Road Closures in Colorado

Thanks to Better-Community-News for sharing this important story:

 Powderhouse Becomes Powder Keg

WESTERN COLORADO - About 45 angry residents gathered to protest the closure of Powderhouse Road in Pitkin Colorado. The sleepy town is a launching place for all kinds of outdoor tourist activities as well as a home to residents who grew up roaming the mountains on their ATVs and snowmobiles.

David Justice, who was at the event, said, "This road has been here longer than the forest service has even existed...They tore it up with rippers and heavy equipment. It's an outrage!"

District Ranger, John Murphy said, "The road had been scheduled for closure since 2010 due to the (5-year) travel management survey that was done for the Gunnison National Forest. The plan wanted (sic.) to create a very large, uninterrupted area for the wildlife."

When asked why the wildlife needed a "large, uninterrupted area," and what a "large, uninterrupted area" would accomplish for the wildlife, Ranger Murphy stated that he didn't know the benefits of such a closure (since he is not a wildlife specialist).

Murphy arrived in Pitkin after the travel management plan had been made. He said many groups participated in the travel plan survey. He listed the environmentalist and other special interest groups that have worked to take away motorized access to the public lands for decades, all of them are from out of the local area. Their input was the basis of the travel management plan that closed the roads.
                                                                                                                 Murphy said, "Very little input was received from the locals who use the trails. Most of them didn't even know the process was going on at the time. Now they're furious that they can't use the trails they've always been used."

Murphy said his neighbor, who had participated in the travel management process years prior, was irate at the process because they didn't listen to what the local citizens wanted, only to the special interest groups.

Murphy mentioned that he has received complaints that the use of the road has been used in the past to fight fires that could threaten the town. He also said that a citizen told him that the road had always been a part of their evacuation plans in the event of fire and that citizen was concerned that his escape route would be cut off.

Click here to read the entire story.

Well said, Kathleen. Well said.

This morning, after our weekly e-mail went out, I got an interesting response from someone.  It basically said, "American lands belong to all Americans, not just to those of a particular state."  It's not the first time we've heard that argument, but I find it interesting.
If the lands of my state belong to all of America, when is New York going to start sending us taxes for the right to come here and enjoy our mountains?  If the American lands belong to everyone in America, shouldn't we be pooling all America's property taxes together?  Or how about sharing all the taxes that come from every state's trust funds and distribute it evenly among all  the schools in America?  Utah, ranking last in the nation in per-pupil funding may only be all-too-anxious to adopt that strategy.  But you see, we can't.  Because public lands do not belong to every American.  They were given to each state at statehood, deeded to the Federal Government only for a temporary time, to allow them to dispose of (or sell) them in a timely manner to help fund our national debt  (see the History of our public lands).
Just as I was wondering how to respond to this obviously well-intentioned person, I received a copy of an article that appeared in today's Deseret News, written by Kathleen Clarke, our Director of Public Lands.
Kathleen's article very articulately spells out the situation that we find ourselves in here in Utah...a situation which many of our neighboring states find themselves in as we struggle to meet our state's financial responsibilities while being able to tax such a minuscule percentage of our land.
I am sharing her article here and hope you will share it with everyone on your contact list.  For we can only claim our rights when we know what they are.

My View: The need for a balanced public lands policy

By Kathleen Clarke

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 14 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

                                    

                                                                            

                        

                        A hiker takes in the view in Bell Canyon in the San Rafael Swell.  (Ravell Call, Ravell Call, Deseret News)

                    

                                        

In its 2012 general session, the Utah Legislature passed HB148: The Transfer of Public Lands Act. This bill charged the Constitutional Defense Council with the duty to study the many complex issues pertaining to the public lands and to report its findings to the Legislature. As director of the Governor's Public Lands Policy Coordination Office, I have overseen this ongoing study. 

                                    

My experience as the previous executive director of the Utah Department of Natural Resources and the national director of the United States Bureau of Land Management has given me a unique insight into public lands policy: Utah's public lands would be better managed, more productive and more accessible under state stewardship.

                                    

Current federal land policy and management is inefficient, ineffective and threatens the long-term use and enjoyment of the public lands. Washington gridlock has resulted in a system where rigid and often conflicting management policies shackle federal land managers and prevent them from actively managing the lands. 

                                    

Outmoded federal policies have resulted in forests that are vulnerable to catastrophic wildfire, insect infestation and disease. Our rangelands are deteriorating and restoration efforts are underfunded. While land is rich in timber and mineral resources, production efforts are either precluded entirely or greatly limited by regulations, endless administrative red tape and lawsuits brought by interest groups that oppose any use of the land. 

                                    

As long as the public lands remain under federal control, they will continue to deteriorate, and Utah and its citizens will be deprived of the many economic benefits to which we are entitled and so desperately need. I am confident that, in state hands, the public lands will be restored, protected and more productive. 

                                    

Utahns have always been good stewards of the land. We have a long track record of both environmental protection and fiscal responsibility. Utah has the expertise in existing agencies —including those within the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Agriculture and Food — to address the many complex and interrelated issues of public land management. Utahns know that people from around the world flock to our state for its unmatched beauty and incredible scenery, and to experience meaningful outdoor experiences. 

                                    

No one in state government would permit the degradation of Utah's wondrous beauty. Under HB148, all national parks, all but one national monument, and all wilderness areas will remain under federal ownership and control. Other lands with similar qualities will also be protected. Lands with less aesthetic or recreational qualities that contain resources will become more accessible for development and revenue production. With ever improving technology, this can be done with minimal environmental impact. 

                                    

Multiple use will be the objective, and multiple users will all be given voice, including tourists; conservationists; hunters; fisherman and other outdoor recreationists; energy industries; farm and ranch interests; local governments; water districts; and other engaged stakeholders. 

                                    

HB148 is neither a "land grab" nor a "political stunt," as some have maliciously alleged. It is an earnest effort to draw attention to a federal lands policy that does not protect the land, does not pay for itself and does not meet the economic or energy challenges of today. There is no intent to sell transferred lands. Rather, these lands will be retained in state ownership and control so that they forever benefit not only the people who live, work and recreate on them, but all Utahns who look to government services to educate their children and enhance their lives. 

                                    

Utah has amazing public lands, and always will. Like my fellow Utahns, I care deeply about Utah's majestic mountains, still forests and quiet desert landscapes. This land is my home. The lands we all love and treasure won't be any less public when they are managed by the state. 

                                    

With proper examination and analysis, and a good faith dialogue, a more balanced lands policy can be achieved which will restore the public lands for the use and benefit of all.

                                    

Kathleen Clarke is the director of Public Lands Policy Coordination Office in the state of Utah.

    

Copyright 2012, Deseret News Publishing Company

Got 12 Minutes?

One of my favorite comedians, Brian Regan, once pointed out that on the back of a package of Pop Tarts, are two sets of instructions:  one for the toaster and one for the microwave.  Seriously?  Because one minute in the toaster just takes too long?  As Brian points out, if you only have the three seconds it takes to microwave a Pop Tart before you have to run out the door in the morning, you may want to loosen up your schedule...
But in reality, most of us, though hard at work most of the day, still find time to update our status on social media sites once or twice a day, "re-pin" a webpage, or catch the newest episode of our favorite show.   We all find a way to do the things we really want to do.
Everyday, people tell me, "I'm really worried about the direction our country is headed, but what can I do?"   They say it as if there is absolutely nothing that they can do to affect change.  And nothing could be further from the truth.
Today, I'm going to show you how you can take those random moments of time in your day to make a powerful difference in your community, and in our nation.  In only 12 minutes, you can be a catalyst for change.
This week's e-mail (entitled "Did You Know?") shares how in 12 minutes, you can contact all of your representatives and share your support for them as they move forward to protect our access, use and ownership of our lands.  In the e-mail, I promised you that it will only take 12 minutes of your time.  So I am going to do it for you, and I will time myself.  (Shoot.  The pressure's on...)  My stopwatch is next to me ready to go.  I promise...

Step One

Find 5 minutes to look through the Resource Tab at the American Lands Council website.  Pick a paragraph or two that you feel teaches an important principle worth sharing with your representative.

OK.  That took me exactly 4 min. 47 seconds.  (Cutting it close!)  It would have been faster, but my computer froze for a second.  Technology.  You can't live with it...you can't live without it.

Step Two
Spend 2 minutes finding the addresses of all of your elected officials.  Make sure to include our County Commissioners or Supervisors.  These can usually be easily found by Google-ing your county's website.

OK.  This was pretty easy to do.  Took me about 10 seconds to find each one.

Step Three 

Spend 5 minutes drafting a quick e-mail to all of your elected officials, lending your support and courage for them to do the heavy lifting of restoring our lands back to the people of the states.  A quick copy and paste of the paragraphs you chose in Step one, and you have just let your voice be heard.  You have helped to educate your representatives and let them know that you will stand with them as they make the tough stands and refuse to take "no" for an answer!

OK.  It took me longer than I thought it would as I had chosen a graphic to share and explain, and when I got to their websites, I could only use text.  So I had to start again.  But after spending about 3 minutes typing what I wanted to say, it was quick to send and then just copy into the next person's page.  Here is a copy of the e-mail I sent just now:

Dear Senator Hatch,

I was present this past Spring at the bill-signing for Utah's HB148 "The Transfer of Public Lands Act" where you spoke to the importance of requiring the Federal Government to return to the states the lands that it has held in trust, as is required in our state enabling act.  

In a recent court case, Hawaii vs. Office of Hawaiian Affairs (2009), the Supreme Court dealt with the preeminence between a state's enabling act and subsequent, inconsistent acts of Congress.  "The consequences of submission are instantaneous and it ignores the uniquely sovereign character of that event ...to suggest that subsequent events somehow can diminish what has already been bestowed."

Senator, while running for re-election, you promised several times to address this matter forcefully if re-elected to office.  I am writing to ask, now that the elections are over, what do you plan to do about it?

Respectfully,

Rebecca Ivory

Good luck!  If everyone on our mailing list sent just ONE e-mail a week, the nation would be flooded with information, determination, and inspiration, to stand together and claim our rights as sovereign states.  And if you want to send a copy of your letter to me to share with others, I would love to hear from you.  Send it to:

Becky Ivory (Director of Communications for the ALC)

becky@americanlandscouncil.org

I hope to hear from you soon!...Let's say, in about 15 minutes?

Where Are We Today?

The elections are over and many people find themselves thinking, "Now what?"  Well, regardless of your political persuasion, the mission of the ALC has not changed.  We will continue to move forward to secure and defend the local control of land access, land use and land ownership, and help restore the sovereignty of our states.  

DO NOT BE DISCOURAGED!

The Supreme Court recent stated in the Affordable Care Act decision:

Federal Government … must show that a consti­tutional grant of power authorizes each of its actions. The same does not apply to the States, because the Con­stitution is not the source of their power. … The States thus can and do perform many of the vital functions of modern government—punishing street crime, running public schools, and zoning property for development, to name but a few—even though the Constitution’s text does not authorize any government to do so. Our cases refer to this general power of govern­ing, possessed by the States but not by the Federal Gov­ernment, as the “police power. … Because the police power is controlled by 50 different States instead of one national sovereign, the facets of governing that touch on citizens’ daily lives are normally administered by smaller governments closer to the governed. The Framers thus ensured that powers which “in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people” were held by gov­ernments more local and more accountable than a distant federal bureaucracy. The independent power of the States also serves as a check on the power of the Federal Government: ‘By denying any one government complete jurisdiction over all the concerns of public life, federalism protects the liberty of the individual from arbitrary power.’ … In the typical case we look to the States to defend their prerogatives by adopting ‘the simple expedi­ent of not yielding’ to federal blandishments when they do not want to embrace the federal policies as their own. The States [by and through their political subdivisions] are separate and independent sovereigns. Some­times they have to act like it.”  

And THAT is exactly what we intend to do.

Fed Policy: If It's Not Broke -- Fix It Anyway ...

(AZ Daily Sun June , 2012)  You have to give the lawsuit-crazy environmental community credit for thinking big. Having already secured 4.7 million acres in northern Arizona and southern Utah for their limited idea of acceptable recreation and having success in their goal of reducing land management option, they now want to take away the very popular multiple-use area just north of Grand Canyon National Park all the way to the Utah border.

They propose the withdrawal of an additional 1.7 million acres into national monument status. The proposed area currently provides recreational opportunities to millions of people who are physically unable to put on a backpack and hike miles and miles as well as those who could but chose not to. It is also an area where multiple-use management has resulted in a wildlife-rich, biologically diverse ecosystem.

Currently, only 23 percent of the land in Arizona remains classified as multiple-use. The rest has a variety of restrictions as to use and Arizona has the third-highest wilderness acreage in the nation.

The proponents of this plan to reduce even further our remaining multiple-use lands list six reasons for their latest scheme to limit your use of your land.

They want to end old-growth logging, yet, in their own words, "The Kaibab Plateau remains a rare example of a fundamentally intact, mature southwestern ponderosa pine forest retaining the highest density of ancient trees outside of protected areas." Funny, this multiple-use area has been managed just right by their own admission, yet they want to limit the ability of most Americans to enjoy it and limit the management options that they state have worked so well.

They want to protect cultural sites, yet there are already numerous federal and state laws that do just that, with felony penalties and fines up to $100,000 for violating these laws.

Managing native wildlife is another of the proponent's goals. The Kaibab is world-renowned for its wildlife, but the proponents still want to destroy the collaborative approaches used by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and the Arizona Game & Fish Department that have worked so well for the past 80 years. The real bottom line is they want to expand wolves to the North Rim, an area that historically had few, if any, wolves.

They want to put wolves on the North Rim because the current effort at wolf reintroduction in eastern Arizona has gone so poorly. This effort has gone poorly because of other wolf re-introductions across the country that have been embroiled in decades of lawsuits, despite the fact that the wolves in these areas are doing just fine and have exceeded all recovery goals. The environmental groups cannot afford to see state Game & Fish agencies succeed in wolf management because that success threatens the cash cow these groups have enjoyed by pleading to their donors that they need their money to "save the wolf" even after the wolf had already recovered in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and the Great Lake States. The Southwest is their latest "save the wolf" cash cow.

Reducing road density is another goal. Guess these groups have not looked at the Travel Management Plans all the forests have adopted. These plans close not only the forests to off-road travel but they close hundreds of miles of roads as well.

Another goal is to end livestock grazing. Over the years, the Forest Service has adopted more restrictive grazing standards. In addition, the current draft forest plan includes even more responsive grazing regulations and guidelines.

Their last goal is to stop uranium mining. What? We have to take 1.7 million acres away from the American public to stop uranium mining? Don't think so. One million acres in the area has already been withdrawn from new uranium mining for the next 20 years.

To the proponents of this ill-conceived, self-serving effort to eliminate multiple-use management and rob millions of people of recreational opportunities, I suggest you come back in 20 years and we can look at it. Until then, go take a hike in your 4.7 million acres and leave the rest of us alone to enjoy our 1.7 million acres.

Trillions in Resources Locked Up: Education Suffers

(CNSNews.com May 11, 2012) - "The Green River Formation, a largely vacant area of mostly federal land that covers the territory where Colorado, Utah and Wyoming come together, contains about as much recoverable oil as all the rest the world’s proven reserves combined, an auditor from the Government Accountability Office told Congress on Thursday.

The GAO testimony said that the federal government was in “a unique position to influence the development of oil shale” because the Green River deposits were mostly beneath federal land."

If the federal government were to simply honor to today's western states the same promise it made and kept with all states east of Colorado to "extinguish title" (i.e., transfer title) to all public lands within a reasonable time from being admitted as a state, western states would likely not have the hardest time funding education nor would they be desperately dependent upon a fiscally unsustainable federal government for more than 30% of their state budgets.

"We Just Want To Manage Our Own Lands So We Can Live In Safety"

(Ruidoso Free Press July 3, 2012)  In between the compelling stories of people who lost their homes, local dignitaries delivered speeches citing the immediate need to return control over public lands to the local level. Acting Ruidoso Fire Chief Harlan Vincent opened the rally expressing thanks and gratitude to the first responders that risked their lives for the sake of homes and properties. “We all know the problem does not lie with those on the front lines, but with the policy makers on high,” Vincent said.

Smoked Bear, Ruidoso Acting Fire Chief Harlan Vincent , Congressman Steve Pearce and a group of Ruidoso Firemen presented the perils of long-term mismanagement of national forests and wilderness areas during Saturdays rally “For our Forest’s Health” held at Wingfield Park. Smoked Bear’s mission is to protect millions of animals from burning and to stop wildfires from polluting our nation by increasing grazing and logging to reduce wildfire fuel.

“It may not be true that all wildfires can be prevented, but they can be mitigated by maintaining the health of the forest through thinning and removal of ladder fuels. Fires will still come, but they need not be as destructive,” Vincent said.

Vincent further noted that the Little Bear Fire, as bad as it was, was not the bad one. “Grindstone Mesa, Upper Canyon and Perk Canyon, Brady, Ponderosa, are all dangerously overgrown and filled with dead or dying trees. A fire started in any one of those areas, spurred on by dry conditions and high winds, would bring this town to its knees in four to six hours.”

Lincoln County Commissioner Mark Doth presented a summary of the series of emergency county commission meeting called to dedicate more than $2million dedicated from the county for immediate recovery effort needs. “Today the fire is a painful memory, but the knowledge of the destruction burns bright in my mind. More than 44,000 acres, 273 homes and outbuildings were destroyed. Market value on the structures is right at $40 million and the loss to the County in terms of property tax and tourism will be huge. Based on the number of homes lost, this is now ranked as the number one disaster in New Mexico history, a title we would rather not have,” Doth said.
The rally concluded with Congressman Steve Pearce’s continued promise to stand with the citizens of New Mexico and other western states and to stand as one voice in Washington D.C. to regain local control over public lands with responsible management, the economic development of ethical logging, grazing and recreational use of western Forests and wilderness areas starting with the citizens of Lincoln County. “We just want to manage our own lands so we can live in safety and harmony with nature, that’s all were saying,” Pearce said.

 

Pollution: It's Spreading Like Wildfire!

(www.SmokedBear.com September 12, 2011) ExxonMobil, ranked as one of the world’s largest corporate polluters, produces just over 10 million pounds of toxic air pollution per year. During three summer months, a recent North American fire released 66 billion pounds of just one of the toxic chemicals it spewed. That is 6,600 times more pollution than ExxonMobil releases in an entire year!

Wildfires throughout North America are on the rise and out of control, particularly in western states. These fires are emitting more dangerous pollutants into the air than all the “tailpipes and smokestacks in the United States….” Recent studies show that wildfires cause pollutants to triple normal levels deemed safe for humans and animals. These shocking results come from a trend of new scientific studies, and underscore the need for a major change in wildfire management.

Another recent NCAR study looked at the amount of mercury pollution wildfires produce. The study explained that plants store mercury in their leaves and needles and when burned the needles and leaves release “nearly all the mercury they had stored—from 94% to 99%.” The study concluded that wildfires spewed mercury pollution into the air “at up to 800 tons per year…” Coal-fired plants, currently the main focus point of reducing mercury pollution, produce a substantially smaller 41 tons per year. This means that wildfires produce nearly 20 times more mercury pollution than U.S. coal-fired plants produce annually.

Wildfires are spewing pollutants into the air in quantities that are many times greater than all of America’s industrial pollution combined. This information about wildfire pollution is just the tip of the iceberg because researchers have only begun quantifying wildfire pollution in the last decade. Wildfires continue to be on the rise while ineffective rangeland management techniques remain in place. Yet, pollution reduction pressure persistently is focused at industry as industries have continued to reduce their pollution rates by leaps and bounds. A problem such as this calls for a change in Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service management procedures and regulations.

Allowing large amounts of fuel—vegetation—to grow on rangeland during spring and summer months mixed with uncontrolled lightning strikes is a recipe for disaster. To stop and decrease the growth of wildfire pollution the sources of fuel must be decreased. Jason Davison, a forage and alternative crops specialist at the University of Nevada Reno, called for new rangeland management techniques fifteen years ago. He promoted the reduction of rangeland fuel by using cows and sheep to feed on the excessive vegetation. Yet, grazing rights have continually been reduced and fires have continually increased.

Smoked Bear is advocating a change in rangeland management in order to save animals, people, and the environment from the harmful effects of wildfires. Pollution is proven to be one of these harmful effects. Therefore, Smoked Bear and all those who are in support of saving animal and human life are now calling on a change in rangeland management in order to reduce wildfire pollution.  (Read more.)

Water: The Final Jurisdictional Frontier?

The USFS and the BLM appear to be launching an all out "war" on water rights in the west, with the help of any number of so-called environmental groups.  Access is being denied all over the west to use, repair, or maintain water rights and systems that have been in private use for generations.  Grazers are being told across the west that their permits will not be renewed unless they sign over their water rights to the U.S. Government.  Recently, the USDA announced new regulations to:

• restore the flow of waters into natural channels and floodplains by removing, replacing or modifying water control structures;
• restore lands and habitat to pre-disturbance conditions by removing debris and sediment conditions following natural or human-caused events; and
• restore, rehabilitate or stabilize lands occupied by non-National Forest System roads and trails to a more natural condition.

Given the history and the language of this regulation, it appears to be another frontal assault on local control of land and water access, use and ownership.  The time to act to secure local jurisdiction over these matters is now.  This is why the American Lands Council was recently formed -- to coordinate offensive actions to secure and defend local control over land and water access, use and ownership, before its too late ...

See this from the Westerner Blog:


Let's see, Tombstone can't repair the city's waterlines, this dam can't be repaired in Montana, and a Lincoln County, NM Commissioner who had just experienced a fire that started in a wilderness says:

“If you had asked me 10 years ago what I thought of the White Mountain Wilderness I would have told you I was in favor of it. The White Mountain Wilderness terrain is beautiful and unique, which should absolutely be protected. However, after years of drought, massive bug tree kill, and blown down trees, this area has become excessively under managed and highly prone to fire damage. Even though the Forest Service has proposed thinning and restoration projects in these forests, lawsuits and appeals by the Wild Earth Guardians, Center for Biological Diversity and others have totally hampered the ability of the Forest Service to manage it. The restrictions on roads and motorized vehicles, chainsaws, and grazing by livestock have also hurt the ability to manage this area. In my opinion, forests in the Southwest, especially those near an urban interface, should never be designated as wilderness areas. As long as the wilderness designation stands, we will not be able to control the area appropriately. This leaves us incredibly vulnerable to disastrous fire damage. We need to consider removing the wilderness designation from the White Mountain Wilderness.”---Mark Doth, Lincoln County Commissioner

PILT vs. Economic Self-Reliance and Education Equality

Wrongheaded to want to responsibly utilize abundant resources to adequately fund education and secure economic self-reliance of state and local communities?

That's what Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar seems to think about western states' efforts to secure local control of land access, land use and land ownership.

The federal government is $16 trillion in debt, with more than $60 trillion in accrued promises to pay Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits (unfunded obligations) for which they have no money, and yet is still OVERSPENDING at the rate of $1.5 trillion per year ($5 trillion per year deficit if you include the obligations for these entitlements).  That's wrongheaded!

Salt Lake Tribune, June 21, 2012 - "Rural Utah communities this year will get a share of $36 million from the federal government in an attempt to offset the large swaths of public lands that eat up their tax base."


While pleased that the federal funds are still flowing, some Utah leaders say they’re gearing up for the years to come when that revenue source may dry up.

"We’re already starting to prepare for what would be a tough budget situation if that were to happen — restructure our budget and financing to try and weather that if that takes place," said Kane County Commission Chairman Jim Matson, who fears budget cuts in Washington will slash rural aid.

Matson, like fellow rural commissioners, backs a plan by state officials to force the federal government to hand over public lands to state control, allowing them to develop some areas and boost revenue.

Salazar, mentioning Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, disagreed with Beehive State officials’ argument that the federal government should hand over public lands, noting that the state benefits greatly from the tourism, recreation, and oil and gas industries.

"The fact is that the lands in Utah, whether it’s Zion National Park or Arches or all of the oil and natural-gas development or mineral developments that take place, contributes in huge ways to the economy of the state of Utah," Salazar said. "So I think they’re just wrongheaded in their criticism."

Bishop, who’s working with Western colleagues to sustain PILT, chided Salazar and said that with 65 percent of Utah’s land controlled or managed by the federal government, tax revenue is hard to come by.

"This could be solved if the federal government would relinquish control over some of its 660 million acres of land," Bishop said. "Apparently wanting to fund public education and give children greater educational opportunities is ‘wrongheaded’ as Secretary Salazar put it." 

"Green Drivel"

Time to rethink the environmental policies that are contracting local control of land access, land use and land ownership?  See this candid and stunning retraction from the godfather of global warming science.

Toronto Sun, June 23, 2012 - "Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been unduly “alarmist” about climate change.

The implications were extraordinary.

Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.

Unlike many “environmentalists,” who have degrees in political science, Lovelock, until his recent retirement at age 92, was a much-honoured working scientist and academic.

Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this century.

Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were incorrect.

He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science advances.

Among his observations to the Guardian:

(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with environmentalists, Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting alternative to coal.

As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)

(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.

“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed. “I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”

(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.

As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally can’t stand windmills at any price.”

(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming: “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”

EPA At It Again - Destroyers in Ditches?

The EPA is at it again.  The agency is running roughshod over state and local jurisdiction.  It is declaring ditches to be "navigable waters" through regulatory "guidance."

(Human Events) -- “Never in the history of the CWA has federal regulation defined ditches and other upland features as ‘waters of the United States,’” said Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), the ranking committee member, and Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

“This is without a doubt an expansion of federal jurisdiction,” the lawmakers said in a May 31 letter to House colleagues.

The unusual alliance of the powerful House Republicans and Democrat to jointly sponsor legislation to overturn the new guidelines signals a willingness on Capitol Hill to rein in the formidable agency.

“The Obama administration is doing everything in its power to increase costs and regulatory burdens for American businesses, farmers and individual property owners,” Mica said in a statement to Human Events. “This federal jurisdiction grab has been opposed by Congress for years, and now the administration and its agencies are ignoring law and rulemaking procedures in order to tighten their regulatory grip over every water body in the country.”

“But this administration needs to realize it is not above the law,” Mica said.

The House measure carries 64 Republican and Democratic cosponsors and was passed in committee last week. A companion piece of legislation is already gathering steam in the Senate and is cosponsored by 26 Republicans.

“President Obama’s EPA continues to act as if it is above the law. It is using this overreaching guidance to pre-empt state and local governments, farmers and ranchers, small business owners and homeowners from making local land and water use decisions,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said in announcing their measure in March. “Our bill will stop this unprecedented Washington power grab and restore Americans’ property rights.”

“It’s time to get EPA lawyers out of Americans’ backyards,” Barrasso said.  (Read more . . .)

Maybe it's time for state and local governments to simply exercise their respective jurisdiction over such local matters . . .

USFS: Owls More Important Than Health and Safety of People

American Lands Council led the charge in rallying state and county officials, concerned citizens and leaders of various organizations to the Tombstone Shovel Brigade in support of Tombstone's right and obligation to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens in the face of arbitrary and irrational federal policy that is blocking Tombstone from restoring and securing access to the mountain springs and its access road they have been using continuously for 130-years until the USFS began shutting them out last summer.

(CNN) American Lands Council President, “Ken Ivory, a state representative from Utah, who won passage of legislation that seeks to turn over federal land to his state . . . says the conflict playing out in Tombstone is an example of the Forest Service dictating to, rather than working with, local government officials. He says the feds suddenly cut off Tombstone's access to springs and roads the city has maintained for 130 years under ‘an arbitrary and irrational federal policy.

As a result, Ivory said, Tombstone ‘is minutes away from going up in smoke’ because it is ‘a wooden town in the middle of the desert in the middle of a drought.’

At the center of the debate is the Mexican spotted owl.

‘What is more important, owls or the people of Tombstone?’ James Upchurch, a Forest Service supervisor who oversees the wilderness, was asked in court earlier this year.

Upchurch responded that there was no easy answer, which left jaws dropping on Tombstone's side of the courtroom.

Tombstone tells a compelling story, portraying the Forest Service as a rogue agency of obstructionist, tree-hugging bureaucrats. The Forest Service had offered little comment, and when it did say something, it sounded to the people of Tombstone, well, tree-hugging and bureaucratic.

And so, under an unforgiving desert sun, about 100 people -- including Old West cowboy types with monikers such as "Whiskers" and "Cowboy Doug" -- gathered at Tombstone's old high school football field Friday for the first day of an event that was billed as part protest and part work party."  (Read more . . .).


More stories:

http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/158323285.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/09/us/tombstone-shovel-brigade/index.html

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2012/06/08/erin-dnt-savidge-tombstone-water-showdown.cnn

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/08/tombstone-takes-water-fight-to-canyons-capitol-hill/

http://digg.com/newsbar/Politics/shovel_brigade_hikes_the_huachucas_to_protect_tombstone

http://www.svherald.com/content/news/2012/05/28/266496

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp2nB_VfB4w

http://cronkitenewsonline.com/2012/06/tombstone-water-war-takes-a-break-for-shovel-brigade-to-fix-pipeline/

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/supreme-court-again-refuses-tombstone-s-plea/article_beb03c53-a2f3-5e6e-bc23-ad90ceefd557.html