant protection of that right.[29] In contrast, rights under the US Bill of Rights are absolute and so a violation will not be found until there has been sufficient encroachment on those rights. The sum effect is that both constitutions provide comparable protection of many rights.[29] Fundamental justice (in section 7 of the Canadian Charter) is therefore interpreted to include more legal protections than due process, which is its US equivalent. Freedom of expression in section 2 also has a more wide-ranging scope than the First Amendment to the United States Constitution's freedom of speech.[29] In RWDSU v. Dolphin Delivery Ltd. (1986), the Canadian Supreme Court considered picketing of the kind the US First Amendment did not permit, as it was disruptive conduct (though there was some speech involved that the First Amendment might otherwise protect). The Supreme Court, however, ruled the picketing, including the disruptive conduct, were fully protected under section 2 of the Charter. The Court then relied on section 1 to find the injunction against the picketing was just.[30] The limitations clause has also allowed governments to enact laws that would be considered unconstitutional in the US. The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld some of Quebec's limits on the use of English on signs and has upheld publication bans that prohibit media from mentioning the names of juvenile criminals.

text: Section 28 of the Charter performs a function similar to that of the unratified Equal Rights Amendment in the US. While that proposed amendment had many critics, there was no comparable opposition to the Charter's section 28.[31] Still, Canadian feminists had to stage large protests to demonstrate support for the inclusion of the section which had not been part of the original draft of the charter.[32][33]

text: The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has several parallels with the Canadian Charter, but in some cases the Covenant goes further with regard to rights in its text. For example, a right to legal aid has been read into section 10 of the Charter (the right to counsel), but the Covenant explicitly guarantees the accused need not pay "if he does not have sufficient means."[34]

text: The Canadian Charter has little to say, explicitly at least, about economic and social rights. On this point, it stands in marked contrast with the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. There are some who feel economic rights ought to be read into section 7 rights to security of the person and section 15 equality rights to make the Charter similar to the Covenant.[32] The rationale is that economic rights can relate to a decent standard of living and can help the civil rights flourish in a livable environment.[32] Canadian courts, however, have been hesitant in this area, stating that economic rights are political questions and adding that as positive rights, economic rights are of questionable legitimacy.[32]

text: The Charter itself influenced the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of South Africa.[32] The limitations clause under section 36 of the South African law has been compared to section 1 of that Charter.[28]

text: Jamaica's Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms was also influenced, in part, by the Canadian charter.[35][36]

text: The Charter and national values[edit]

text: The Charter was intended to be a source for Canadian values and national unity. As Professor Alan Cairns noted, "The initial federal government premise was on developing a pan-Canadian identity."[27] Trudeau himself later wrote in his Memoirs that "Canada itself" could now be defined as a "society where all people are equal and where they share some fundamental values based upon freedom", and that all Canadians could identify with the values of liberty and equality.[37]

text: The Charter's unifying purpose was particularly important to the mobility and language rights. According to author Rand Dyck, some scholars believe section 23, with its minority language education rights, "was the only part of the Charter with which Pierre Trudeau was truly concerned".[38] Through the mobility and language rights, French Canadians, who have been at the centre of unity debates, are able to travel throughout all Canada and receive government and educational services in their own language. Hence, they are not confined to Quebec (the only province where they form the majority and where most of their population is based), which would polarize the country along regional lines. The Charter was also supposed to standardize previously diverse laws throughout the country and gear them towards a single principle of liberty.[39]

text: Former premier of Ontario Bob Rae has stated that the Charter "functions as a symbol for all Canadians" in practice because it represents the core value of freedom.[27] Academic Peter Russell has been more skeptical of the Charter's value in this field. Cairns, who feels the Charter is the most important constitutional document to many Canadians, and that the Charter was meant to shape the Canadian identity, has also expressed concern that groups within society see certain provisions as belonging to them alone rather than to all Canadians.[27] It has also been noted that issues like abortion and pornography, raised by the Charter, tend to be controversial.[39] Still, opinion polls in 2002 showed Canadians felt the Charter significantly represented Canada, although many were unaware of the document's actual contents.[40]

text: The only values mentioned by the Charter's preamble are recognition for the supremacy of God and the rule of law, but these have been controversial and of minor legal consequence. In 1999, MP Svend Robinson brought forward a failed proposal before the Canadian House of Commons that would have amended the Charter by removing the mention of God, as he felt it did not reflect Canada's diversity.

text: Section 27 also recognizes a value of multiculturalism. In 2002, polls found 86% of Canadians approved of this section.[41]

text: Criticism[edit]

text: While the Charter has enjoyed a great deal of popularity, with 82% of Canadians describing it as a good thing in opinion polls in 1987 and 1999,[27] the document has also been subject to published criticisms from both sides of the political spectrum. One left-wing critic is Professor Michael Mandel, who wrote that in comparison to politicians, judges do not have to be as sensitive to the will of the electorate, nor do they have to make sure their decisions are easily understandable to the average Canadian citizen. This, in Mandel's view, limits democracy.[42] Mandel has also asserted that the Charter makes Canada more like the United States, especially by serving corporate rights and individual rights rather than group rights and social rights.[42] He has argued that there are several things that should be included in the Charter, such as a right to health care and a basic right to free education. Hence, the perceived Americanization of Canadian politics is seen as coming at the expense of values more important for Canadians.[42] The union movement has been disappointed in the reluctance of the courts to use the Charter to support various forms of union activity, such as the "right to strike".

text: Right-wing critics Morton and Knopff have raised several concerns about the Charter, notably by alleging that the federal government has used it to limit provincial powers by allying with various rights claimants and interest groups. In their book The Charter Revolution & the Court Party, Morton and Knopff express their suspicions of this alliance in detail, accusing the Trudeau and Chrétien governments of funding litigious groups. For example, these governments used the Court Challenges Program to support minority language educational rights claims. Morton and Knopff also assert that crown counsel has intentionally lost cases in which the government was taken to court for allegedly violating rights, particularly gay rights and women's rights.[43]

text: Political scientist Rand Dyck, in observing these criticisms, notes that while judges have had their scope of review widened, they have still upheld most laws challenged on Charter grounds. With regard to litigious interest groups, Dyck points out that "the record is not as clear as Morton and Knopff imply. All such groups have experienced wins and losses."[44]

text: The political philosopher Charles Blattberg has criticized the Charter for contributing to the fragmentation of the country, at both the individual and group levels. In encouraging discourse based upon rights, the Charter is said to inject an adversarial spirit into Canadian politics, making it difficult to realize the common good. Blattberg also claims that the Charter undercuts the Canadian political community since it is ultimately a cosmopolitan document. Finally, he argues that people would be more motivated to uphold individual liberties if they were expressed with terms that are much "thicker" (less abstract) than rights.[45]