forest voice winter 2009

8/9/2019 Forest Voice Winter 2009

1/9

Forest Voice 1Winter 2009

Forest VoiceDefending Nature, Saving Life Since 1988 www.forestcouncil.org

Winter 2009Volume 20Number 4

Native Forest Councils

If We Really

Want Change...

We Have To

Make It Happen


2/9

2 Forest Voice www.forestcouncil.org Forest Voice 3Winter 2009

Nature Loss Dwarfs Financial Crisis

The worlds economy is suering more rom the loss o oreststhan rom the current crisis on Wall Street, according to anew EU-commissioned study. The study says that the cost odeorestation annually is between $2 and $5 trillion dollars.These numbers were arrived at ater researchers put value on,and then added together, the many ways in which orestswork or us, including absorbing CO2 rom the air, andproviding potable water. The idea behind the study is thatas orests disappear, the natural world no longer providesservices which it used to provide or ree. So, the humaneconomic system must step in and nd a way to provide thesesame services... (BBC) ( Editorial note: $2-5 trillion mentionedfails to account for the replacement-cost of goods sold or anyother measure of value of the trees being destroyed.)

Chemical Released by Trees Cools the Planet

Scientists in the UK and Germany have discovered that treesrelease a chemical that thickens clouds above them, whichrefects more sunlight and so cools the Earth. The researchsuggests that chopping down orests could accelerate globalwarming more than was thought, and that protecting existingtrees could be one o the best ways to tackle the problem.

The scientists looked at chemicals called terpenes that arereleased rom boreal orests across northern regions such asCanada, Scandinavia and Russia. The team ound theterpenes react in the air to orm tiny particles called aerosols.The particles help turn water vapor in the atmosphereinto clouds. Because trees release more terpenes in warmerweather, the discovery suggests that orests could act as anegative eedback on climate, to dampen uture temperaturerise. The team looked at orests o mainly pine and sprucetrees, but said other trees also produce terpenes so thecooling eect should be ound in other regions, includingtropical rainorests. (Guardian )

Pollution Causes 40% of Deaths Worldwide

About 40% o deaths worldwide are caused by water, airand soil pollution, concludes a Cornell researcher. Suchenvironmental degradation, coupled with the growth inworld population, are major causes behind the rapid increase

in human diseases, which the World Health Organizationhas recently reported. Both actors contribute to themalnourishment and disease susceptibility o 3.7 billionpeople. Air pollution rom smoke and various chemicals killsthree million people a year. In the United States alone aboutthree million tons o toxic chemicals are released into theenvironmentcontributing to cancer, birth deects, immunesystem deects and many other serious health problems. Soilis contaminated by many chemicals and pathogens, whichare passed on to humans through direct contact or via oodand water. Increased soil erosion worldwide not only resultsin more soil being blown but spreading o disease microbesand various toxins. (ScienceDaily, August 14, 2007)

Md. Police Put Activists Names on Terror Lists

The Maryland State Police classied 53 nonviolent activists asterrorists and entered their names and personal inormationinto state and ederal databases that track terrorism suspects,the state police chie acknowledged. Police SuperintendentTerrence Sheridan revealed at a legislative hearing that thesurveillance operation, which targeted opponents o thedeath penalty and the Iraq war, was ar more extensivethan was known when its existence was disclosed in July.The ormer state police superintendent who authorized the

operation, Thomas Hutchins, deended the program. He saidthe program was a bulwark against potential violence andcalled the activists ringe people. Sheridan said protestgroups were also entered as terrorist organizations in thedatabases, but his sta has not identied which ones. Idont believe the First Amendment is any guarantee tothose who wish to disrupt the government, Hutchins said.But Sen. James Brochin (D-Baltimore County) noted thatundercover troopers used aliases to inltrate organizationalmeetings, rallies and group e-mail lists. He called the spying adeliberate inltration to nd out every piece o inormationnecessary on groups such as the Maryland Campaign to Endthe Death Penalty and the Baltimore Pledge o Resistance.Sheridan said that he did not think the names were circulatedto other agencies in the ederal system and that they are noton the ederal governments terrorist watch list, but Hutchinssaid some names might have been shared with the NationalSecurity Agency. (Washington Post, October 8, 2008)

Another administration; another chance to get it right. Ocourse, every new administration promises change, but thisone is ounded on something more primal and essential tothe human psyche: hope. On election night, or many, thathope was realized. Indeed, much o the nation and theworld is grateul that we have awakened rom our collectiveinsanity, and that our national nightmare will soon be over.

Barack Obama provides such a stark contrast to George W.Bush that it is easy to become hopeul, i not outright giddy.Obama has gravitas, and Bush does not. He is engaged, andBush is not. He is compassionate, and Bush is not. He iseloquent, and Bush is not. But having said that, it would bewise to remember that environmentalists have been shatedby Democrats almost as oten as we have by Republicans. Thedierence is: Republicans do it without pretense.

Even now, awash in the aterglow o realized hope, seriousconcerns remain. With the exception o the occasional nodto global warming, the environment barely got a mention inthe long, caustic run-up to the election. And when Obamaactually took a position on the issues, hispronouncements were problematic. Hedeclared himsel or clean coal, nuclearpower, and energy-ineicient ethanol, andencouraged oil companies to exercise their

domestic leases. He saw nothing wrongwith substantially upping the cut on publiclands or burning orest biomass to produceelectrical energy.

These, he may claim, are transitionalpolicies which can be abandoned once non-polluting energy sources are developed. Buti the past teaches us anything, it is that thecoal, nuclear, oil and timber industries willlobby long and hard to retard meaningul change and keepthings just the way they are which is to say, in a state ocontinued environmental decline. As Naomi Klein so capablydocuments in The Shock Doctrine, creating and takingadvantage o disasters has now become the key economicstrategy o corporatists who could not otherwise advancetheir agendas. And we can no longer aord to delay.

Unarguably, the Bush administration leaves the nation withmany urgent problems. In eight years it turned a mansioninto a ixer-upper, and there is a lot that needs ixing. Butwhen your ixer-upper catches ire, you dont take time torepair a dripping aucet beore turning your attention to themore pressing problem.

Even as Americas love aair with mediocrity steadily eroded,environmental problems have been exacerbated by nearlya decade o inattention. Lester Brown o The WorldwatchInstitute inorms us that all living systems are in decline. AlGore warns that, the era o procrastination, o hal measures,o soothing and baling expedients, o delays, is coming to aclose. In its place, we are entering a period o consequences.These sober realizations give rise to an urgency that inorms

our hope or the new administration. I we had the president-elects ear, this is what we would tell him:

We have the audacity to hope that Democrats will grow aspine. Its past time that Democrats stand or somethingbesides re-election. For six years Democrats were kicked inthe teeth and oered no meaningul opposition while thecountry was turned into something we barely recognized.When they inally gained control o Congress, they promptlylaid down to provide the Bush machine a lat surace toroll over. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi behaved timidly,showing themselves to be leaders in name only. Theyreused to ilibuster and shrank rom their obligation to holdimpeachment hearings. Congress is obliged by oath andcharter to champion the Constitution and the rule o law,and to provide a counterbalance to the executive branch. TheDemocrat-controlled Congress ailed to do either.

We have the audacity to hope that the EPA and theDepartments o Interior, Commerce and Agriculture willnot be staed by industry hacks. The top positions in theseagencies are illed by lawyers, lobbyists and ormer executiveso the worst polluters and plunderers in their respectiveindustries. Their objective is to ensure that regulatory agenciesdont work, and that the crooks and despoilers are notinconvenienced by the enorcement o laws. Without honestoversight, the best intended legislation will be undermined,and regulatory agencies will continue to serve as subsidiarieso the industries they are chartered to regulate.

We have the audacity to hope that integrity returns togovernance. Ater eight years o governance based in raud,lies, and secrets, bolstered by Democrat inaction, the nation

urgently needs aith in its leadership restored.We have the audacity to hope that every Bush administrationedict that undermines our constitutional protections,threatens our reedoms, and imperils our environment willbe overturned. This should include, but not be limited to:prohibitions on spying, torture, and illegal search and seizure;the elimination o oxymoronic ree speech zones; and thereinstatement o posse comitatusand habeas corpus.

We have the audacity to hope or an end to the privatizationo the commons. Our national orests, public lands, parks,and water resources must be protected in perpetuity orthe common good, not or the inancial gain o the ew.We hold other assets in common as well, including roads,bridges, government buildings, public transportation, publiceducation, Social Security, ire and police departments, thecourts, the military, and so on. Neither the physical assetsnor the unctions they perorm can be rightully sold o oroutsourced without the peoples consent.

We have the audacity to hope that there willbe a true and ull accounting o the valueo natural systems. Valuing nature only as acommodity is suicidal. Standing orests, orexample, provide oxygen, sequester carbon,

cool the planet, conserve, release, and puriywater, provide wildlie habitat, recreationalopportunity and, or many, spiritual solace.The economic and intrinsic value o thoseservices must be weighed beore orests areleveled. According to a study commissionedby the European Union, were losing naturalcapital at between $25 trillion every year.Thats equivalent to twice the cost o thecurrent inancial meltdown but happening

every year! Forest decline alone is estimated to cost about 7%o global GDP. These losses are not only oolish, they hastenplanetary warming and decline.

We have the audacity to hope that the nation will not againpostpone meaningul action to curb global warming. All welack is the political will. I we have any chance at all o reversingthis coming calamity, we must start todayto make changes onan unprecedented scale. A Marshall Plan or green, non-polluting, renewable energy would not only create the jobsand technologies o the 21st century, but has the potential toprovide the nation with a common moral purpose so lackingduring the Bush years.

We have the audacity to hope that the government willaddress the needs o common people. Lie, liberty, and thepursuit o happiness at their most basic require cleanair, pure water, and a livable planet. These basic needs requiresuicient regulation to protect us rom raud and predation.They require a health care system that is not punitivelyexpensive and an educational system that leaves graduatesburdened with knowledge, not debt. And, especially in timeso crisis, they require that we hold ast to our values and

reedoms, not barter them away or the illusion o security.

Hope, it has been said, makes a good breakast but a poorsupper. Today we stand hopeul and ready to roll up oursleeves in service o a just and livable world. But i ourhope is not met with action, it will soon turn to despair orworse, resignation. There is, Mr. President-elect, nothingaudacious about hope. Hype, which oers alse hope clad ingrandiloquence, now that would truly be audacious andtragic.

Admittedly, the new president will inherit unprecedentedchallenges rom an administration which through greed,incompetence and design stripped the nation o mucho its wealth and many o its options. But we Americans arenothing i not resilient, and we urgently need to believe ourhope has not been misplaced.

We stand ready to ollow; a wounded nation yearning or aleader worthy o our trust.

Tim Hermach, President,Native Forest Council

* * *

Forest Voice

1988-2008ISSN 1069-2002Native Forest CouncilPO Box 2190Eugene, OR 97402541.688.2600Fax [email protected]

Forest Voice is sent ree tomembers o the Native ForestCouncil. The cost o U.S.membership is $35 annually.Bulk orders o theForest Voice are available or $50 per 100.A complimentary copy isavailable on request.

All rights to publication oarticles appearing in ForestVoiceare reserved.

Publisher/Executive EditorTim Hermach

Managing EditorJim Flynn

Associate EditorDavid Porter

Special ThanksDavid PorterMarriner OrumCharlotte TalberthDeborah OrtunoLeeona KlippsteinShannon Wilson

No ThanksAll those who eel its OK tocut deals that leave us withless native orests, soil, air,and clean water.

Submission GuidelinesWe welcome unsolicitedsubmissions that addressissues relevant to publiclands protection andsupport the Native ForestCouncils mission. I youwould like us to returnyour work, please includea SASE or send to [email protected].

Inspired?Incensed?Impressed?

Please contact:Native Forest CouncilPO Box 2190Eugene, OR 97402541.688.2600

Cover art:Manny Francisco

This publication containscopyrighted material theuse o which may not bespeciically authorized bythe copyright owner. Weare making such materialavailable in our eorts toadvance understanding oenvironmental, political,human rights, economic,democracy, scientiic, andsocial justice issues, etc. Webelieve this constitutes aair use o any such copy-righted material as providedor in section 107 o the U.S.Copyright Law. In accor-dance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the materialin this publication is dis-tributed without proit tothose who have expresseda prior interest in receivingthe included inormationor research and educationalpurposes. For more inorma-tion, go to www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml .

Native ForestCouncil

The Native Forest Council isa nonproit, tax-deductibleorganization ounded bybusiness and proessionalpeople alarmed by thewanton destruction o ournational orests. We believea sound economy and asound environment mustnot be incompatible and thatcurrent public-land manage-ment practices are probablycatastrophic to both.

The mission o the NativeForest Council is to protectand preserve every acre opublicly owned land in theUnited States.

Board of DirectorsAllan BranscombCalvin HecoctaTim HermachMichelle Maher

Advisory BoardEd Begley, Jr.Je DeBonisLarry DeckmanEd DorschErika FinstadDavid FunkRev. James Parks MortonFraser ShillingKaryn Strickler

PresidentTimothy Hermach

StaffBill BartonRachel Barton-RussellMonica Morrison

VolunteersJohn BorowskiMichelle DAmicoRick GormanMichael LangJeanie MyklandSteve NorthwayDavid PeltierMichael RiegertJohnny VanHerwaarden

ForesterRoy Keene

Seattle Office206.783.0728

[email protected] DivelbissSuzanne Pardee

Regional Representatives

Margaret Hays YoungBrooklyn, NY718.789.0038

Linda MarinaBurlington, VT802.540.0196

Kris MoormanAmes, IA515.232.1316

Wayne NortonGainesville, FL352.373.8733

Jason TamblynDuluth, GA770.851.4181

News and Views

Printed on 100%Post-ConsumerRecycledPaper withSoy-based Ink

LettersDear Editor,I read the Forest Voiceover coee around the time the printedition came in. It sounded a little spiteul to me. Sort o likewere out to get those baaaaad s.o.b.s. Dont we need to worktogether? Cant we igure out how to do that? It remindedme a little o witch hunting, asking me to report on otherorganizations, etc. How the *&^% do I know? It was just alittle too backbiting. Just expressing my opinion FYI.

MaureenSeattle, Washington

Our reply: Dear Maureen,Youre right. Everyone who wants to protect our forests, water-sheds and life on Earth has to join together to stop the destruc-tion.This is what Zero Cut has always been about, hoisting abanner for people to rally behind. But the question remains:what do we do when some of the biggest players on the teamkeep throwing the game?

Of course, you dont have totake our word for it: check outthe new book by Christine MacDonald called Green, Inc.: An Environmental InsiderReveals How a Good Cause HasGone Bad, which comes tothe same conclusions we have:there needs to be a revolutionin the conservation movement. As abolitionist William LloydGarrison said: Little boldnessis needed to assail the opinionsand practices of notoriouslywicked men; but to rebuke greatand good men for their conduct,and to impeach their discern-ment, is the highest effort ofmoral courage.

To theForest Voice:I just received the summer issue yesterday. It saddens myheart to read o the senseless destruction, but I love thattheres hope. I live in a logging town/county o MountBaker-Snoqualmie National Forest, am a homeschoolingMama o two & eel it is SO important to educate our nextgenerations o the importance o responsible orest care &protection. We need our trees! I plan on reading this issuewith my girls and bringing some copies to local schools &teachers as well. Thank you again!

Holly,Maple City, Washington

The Audacity of Hope... or Hype?

Native Forest Council &Forest Voice Turn 20!!!

Were celebrating 20 years this year, looking back onwhere weve been and looking forward to the next20 years. Were also looking for your feedback onthe content and quality of our one-of-a-kind news-paper, the Forest Voice. In particular:

In what way has the Forest Voiceeducated you overthe years?

Did any particular articles teach you somethingnew? Enrage you? Give you hope?

Any pictures that just blew you away, from a stun-ning forestscape to a heart-wrenching clearcut?

What features in the paper would you like to seemore of? Less of?

Well publish some of the responses in future issues,and use the feedback to make yourForest Voicenews-paper more of what you want to see. (Send to PO Box2190, Eugene, OR 97402 or [email protected].)Thanks to all our supporters for staying true to yourprinciples and supporting the Native Forest Counciland the Forest Voicethrough the years!


3/9


By Tim Hermach

The transition to a new administration heldpromise o a change in leadership and direc-tion or our oundering economy and deeplystupeied and polarized population. Runningon a platorm o hope and change, BarackObama promised a new direction or America.Now, six weeks ater the election and a monthbeore the inauguration, the change we werecounting on seems a remote possibility at best,at worst, a nasty deception that was oisted ona public starved or a chance to create the liveswe as Americans have been led to believe wereavailable to us.

President-elect Obama has chosen a cabinet,most rom President Clintons right-o-centerteam. Many o these Clinton retreads haveeven drited arther into the pockets o WallStreet since their time in the White House.He has traded ormer Chevron board memberCondi Rice or current Chevron Board mem-ber Jim Jones. He has chosen inancial sectorpower player and ormer Clinton staer RahmEmmanuel as his chie o sta. His pick tohead the Department o the Interior is a big oiland coal proponent and his Agr iculture pick isa supporter o GMOs and the antasy o cornethanol. This is not change; this is the statusquo on steroids.

During the campaign, the dogmatic demo-crats and the liberal olks hoping and pray-ing or change continually espoused the linewe have to get him elected then we willhold his eet to the ire. A huge groundswello olk put their hearts and souls into whatbecame a unique and unstoppable campaign.Unprecedented undraising and internet orga-nizing combined with the collapse o theeconomy carried Barack Obama to victory inan electoral landslide. Now Obamas blueprintis coming into ocus and all those who wereso sure that change was at hand should bescreaming bloody murder.

I see in the near uture a crisis approachingthat unnerves me and causes me to trembleor the saety o my country. . . . Corporationshave been enthroned, an era o corruptionin high places will ollow, and the money-power o the country will endeavor to prolong

its reign by working upon the prejudices othe people until the wealth is aggregated ina ew hands and the Republic is destroyed.This quote by Abraham Lincoln provides aninsight into what has happened to our coun-

try. The moneyed interests that have extractedmost o the wealth rom the middle class andomented a divisive and polarized conditionin our society have used their ad agencies, cor-porate media and wealth to create an illusiono change while keeping the same players inpower. When it came time to hold the presi-dent-elects eet to the ire, it was done. Not bythe orward looking olks who put this man inoice, rather, the ruling class who control allthings political handed him his cabinet picksand industry and big business are cheeringhis choices.

He has backed o his promise to implement awindall proits tax on big oil. He has decidednot to eliminate the tax breaks or the richestamong us. He has decided not to leave Iraq onthe schedule he promised. He has supportedwhat has now become an $8.5 trillion dol-lar give-away to the same people responsibleor crashing the largest and most productiveeconomy on Earth. He is talking about a mas-sive expansion o the already bloated mili-tary.

I youre wondering what happened, look noarther than the talking points used by the

conservative pundits during the election pro-cess. They said Obama had the most liberalrecord in the Senate. They said he would bringsocialism to America. They created a climateo ear in their base about what would happen

to our country i this Socialist were elected.They had us believing we were truly lookingat a change.

A close look at his policy proposals showedthat his positions on the issues were not arlet as stated. The recurring dialog o theaithul said that when he was elected hewould swing gently let and bring real changeto our nation. It now appears that the swingwas hard to the right and the olks who count-ed on being heard during this transition willbe looking or real change or at least another4 years.

Again, Abraham Lincoln It is the eternalstruggle between two principles, right andwrong. Throughout the world it is the samespirit that says you toil and work and earnbread and Ill eat it. Today, the corporationsand their minions in Washington are eatingyour bread.

While it is still possible that Mr. Obama willsomehow lead the powerul, positional cabi-net personalities he has selected and create anObama administration that will do good orour country, with each pick o an entrenched

Washington insider that outcome becomesless likely. I he does not do this, how canour nation survive? Quoting Lincoln again,This country, with its institutions, belongsto the people who inhabit it. Whenever theyshall grow weary o the existing government,they can exercise their constitutional right oamending it, or exercise their revolutionaryright to overthrow it. The last election was anexercise o our constitutional right to amendthe government. It does not appear that wewere diligent enough in vetting the choicesand it now appears who we chose will notmaniest the change we were so desperatelyseeking.

Mr. Obama seems to have decided not to valueand regard nature as anything but a savingsaccount to be liquidated or a grocery storeto be plundered. All or the beneit o thoseentrenched powers that are the masters oWall Street. How much more o this can ournation take? I the incoming administrationcontinues, in general, the ailed environmen-tal, economic, social, military, and oreignpolicies we have endured or decades, it maybe time to look at Mr. Lincolns second optionand start over.

Tim Hermach is director of the Native Forest

Council.

What Happened on the Way to the Inauguration?By Jeffrey St. Clair

Although Americas greatest Interior Secretary,Harold Ickes, who had the post or nearly adecade under FDR, was rom Chicago, the play-book or presidential transitions calls or picking aWesterner or Interior, as long as the nominee isnta Caliornian. Pick someone rom Arizona or NewMexico or Colorado. O course, Colorado has pro-duced two o the worst recent Interior Secretaries: James Watt and Gale Norton. Ken Salazar maymake it three.

And why not? Ater all, Salazar was one o the irstto endorse Gale Nortons nomination as BushsInterior Secretary.

By almost any standard, its hard to imagine a moreuninspired or uninspiring choice or the job thanproessional middle-o-the-roader Ken Salazar, theconservative Democrat rom Colorado. This palo Alberto Gonzalez is a meek politician, who hasnever demonstrated the stomach or conrontingthe corporate bullies o the west: the mining, tim-ber and oil companies who have been easting on

Interior Department handouts or the past eightyears. Even as attorney general o Colorado, Salazarbuilt a record o timidity when it came to goingater renegade mining companies.

The editorial pages o western papers have largelyhailed Salazars nomination. The common themeseems to be that Salazar will be an honest broker.But broker o what? Mining claims and oil leases,most likely.

Less deensible are the dial-o-matic press releasesaxed out by the mainstream groups, greenwash-ing Salazars dismal record. Heres Carl Pope, CEOo the Sierra Club, who ine-tuned this kind orhetorical airbrushing during the many traumas othe Clinton years:

The Sierra Club is very pleased with the nomina-tion o Ken Salazar to head the Interior Department.As a Westerner and a rancher, he understands thevalue o our public lands, parks, and wildlie andhas been a vocal critic o the Bush Administrationsreckless eorts to sell-o our public lands to BigOil and other special interests. Senator Salazar hasbeen a leader in protecting places like the RoanPlateau and he has stood up against the Bushsadministrations dangerous rush to develop oilshale in Colorado and across the West.

Senator Salazar has also been a leading voice incalling or the development o the Wests vast solar,wind, and geothermal resources. He will make sure

that we create the good-paying green jobs that willuel our economic recovery without harming thepublic lands he will be charged with protecting.

Who knew that strip-mining or coal, an industrySalazar resolutely promotes, was a green job? Holdon tight, here we go once more down the rabbithole.

The Sierra Club had thrown its organizationalhet behind Mike Thompson, the hook-and-rile Democratic congressman rom northernCaliornia. Obama stied them and got away withit without enduring even a whimper o disappoint-ment.

In the exhaust-stream, not ar beyond Pope, camean organization (you cant call them a group,since they dont really have any members) calledthe Campaign or American Wilderness, lavishlyendowed by the centrist Pew Charitable Trusts,to ete Salazar. According to Mike Matz, theCampaigns executive director, Salazar has beena strong proponent o protecting ederal lands aswildernessAs a armer, a rancher, and a conserva-tionist, Sen. Salazar understands the importance obalancing traditional uses o our public lands withthe need to protect them. His knowledge o landmanagement issues in the West, coupled with hisability to work with diverse groups and coalitionsto ind common ground, will serve him well at theDepartment o the Interior.

Whenever seasoned greens see the word common

ground invoked as a solution or thorny landuse issues in the Interior West it sets o an earlywarning alarm. Common ground is anotherlex-phrase like, win-win solution that indicatesgreens will be handed a ew low-calorie crumbswhile business will proceed to gorge as usual.

In Salazars case, these morsels have been a ewmeasly wilderness areas inside non-contentiousareas, such as Rocky Mountain National Park.Designating a wilderness inside a national parkis about as risky as placing the National Mall o-limits to oil drilling.

But Salazars green gits havent come without acost. In the calculus o common ground politics,trade-os come with the territory. For example,Salazar, under intense pressure rom Coloradoans,issued a tepid remonstrance against the Bushadministrations maniacal plan to open up theRoan Plateau in western Colorado to oil drilling.But he voted to authorize oil drilling o the coasto Florida, voted against increased uel-eiciencystandards or cars and trucks and voted againstthe repeal o tax breaks or Exxon-Mobil whenthe company was shattering records or quarterly

proits.

On the very day that Salazars nomination wasleaked to the press, the Inspector General or theInterior Department released a devastating reporton the demolition o the Endangered Species Actunder the Bush administration, largely at thehands o the disgraced Julie MacDonald, ormerDeputy Secretary o Interior or Fish and Wildlie.The IG report, written by Earl Devaney, detailedhow MacDonald personally interered with 13 di-erent endangered species rulings, bullying agen-cy scientists and rewriting biological opinions.MacDonald injected hersel personally and pro-oundly in a number o ESA decisions, Devaneywrote in a letter to Oregon Senator Ron Wyden.We determined that MacDonalds managementstyle was abrupt and abrasive, i not abusive, andthat her conduct demoralized and rustrated hersta as well as her subordinate managers.

What McDonald did covertly, Salazar might attemptopenly in the name o, yes, common ground. Takethe case o the white-tailed prairie dog, one o thedeclining species that MacDonald went to neari-ous lengths to keep rom enjoying the protectionso the Endangered Species Act. Prairie dogs areviewed as pests by ranchers and their populationshave been remorselessly targeted or eliminationon rangelands across the Interior West.

Ken Salazar, ormer rancher, once threatened tosue the Fish and Wildlie Service to keep the simi-larly imperiled black-tailed prairie dog o theendangered species list. The senator also iercelyopposed eorts to inscribe stronger protections orendangered species in the 2008 Farm Bill.

The Department o the Interior desperatelyneeds a strong, orward looking, reorm-mindedSecretary, says Kieran Suckling, executive directoro the Tucson-based Center or Biological Diversity.Unortunately, Ken Salazar is not that man. Heendorsed George Bushs selection o Gale Nortonas Secretary o Interior, the very woman who initi-ated and encouraged the scandals that have rockedthe Department o the Interior. Virtually all othe misdeeds described in the Inspector Generalsexpose occurred during the tenure o the personKen Salazar advocated or the position he is nowseeking.As a leading indicator o just how bad Salazarmay turn out to be, an environmentalist needonly bushwhack through the ew remaining dailypapers to the stock market pages, where energyspeculators, cheered at the Salazar pick, drove upthe share price o coal companies, such as Peabody,Massey Energy and Arch Coal. The battered S&PCoal index rose by three per cent on the dayObama introduced the coal-riendly Salazar as hisnominee.Say this much or Salazar: hes not a Clinton retread.

In act, he makes Clinton Interior Secretary BruceBabbitt look like Ed Abbey. The only way to redeemClintons sorry record on the environment is orObama to be worse.

As Hot Rod Blajogevich demonstrated in his earthyvernacular, politics is a pay-to-play sport. LikeKen Salazar, Barack Obamas political underwritersincluded oil-and-gas companies, utilities, inancialhouses, agribusiness giants, such as Archer DanielsMidlands, and coal companies. These bundledcampaign contributions dwared the money givento Obama by environmentalists, many o whombacked Hillary in the Democratic Party primaries.

Environmentalists made no demands o Obamaduring the election and sat silently as he backedo-shore oil drilling, pledged to build new nucle-ar plants and sang the virtues o the oxymoronknown as clean-coal technology. At this point, thepresident-elect probably eels he owes them noavors. And he gave them none. The environmen-tal establishment cheered.

So the environmental movement has once againbeen let out in the cold, begging Rahm Emmanuelor a ew sub-cabinet appointments. They mayget one or two positions out o a couple hun-dred slots. But Big Greens docile genulections toSalazar wont make those table-scraps go down anysmoother.

Jeffrey St. Clair is the author of Been Brown So Long It Looked Like Green to Me: the Politics of Natureand Grand Theft Pentagon. His newest book, BornUnder a Bad Sky, is now out.books. He can be reachedat: [email protected].

Salazar and the Tragedy of the Common Ground


4/9


by Shawn Dell JoyceWe are depleting our topsoil at a rate 10 timesgreater than nature can replenish it, accord-ing to several studies. Thats scary because ittakes nature up to 500 years to produce oneinch o topsoil.

Our 9-year-old son came home rom armcamp last summer singing at the top o hislungs: Dirt, you made my lunch! Thank youdirt, thanks a bunch! How poignant that thisyoungster gets what so many o us adults aremissing a basic understanding that we oweour very existence, the ood we eat, the clotheswe wear and the air we breathe to dirt!

One heaping tablespoon o the stu containsmore microorganisms than there are peopleon the planet, points out author Harvey Blattin Americas Environmental Report Card.Those soil microbes are critically importantor healthy plants and crops, which in turn

are critically important or healthy humansand other species. Also contained in thattablespoon are the minerals and organic mat-ter which take carbon rom the atmosphereand ix it into the soil, helping to storemoisture and carbon saely in the soil.

In our culture, dirt is a derogatory term,like dirt poor, dirty, or soiled. Yet, weneed only look back a ew years to the 1930sDust Bowl to see how important dirt really is.In the 1930s, the prairie grasses were plowedunder to grow crops. Ater several years ointense drought, the soils dried out and nocrops or native grasses survived to hold thetopsoil in place. Winds whipped the topsoilinto huge dust storms, causing many amiliesto become reugees, and the loss o more thanive inches o topsoil rom almost 10 millionacres, according to the United Nations.

Five inches may not sound like much, butit takes nature up to 500 years to produceone inch o topsoil. We are depleting ourtopsoil at a rate 10 times greater than naturecan replenish it, according to several studies.[Ed. note: 70% of our nations topsoil is gone or

polluted.] Topsoil loss is three times worse inmore populated places like China and Arica.Chinese topsoil can be ound in Hawaii dur-ing the spring planting season, blown in thewind to the islands rom tilling. Arican top-soil can be ound in Brazil and Florida, accord-ing to a US Department o Agriculture report.American topsoil oten winds up in our riversand streams as silt. Many rivers are now brownrom topsoil erosion such as the Hudson Riverin my region.

Our diet and arming practices are the mainculprits behind topsoil erosion. Corn is one othe most environmentally-devastating cropsto grow. The soil must be tilled, keeping itloose and dry, and vulnerable to erosion. Mosto this corn is ed to animals or shipped over-seas. For every pound o bee (ed with corn)we lose ive pounds o ertile topsoil, accord-ing to a Harvard School o Public Health study.This adds up to more than two million acres otopsoil lost every year. On top o t his, we lose

another million acres to urban sprawl.

Land degradation and desertiication maybe regarded as the silent crisis o the world, agenuine threat to the uture o humankind,says Andres Arnalds, assistant director o theIcelandic Soil Conservation Service. Soil andvegetation is being lost at an alarming ratearound the globe, which in turn has devastat-ing eects on ood production and acceleratesclimate change.

Soil impacts climate change by storing twiceas much carbon as can be ound in the atmo-sphere. Also, soil with organic matter in itholds moisture longer, needing less water orirrigation.

Already, 43% o the Earths vegetated suracehas been degraded by soil depletion, deserti-ication and loss o orests, says author DaleAllen Peier in his book Eating Fossil Fuels.Peier also notes that 10 million hectareso land get added to that igure every year asmore lands become degraded. At the sametime, ive million hectares must be added toeed the additional 84 million humans born

each year, he adds. What will we do in 2050with the projected additional three billionmore mouths to eed?

The questions we must ask ourselves now are,how can we allow this to happen, and whatcan we do to prevent it?, asks Peier. Doesour present liestyle mean so much to us thatwe would subject ourselves and our childrento this ast approaching tragedy simply ora ew more years o conspicuous consump-tion?

A highly eective tool to conserve topsoil isthe Conservation Reserve Program, accordingto Lester Brown o the Ear th Policies Institute.Under the program, armers were paid toplant trees or cover crops, such as clover,on highly erodible armland. Reducing till-age was also encouraged. These techniquesin combination reduced US topsoil loss rom3.1 billion tons in 1982 to 1.9 billion tons in1997.

Here are a few things you can do to reducetopsoil loss:

Compost fall leaves and vegetable trim-mings. Use the compost to enrich the soil in

your yard or garden.

Eat only pasture-raised local meats andavoid corn-fed factory farmed meats. [Ed.note: Or become a vegetarian.]

Dont buy or support biofuels made fromcorn.

Buy direct from small farmers who areless likely to use large scale cultivators.

Teach your children to sing: Dirt, youmade my lunch!

Shawn Dell Joyce is a sustainable artist and activ-ist living in a green home in the Hudson RiverValley of New York. She can be reached at [email protected]. (Source: www.sedona.biz/sustainable-living0907.htm)

Save Our Soil!

A pretty serious case of topsoil depletion?

by Alan Snitow and DeborahKaufman

In the last ew years, the worlds largest inan-cial institutions and pension unds, romGoldman Sachs to Australias Macquarie Bank,have igured out that old, trustworthy utili-ties and inrastructure could become reliablecash cows supporting the inancial systemsspeculative junk derivatives with the real con-crete o highways, water utilities, airports,harbors, and transit systems.

The spiraling collapse o the inancial systemmay only intensiy the quest or private invest-ments in what is now the public sector. Thislipping o public assets could be the nextbig phase o privatization, and it could hap-pen even under an Obama administration, aslocal and state governments, starved during

Bushs two terms in oice, look to bail out onpublic assets, employees, and responsibilities.The Republican record o neglect o basic inra-structure reads like a police blotter: levees inNew Orleans, a major bridge in Minneapolis,a collapsing power grid, bursting water mains,and outdated sewage treatment plants.

Billions in private assets are now parked ininrastructure unds waiting or the crisis tomature and the right public assets to buy onthe cheap. The irst harbingers o a potentialire sale are already on the horizon. The Cityo Chicago has leased its major highway andIndiana its toll road. Private companies aremanaging major ports and bidding or con-trol o local water systems across the country.Government jobs are also up or sale. For theirst time in American history, the ederal gov-ernment employs more contract workers thanregular employees.

This radical shit to the private sector couldbecome one o historys largest transers oownership, control, and wealth rom the pub-lic trust to the private till. But more is at stake.The concept o democracy itsel is being chal-lenged by multinational corporations that

see Americans not as citi-zens, but as customers, andgovernment not as some-thing o, by, and or thepeople, but as a market tobe entered or proit.

How the Water RevoltBegan

And a huge market it is.About 85% o Americansreceive their water rompublic utility departments,making water inrastruc-ture, worth trillions odollars, a prime target orprivatization. To drive theiragenda, water industry lobbyists have con-sistently opposed ederal aid or public water

agencies, hoping that ederal cutbacks woulddrive market expansion. So ar, the strategyhas worked. In 1978, just beore the Reagan-erastarvation diet began, ederal unding covered78% o the cost or new water inrastructure.By 2007, it covered just 3%.

As a result, local and state governments aredesperately trying to igure out how to makeup the dierence without politically unpopu-lar rate increases. A growing number o may-ors and governors are turning to the industrysdesignated solution: privatization.

Providing clean, accessible, aordable water isnot only the most basic o all government ser-vices, but throughout history, control o waterhas deined the power structure o societies. Iwe lose control o our water, what do we, ascitizens, really control?

The danger is that most citizens dont evenknow theres a problem. Water systems aregenerally underground and out o sight. Mosto us dont think about our water until the tapruns dry or we lush and it doesnt go away.That indierence could cost us dearly, butprivatization is not yet destiny.

A citizens water

revolt has beenslowly spreadingacross the UnitedStates. The revolt isnot made up o theusual suspects, hasno ocused ideol-ogy, and isnt thestu o headlines.It oten starts as anot-in-my-back-yard movementbut quickly expandsto encompass issueso global economicjustice.

In Lee, Mass-achusetts, therevolt began againstpotential water-plant layos. InFelton, Caliornia,it was initiallyabout rate increasesand local control;in Atlanta, brokenpipes and sewagelines. In other com-munities, it ocused

on corruption, cover-ups, and complicitybetween politicians and giant corporations.

One o the epicenters o this nascent move-ment has been Stockton, Caliornia, in theheart o the states agricultural San JoaquinValley. A citizens group there took on notonly the mayor and city council, but alsosome o the worlds largest private water cor-porations in a preview o the corporate waterwars to come.

When private water companies case a city asa potential privatization target, they look ora champion in city government, someonewho will take the lead in selling o the cityswater services. In Stockton, they ound theirchampion in Mayor Gary Podesto, a ormerbig box grocery store owner. In his view, itwas time that Stockton city government treatits citizens as customers.

* * *

And so a new stage in the water privatizationwars beckons as Goldman Sachs, Macquariebank, huge pension unds, and billionaireinvestors hop on the inrastructure bandwag-on.

Will the Democrats resist the trend? Past his-tory suggests that the Party is deeply split onthe issue o privatization and that only publicresistance has slowed the ire sale. No matterwho is president, the ate o public servicesand assets is likely to be let to local citizensgroups that have cut their teeth on waterbattles like the one in Stockton.

Those local groups have already coalescedinto a national movement or a democraticand sustainable water uture. The unansweredquestion is whether these twenty-irst centurywater wars are merely a last stand against aninevitable corporatized uture, or the begin-ning o a ar-reaching revolt to reclaim citizen-ship, reassert democratic values, and redeinehow we interact with our environment.

Alan Snitow and Deborah Kaufman are award-winning filmmakers whose PBS documentaryThirst was the first film to bring attention tothe global movement against water privatiza-tion. Their book by the same name exposed howthe corporate drive to control water has becomea catalyst for community resistance to globaliza-tion. Snitow is on the board of Food and WaterWatch. Kaufman is on the board of the Progressive

Jewish Alliance. This essay was adapted from alonger version in Water Consciousness: How We

All Have to Change to Protect Our Most CriticalResource, edited by Tara Lohan.

Corporate Takeover Threatens Our DrinkingWater Supplies


5/9


H2Omeland Security & the US Forest Service

Is this how we allow our public servants to act?

Zero Cut on Public Lands

At least 36 states

anticipate water

shortages within

the next 10 years.

US Government

Accountability

Office, 2003

The Forest Service has a mandate

to protect our precious water.

Unfortunately, they do not always

live up to this goal...

Clean Water is ESSENTIAL for Life

From the US Forest Service Website:

Forests are a source of drinking water for over 180 million people in the United States.

The National Forest System was established with the purpose of securing favorable conditions of waterflows in thenations headwaters.

Healthy forests provide a host of watershed services, including water purification, groundwater and surface flow regulation,erosion control, and streambank stabilization.

The importance of these watershed services will only increase as water quality becomes a critical issue around the globe.

The loss or decline of forests, our ecological life-support systems, causes significant harm to the nations economy and topublic-health and well-being.

However, the pictures at the right tell a different story. The ForestService is selling off our national treasures at a financial loss, and

our watersheds are paying the price.


6/9


by Denny Haldeman

Once again, we ind our political leadershipunited around a very bad idea ethanoland other biouels to help gain energyindependence, to help armers and mostimportantly, to help citizens avoid the harshreality o peak oil converging with unsustain-able liestyles.

While some crops are superior to others andorest-eating cellulosic ethanol technologyscams are still in development, corn ethanolprimacy is devouring the nations alternativeenergy ocus. Billions o taxpayer dollars arebeing thrown into this unsustainable technol-ogy and we subsidize each gallon o auto alco-hol to the tune o 51 cents per gallon.

To grow enough corn or ethanol to replaceour oil addiction would require approximately482 million acres o cropland, exceeding thecurrent total o 434 million acres o cropland

used or all ood and iber. This does not evenaccount or projected growth o oil consump-tion in the US. There is already a push to putthe marginal Conservation Reserve Programlands, vital or wildlie and water quality andquantity, into intense energy crop produc-tion.

Old school ethical armers in the corn beltare already lamenting the destruction o soil-saving windbreaks, some planted during theCCC years, the plowing under o hayieldsto corn, highly erodable hilly lands beingput into corn, and water drainages beingreduced, hearkening back to the depression-era insanity that squandered so much vitaltopsoil. Cellulosic ethanol scams will areeven worse or the soils as residues arescooped up, leaving virtually nothing to eedback to the soil.

In the rush to burn our nations dwindlingsoil resources, corn is king. Corn devourssoil nutrients at 12-20 times the rate osoil renewal, meaning it is already a high-ly unsustainable crop. Corn is also highlydependent on ossil uel based ertilizer andpesticide inputs. With the inevitable hybrid-ization and genetically modiied corn crops,the soil nutrient depletion will accelerate.

The Corn Cartel, led by the likes o ArcherDaniels Midland and Monsanto, have beenworking or decades on their plans or corndominion over the US and are now reapingrecord proits and subsidies.

In a land already plagued with poisonedgroundwater, the incidence o atrazine andother poisons will only become more per-vasive. Aquiers, already drained aster thanrecharge will only dry up aster in directproportion to our ethanol consumption.It takes around 8,000 gallons o water toproduce a gallon o ethanol rom corn andeach gallon o it leaves eight gallons o toxicwaste sludge. Even in the land o 10,000 Lakes,Minnesota is experiencing water shortagesrom the ethanol production explosion. With99% o corn production under intensive ossiluel nitrogen ertilization regimes, there is adirectly proportionate resulting contamina-tion o surace and groundwater and growtho the dead zones where our rivers drain.

Depending on i you believe the science othe Corn Growers Association or scientistsrom Cornell University, corn will produceslightly more energy than is required to turnit into ethanol or substantially less. Havingmonitored the bioenergy crowd or a decade,

repeated inquiries into true sustainabilityhave been met with deaening silence. Thereis no ethanol plant in operation that canplant, grow, harvest, transport, process, andtransport its product on ethanol alone andstill show a proit.

Ethanol also contains only 70% o the energyo gasoline. Thereore, it takes much moreethanol to go a hundred miles than it takesgas, undermining the 10-cent price dierenceat the pump that seems like you are savingmoney and the earth. Ethanol blends alsoevaporate ar more readily, causing a toxicnauseous moment at the pump and increas-ing ozone pollution. With the EPA poised toadjust ozone pollution standards to actuallyprotect people, and Chattanoogas history obarely tolerable air, it is unconscionable orthe ethanol bandwagon committee here to bealling or this scam.

Today, communities are ighting proposed

ethanol plants on issues rom waterconsumption, water quality, noxious umes,noise, traic saety, and other quality o lieissues.

Do we eed cars or ourselves? To uel theaverage American consumers driving habitswould require 11 acres o cropland per year,the same cropland that could eed seven peo-

ple or a year. Already weve seen tortilla riotsin Mexico and other places where corn is aood staple and the 60% price increase is pro-hibitive or the least aluent amongst us.

Ethanol primacy is in direct competition orthe dairy and animal industry. In the US, theUSDA projects that the wholesale price ochicken will be 10% higher this year, the priceo eggs up 21%, milk 14%, bee 6% and this isonly the beginning. Other ood crops like soy-beans, wheat, barley are being plowed under toeed cars instead. Already in Germany there isa shortage o barley leading the good Germansto ear or the uture o their beer.

Ater we do the inevitable Enron-style bailouto the ethanol scamsters, we will be let withsoils so depleted o basic nutrients that anysubsequent ood production will be lowerin nutrients, adversely aecting human andanimal health and well being.

Indonesian and Brazilian rainorests are allingor ethanol and bioenergy production, slavery ismaking a comeback, peasants are being drivenurther into the orests, paramilitary corn cartelsare stealing land in Columbia, endangeredspecies are on the run and unmindul consumerso the over-developed world keep on consumingwith nary a thought.

The ethanol scam will only accelerate globalwarming. As orests are cleared, more carbonis released than could ever possibly be avoidedby burning ethanol. The mere act o usingethanol as a panacea to keep consumptionand the American Weigh alive and unwell,

will keep consumers unmindul and uncaring.Politically, that is what this whole snake/cornoil boondoggle is all about. To paraphrase the Jack Nicholson line... We cant handle thetruth.. about corn, peak oil, unsustainableliestyles and how were ripping o uturegenerations. The switchgrass crowd, biod-iesel crowd, and others intent on devouringsoil and landscapes, might be somewhat less

devastating, but the same problems willexist to the degree that the Earths ability tosupport us declines and the other degreescontinue to rise.

I we poured trillions o dollars in subsidiesto the oil and corn industries and untoldresources into truly sustainable technolo-gies, we could actually avert the worst casescenario o the end o oil and ensuing chaosand anarchy. Consumption-based taxationon uels, vastly improved mileage standardswith current technology and technologyin development, supporting improvementsin solar, wind and storage technologies, carpooling, a conscientious and ethical public,combined with our ingenuity and technicalprowess, we could develop truly sustainableoptions without a noticeable impact on oursacred standard o living like were the onlycreatures on the planet.

There is a reason that Toyota is now thebiggest auto dealer in the US: innovationand mileage. The Chevy Volt is promisingto get 150 mpg, mostly driven by electric-ity. Solar technology is on the verge obecoming competitive to the Earth-raping,subsidized technologies o ripping moun-tain tops o or coal, mining and leavingnuclear waste or 10,000 generations todeal with, and oil wars that kill and maimmillions. Decentralized solar and windcould power virtually all o our currenthome and transportation needs. I we quit

driving our ood an average o 1,500 milesper bite and bought locally, lived within ourmeans as communities and individuals, wemight ind an actual higher quality o lie aswe re-create communities based on our oldvalues o taking care o the planet or uturegenerations, living by the golden rule, andbeing tough enough to igure things out anddo right. Just sit down by your car and take aswig o your avorite ethanol beverage, sharea shot with your SUV, and ponder ways toavert disaster and the bad-mouthing o us bywho is let o posterity.

Denny Haldeman is a carpenter, organic farmer,and a founding member of Earthworks.

Turning Forests and Food into Gas? A Bad IdeaFrom cradle to grave, ground to ash, thedamages coal causes to our environment andsociety are enormous. Unortunately, theconsequences o burning coal or electric-ity do not normally weigh into our nationaldiscussions about our energy uture. As thisreport shows, the costs o using coal are highand are continuing to rise, especially as ourunderstanding o the consequences o globalwarming grows.

The coal industry knows that the equationmust change or they will be out o busi-ness. That is why they are pushing putativeclean coal. But, coal as it exists today is any-thing but clean. Ambiguously deined, cleancoal has become little more than an emptytechnological promise o a dierent way odoing business. Coal advocates, includingthe people and politicians who beneit themost rom Big Coals checkbook, point totechnological innovations they claim canhelp lessen the worst impacts o burning

coal. Ironically, what they do not reveal isthat industry has been ighting standards toclean up coal plants tooth and nail since theClean Air Act was passed, and that a lot oolder plants still do not have even the mostbasic and readily available pollutioncontrol devices. These coal advocates also ailto look at the ull lie cycle o coal, ocusingtheir sight on the more well-known damagescaused during the burn.

The two supposedly clean coal technolo-gies that have attracted the most attention inrecent years are carbon capture and seques-tration (CCS) and Integrated GasiicationCombined Cycle (IGCC). Carbon captureand sequestration is a process where carbondioxide produced at coal-ired power plantsis captured rom the plants exhaust and thenstored underground to prevent it rom enter-ing the atmosphere. Although in theory CCSsounds promising, the challenges are enor-mous, ranging rom separating out the CO

2

and transporting it to iguring out how tomake sure it stays sealed o or thousands oyears to come. In addition, the scale neededto store all o the carbon dioxide pollutionrom our nations coal-ired plants is mas-sive, and would require huge undertakingsto ensure that it does not leak into the atmo-

sphere. As o now, carbon capture and storagehas not been demonstrated with anythingapproaching the emissions o a coal-iredpower plant and remains an unproven tech-nology. Experts also disagree as to how longit will take or this technology to be availableor commercial and wide-scale use.

The second technology, IntegratedGasiication Combined Cycle (IGCC), is analternative system or coal-ired power plantsthat converts coal to a gas that is burned toproduce electricity. IGCC is oten promotedas the easiest system to retroit to capture car-bon dioxide emissions in the uture should

CCS work out. Proponents also like IGCCbecause it can emit lower amounts o sootand smog pollution. However, it emits justas much global warming pollution as othercoal plants, not to mention the environmen-tal and societal damages caused by miningthe coal to uel the plant and all o the addi-tional coal combustion wastes. Until carboncapture and storage technologies are betterdeveloped, the carbon dioxide emissions willbe much the same as any other coal plant.

The truth is that promises o these and otheruture technological innovations that willallow us to use coal with less pollution are notavailable today. Not surprisingly, these sameclean coal advocates are also behind eortsto jumpstart a new coal-to-liquids industry.Liquid coal creates almost double the carbondioxide emissions per gallon as regular gaso-line, and replacing just 10% o our nationsuel with it would require a more than 40%increase in coal mining. On top o these envi-

ronmental damages, liquid coal needs billionso dollars o government subsidies and incen-tives to be viable, money that could be muchbetter spent cleaning up our current use ocoal and shiting toward cleaner sources oenergy. Taxpayers gambled on liquid coal syn-uels 30 years ago and lost billions o dollars, alesson we should not have to learn twice.

Finally, as this report documents, the inescap-able conclusion is that mining coal leads toenvironmental destruction, polluted waters,and devastated communities. Burning coalcauses serious air pollution, jeopardizes ourpublic health, and contributes substantiallyto global warming. Coal wastes also put ourhealth at risk, polluting drinking water andharming people who live near landills andimpoundments. These dirty secrets have seri-ous societal and economic impacts that needto be calculated into our decisions about theenergy uture we are building now.

The challenge o cleaning up the way wemine and use coal is not small by any means.On average, our country consumes morethan three million tons o coal every day, orabout 20 pounds o coal or every person inthe nation every day o the year. We minemore than 1.1 billion tons o coal a year, and

generate about hal o our electricity romcoal. To minimize the devastating eects othe way we currently use coal, we need tostrengthen our nations laws and put policiesinto place to protect our communities andour environment. Some o these have alreadybeen proposed, like restoring the Clean WaterActs prohibition on illing streams and wet-lands with waste.

We owe it to our children to consider smarter,cleaner, healthier options or meeting ourenergy needs rather than locking ourselvesinto using a polluting, backward technologyor the next 50 years that harms people, dam-

ages our environment, and makesglobal warming much worse. Atthe same time, we need to be waryo continuing to hitch our uture tononrenewable resources or buyinginto alse promises about dealingwith pollution somewhere downthe road. We must make sure thatcoal is mined responsibly, burnedcleanly, and does not exacerbateglobal warming i it continuesto be part o our nations energyequation.

(Source: www.sierraclub.org/coal)

Clean Coal? A Dirty Lie

TVA Dumps Coal Sludge

In a single year, a coal-ired electric plant depos-ited more than 2.2 million pounds o toxic materi-als in a holding pond that ailed the week beoreChristmas, looding 300 acres in East Tennessee,according to a 2007 inventory iled with theEnvironmental Protection Agency.

The inventory, disclosed by the Tennessee ValleyAuthority [TVA] at the request o The New YorkTimes, showed that in just one year, the plantsbyproducts included 45,000 pounds o arsenic,49,000 pounds o lead, 1.4 million pounds obarium, 91,000 pounds o chromium and 140,000pounds o manganese. Those metals can causecancer, liver damage and neurological complica-tions, among other health problems.

And the holding pond, at the Kingston FossilPlant, a TVA plant 40 miles west o Knoxville, con-tained many decades worth o these deposits.

For days, authority oicials have maintained thatthe sludge released in the spill is not toxic, thoughcoal ash has long been known to contain danger-ous concentrations o heavy metals. A week aterthe spill, the authority issued a joint statementwith the EPA and other agencies recommendingthat direct contact with the ash be avoided andthat pets and children should be kept away romaected areas.

Residents complained that the authority had beenslow to issue inormation about the contents othe ash and the water, soil and sediment samplestaken in and around the spill.

They think that the public is stupid, that theycant put two and two together, said SandyGupton, a registered nurse who hired an indepen-

dent irm to test the spring water on her amilys300-acre arm, now sullied by sludge rom thespill. It took ive days or the TVA to respond tous.

Richard W. Moore, the inspector general o theauthority, said he would open an investigationinto the cause o the spill, the adequacy o theresponse, and how to prevent spills rom similarlandills at other authority plants, according to areport in The Knoxville News Sentinel.

Elevated levels o lead and thallium and what theEnvironmental Protection Agency called veryhigh levels o arsenic have been ound in watersamples taken near the site o the spill.

Though the EPA, the Tennessee Department oEnvironment and Conservation and the authorityhave spoken daily about their eorts to monitorair, soil and water quality, complete results havebeen released or only two samples, both takenrom a drinking water intake site that is upstreamo the spill.

A test or heavy metals in water, soil or sedimentshould take two to eight hours, said Peter Schulert,the chie executive o the Environmental ScienceCorporation, an environmental laboratory nearNashville. Theres no reason why you couldnthave the results within a day, Mr. Schulert said.

(New York Times)

graphic courtesy Mother Jones


7/9


Lagoons and sprayields are oten located inclose proximity to waterways and loodplains,which increases the likelihood o ecologicaldamage. Lagoon spills and leaks and runorom sprayields have killed ish, depleted oxy-gen in water, contaminated drinking water,and threatened aquatic lie. In many cases,lagoons leak because they are not lined, butleakage may even occur with the use o clayliners, with seepage rates as high as millionso gallons per year. How much a lagoon orsprayield seeps depends, in part, upon whereit is sited. In many places, lagoons and spray-ields have been permitted or places wheregroundwater can be threatened, such as overalluvial aquiers and in locations with shallowgroundwater tables. The lagoon system alsodepletes groundwater supplies by using largequantities o water to lush the manure intothe lagoon and spray it onto ields.

Alternative Approaches to the

Lagoon and Sprayfield System Exist

A wide range o alternatives to the lagoonand sprayield system currently exist, whichillustrates that it is not the lack o otheroptions that is driving actory arms to rely

almost exclusively on the lagoon and spray-

ield system. Instead, actory arms continueto use this polluting system because they havebeen allowed to use armland, rural water-ways, and air as disposal sites or untreatedwastes. Alternative approaches include sus-

by Albert Bartlett

Throughout the world, scientists are promi-nently involved in seeking solutions to themajor global problems such as global climatechange and the growing inadequacy o energysupplies. They present their writings in publi-cations ranging rom newspapers to reereedscientiic journals, but with a ew rare excep-tions, on one point they all replace objectivitywith political correctness. In their writingsthe scientists identiy the cause o the prob-lems as being growing populations. But theirrecommendations or solving the problemscaused by population growth almost neverinclude the recommendation that we advo-cate stopping population growth. PoliticalCorrectness dictates that we do not addressthe current problem o overpopulation in theU.S. and the world.

We can demonstrate that the Earth is over-populated by noting the ollowing:

A SELF-EVIDENT TRUTH

I any raction o the observed global warmingcan be attributed to the actions o humans,then this, by itsel, constitutes clear and com-pelling evidence that the human population,living as we do, has exceeded the CarryingCapacity o the Earth, a situation that is clear-ly not sustainable.

As a consequence it isAN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

that all proposals or eorts at the local, nation-al or global levels to solve the problems oglobal warming are serious intellectual raudsi they ail to advocate that we address the un-damental cause o global warming: namelyoverpopulation.

We can demonstrate that the U.S. is overpopu-lated by noting that we now (2008) importsomething like 60% o the petroleum that weconsume, around 15% o the natural gas thatwe consume and about 20% o the ood we eat.Because the U.S. population increases by some-thing over 3 million per year, all o these rac-tions are increasing. Natural gas production inNorth America has peaked in spite o the drill-ing o hundreds o new gas wells annually. In anutshell, the U.S. in 2008 is unsustainable.

Lets look at two prominent examples othis political correctness. The book, AnInconvenient Truth was published to accom-pany Al Gores wonderul ilm by the samename. On page 216 Gore writes; The unda-mental relationship between our civilizationand the ecological system o the Earth hasbeen utterly and radically transormed by thepowerul convergence o three actors. Theirst is the population explosion...

Its clear that Gore understands the role ooverpopulation in the genesis o global cli-mate change. The last chapter in the book hasthe title, So heres what you personally cando to help solve the climate crisis. The list o36 things starts with Choose energy-eicientlighting and runs through an inventory o allo the usual suspects without ever calling orus to address overpopulation!

As a second example, in the ClearinghouseNewsletter we read the statement, HumanImpacts on Climate rom the Council o theAmerican Geophysical Union, The title recog-nizes the human component o climate changewhich we note is roughly proportional to theproduct o the number o people and theiraverage per capita annual resource consump-tion. The last paragraph o the A.G.U. state-ment starts with the sentence, With climatechange, as with ozone depletion, the humanootprint on Earth is apparent. The rest othe paragraph suggests what must be done,and its all the standard boilerplate. Solutionswill necessarily involve all aspects o society.Mitigation strategies and adaptation respons-es will call or collaborations across science,technology, industry, and government. Etc.,Etc., Etc... There is no mention o addressingthe overpopulation that the statement recog-nizes is the cause o the problems.

A ew years ago I wrote an article calling theattention o the physics community to this

shortcoming. To my amazement, most o theletters to the editor responding to my articlesupported the politically correct unscientiicpoint o view.

Many journalists look to the scientists oradvice. The scientists wont talk about over-population, so the journalists and the readingpublic can easily conclude that overpopulationis not a problem. As a result, we have thingssuch as the cover story in Time magazine, April9, 2007, The Global Warming Survival Guide:51 Things You Can Do to Make a Dierence.The list contained such useul recommenda-tions as Build a Skyscraper, (No. 9, Pg. 74)but not one o the 51recommendations dealswith the need to address overpopulation!

Whats one to do when scientists and politi-cal leaders demonstrate their understandingo the act that overpopulation is the main

cause o these giganticglobal problems, yet thescientists recommenda-tions or dealing with theproblems never call oraddressing overpopula-tion?

(The above article first appeared in the TeachersClearinghouse or Science and SocietyEducation Newsletter, Spring 2008.)

* * * * *

Scientific Americanand the Silent Lie

The September 2006 issue oScientific Americanis a Special Issue devoted to Energys FutureBeyond Carbon with the subtitle How toPower the Economy and Still Fight GlobalWarming. As I read the issue I thought oCaptain Renault, the Chie o Police in themovie Casablanca who says to an assistant,Major Strasser has been shot. Round up theusual suspects. The implication o the Chiesorder is clear. Never mind inding the culprit,just round up the usual suspects.

The main body o this special issue consists onine articles relating to global warming, each

dealing with one or more o the usual suspects.These are summarized in the irst article, AClimate Repair Manual. There we read thatglobal warming is a major problem: Preventingthe transormation o the earths atmosphererom greenhouse to unconstrained hothouserepresents arguably the most imposing scienti-ic and technical challenge that humanity hasever aced. Climate change compels a massiverestructuring o the worlds energy economy.The slim hope or keeping atmospheric carbonbelow 500 ppm hinges on aggressive programso energy eiciency instituted by national gov-ernments. The culprit is world populationgrowth, but Scientific American is just roundingup the usual suspects.

(The complete article is at www.culturechange.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=85&Itemid=1.)

Albert A. Bartlett, physics professor emeritus atUniversity of Colorado at Boulder, has long been atireless educator of the public on the subjects of ener-

gy and the fallacy of sustainable economic growth. He can be reached at [email protected].

Why Wont We talk About Overpopulation?Multi-million dollar corporations controlmany actory arms. The actory arms ownedor controlled by these corporations are plaguedwith pollution problems. Lagoons at many othese operations have broken, ailed, or over-lowed, leading to major ish kills and otherpollution incidents. Operators have sprayedwaste in windy and wet weather, on rozenground, or on land already saturated withmanure. More and more, local communitiesand environmental groups are looking to thecourts to remedy environmental violations.

Lagoons and Sprayfields

Threaten Public Health

People living near actory arms are placed atrisk. Hundreds o gases are emitted by lagoonsand the irrigation pivots associated withsprayields, including ammonia (a toxic ormo nitrogen), hydrogen sulide, and methane.The accumulation o gases ormed in the pro-cess o breaking down animal waste is toxic,oxygen consuming, and potentially explosive,

and arm workers exposure to lagoon gaseshas even caused deaths. People living closeto hog operations have reported headaches,runny noses, sore throats, excessive cough-ing, respiratory prob-lems, nausea, diarrhea,dizziness, burning eyes,depression, and atigue.

The pathogenic microbesin animal waste can alsoinect people. Watercontaminated by ani-mal manure contributesto human diseases suchas acute gastroenteri-tis, ever, kidney ailure,and even death. Nitratesseeping rom lagoonsand sprayields havecontaminated ground-water used or humandrinking water. Nitratelevels above 10 mg/l indrinking water increasethe risk o methemoglo-minemia, or blue babysyndrome, which cancause deaths in inants,and contamination rom manure has also been

linked to spontaneous abortions. Moreover,the practice o eeding huge quantities o anti-biotics to animals in subthereapeutic doses topromote growth has contributed to the riseo bacteria resistant to antibiotics, makingit more diicult to treat human diseases.Scientists recently ound bacteria withantibiotic resistant genes in groundwaterdownstream rom hog operations.

Lagoons and Sprayfields

Harm Water Quality

Lagoons and sprayields pose a grave dan-

ger to the water we use or drinking andswimming. Lagoons illed with manurehave spilled and burst, dumping thousandsand oten millions o gallons o wasteinto rivers, lakes, streams, and estuaries. Inaddition, the impact o runo rom spray-ields can be severe over time since manureis oten over-applied or misapplied to crop-land and pastures. There are also otencumulative eects rom sprayield runowithin local watersheds because multiplelarge-scale eedlots cluster around slaugh-terhouses. Watersheds as ar as 300 milesaway are also aected by the atmosphericdeposition o ammonia that is emittedrom lagoons and sprayields.

Factory Farms Foul our Soil, Air & Water

tainable agriculture practices that preventpollution, such as management intensiverotational grazing, hoop houses, and com-posting. Alternative technologies that treat

the wastewater, including anaerobic diges-tion, wetlands treatment, and sequencingbatch reactors also mitigate some o the risksto surace water, groundwater, air, and public

health.

Recommendations

Despite the growing body o

evidence that the lagoon andsprayield system pollutes theenvironment in numerous ways,the Environmental ProtectionAgencys (EPA) proposed tech-nology rules under the CleanWater Act would allow the riski-est lagoons to continue to oper-ate and also allow new lagoons tobe built. Instead, EPA should bannew lagoons and sprayields rombeing built, and phase-out exist-ing systems. The agency shouldencourage new concentratedanimal eeding operations to usesustainable animal productionsystems. In addition, EPAs inalregulations should include con-trols that address all air, suracewater, and groundwater pollu-

tion that can contaminate our lakes, streams,

and coastal waters, including ammonia, bac-teria, viruses, heavy metals, salt, antibiotics,and other toxins.

(Source: www.sraproject.org)


8/9


by John Borowski

For more than a decade I have attempted tocast a light on industrial strength sciencecurriculum: that curriculum o the corpora-tion, by the corporation and or a corpora-tions proits shall indeed hasten the rateo destruction o the Earths resources andindeed, people may perish rom the Earth. Ihave been an utter ailure at convincing manyin the environmental community o theimportance o reaching out to the 55 millionstudents as uture citizens that must be eco-logically literate, and that power o ecologicalknowledge in generating a love o place anda genuine, passionate and active responseto the looming ecological crisis o speciesextinction, deorestation and climate change.Never has such a large group o humans goneuntapped and ignored in the process o creat-

ing change in the name o social good. Yet,corporate entities now spend millions o dol-lars annually to spawn science curriculumor the public good. Theirs is not a curriculumo science; it is a science o death. I do notstate this glibly or in anger, I state it based inact. From timber-industry-unded ProjectLearning Tree (PLT) to the charade o energyeducation by the cartel o oil pimps betterknown as the American Petroleum Institute,teachers are unwittingly and tragically teach-ing concepts that students may embracethat encourage more oil consumption, moreclearcutting and greater avoidance o ecologi-cal tenets that clearly state that the Earth as asustainable system is on lie support.

Recently I watched in stunned horror as aConoco-Philips commercial touted its ener-gy educational materials or teachers. Is t histhe same Conoco-Philips that wants to exploitwildlie rich Amazon jungle habitat and theirnative cultures or black gold? Is this the sameConoco-Philips that touts clean coal tech-nology: an oxymoron that ranks in its hypoc-risy with phrases like sustainable develop-ment and smart growth? You know, theConoco-Philips who had their director o cor-porate communications, Bill Tanner, state tothe Times of Trenton: The oil and gas industry

has lost touch with the public. No problem,lets take a sliver o our huge oil proits to lieto teachers and their students.

Sitting in ront ome I have PLT cur-riculum, which,like an educationalmalignancy, hasspread alsehoods,hal-truths andobuscations aboutorest ecology inclassrooms aroundthe nation. PLT nowembraces workingwith the AmericanPetroleum Instituteon energy issues. Intheir energy mod-ule there is no sub-stantive discussionon climate change,acidiication o the

oceans, or peak oil. For years, I have toiled toinorm other teachers that PLT is the posterchild or guilty o the worst sin omissioncurriculum I have ever thumbed through. Yes,detractors will whine, but, John, it has somegood materials. Yes, it does, yet, does thatprovide cover and orgiveness or not thor-oughly explaining that trees arms are not or-ests? That clearcutting old growth and soon-to-be old-growth orests is a climate changedebacle (recent data show these orests as car-bon reservoirs)? That years o orest ragmen-tation has caused large predators to decline,watersheds to dry and erosion to eradicatethousands o years o soil building? PLT is avehicle to put a smiley ace on an industrythat has lied, bilked taxpayers o billions odollars in welare subsidies, manipulated law-makers to encourage more deorestation, and,most grotesquely, made our childrens planetless livable.

Why do environmentalists ignore education?I am at a loss. Blame teachers? I say no, theyare busy and yearning or good, lab-based,hands-on curriculum. In the absence ogreen groups providing sound educationaldata, industry has illed the void. Here is thetwist: show me a single, peer-reviewed sciencedocument that doesnt state that all major

ecosystems are not in decline. Climate changeand species loss lurk around us much like theGrim Reapers scythe. And to imagine a world

where climate change irreversibly has alteredweather patterns or a planet where 4050%o our ellow species are gone orever is toopainul to ace especially in light o theact that there is time or a massive reversal oortune. Fity-ive million students are await-ing a clarion call to action: not activism, notmaligned environmentalism, no, a liestylethat can be sustained, can be rewarding andcan undo the layers o corporate spin thatleaves them comortably numb in a worldo virtual reality and empty materialism.

Green groups: pool together resources tohelp teachers in their quest to make studentsecologically luent. Journalists: expose theagendao this corrosive curriculum. Enlightenand motivate citizens to action. Parents:demand that corporate America be tarred andeathered and chased out o the educationbusiness, or should I say, corporations in themis-education business. Demand that yourchildren be given exciting, lielong sciencelearning. Education organizations: demandthat corporate sponsored curriculum beput through a detailed screening process.Filmmakers: make documentaries andstudent riendly visuals that documentmountain top removal, extinction o species,peak oil, the insanity o an economic system

that is based on devouring our own lie supportsystem (we cannot depend on Viacom,General Electric and Disney to provide thison their corporate TV channels). Teachers:students are hungry or real science that theycan eel and see and that stirs a gut reaction.They are hungry or becoming doers. Theyare hungry or curriculum that stimulatesthought and debate, that breeds passion anddesire to ensure our planets resources existwell into uture.

Teachers: say no Concoco-Philips sel-contrived educational myths o clean coalor American Petroleum Institutes oil soakeddiatribes that ...we have enough to power 60million cars and heat 160 million householdsor 60 years or PLTs mantra o we can have itall by cutting our natural orests and replacingthem with sterile monocultures. The scienceo death has no place in our schools, ourworkplace or in our society. Teach that.

John F. Borowski is an environmental and biologyteacher of 28 years. He just successfully foughtand won a reversal of a reprimand for postingecological cartoons in his classroom. He can bereached at [email protected].

Corporate Science Curriculum?Our Children Deserve Better.A masterpiece o low-budget ilm-making by Annie and Free Range

Studios, it is ast becoming the latest poster-child or viral marketing.The website, where you can watch and download the ilm, www.sto-ryostu.com, had a hal-million hits in the irst two weeks ater itsrelease.

The Story o Stu is a short but powerul ilm about the environmen-tal and social impacts o our current production and consumptionsystems. The ilm intends to raise awareness about the oten hiddenimpacts o production and consumption, to highlight the connec-tions between a wide range o issues, and to spark discussion aboutboth the systemic nature o the problem and eective strategies toaddress them.

The Story o Stu is a ast-paced, act-illed look at the underside oour production and consumption patterns, with a special ocus on theUnited States. It exposes the connections between a huge number oenvironmental and social issues and calls or all o us coming togetherto create a more sustainable and just world. Itll teach you something.Itll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all thestu in your lie orever.

To watch The Story o Stu, go to www.thestoryostu.com.

Reviews:

Annie Leonards The Story of Stuff is a mega hit on three levels. First hav-ing studied economics right through graduate school, I can tell you that this

20 minute film will make you laugh AND teach you everything you needto know about the global economy. I should have saved my tuition checks.Second, Annies use of a short, simple film that breaks a complicated storydown to something that we can all understand sets a new bar for activ-

ism, bypassing even Gores AnInconvenient Truth. Annie didthis without a multi-milliondollar movie budget and awardwinning directors. Lastly,

Annies distribution model, giv-ing it away over the web, is

going to make this the viralactivist hit of the year.

John Passacantando,Executive Director,

Greenpeace USA

The Story of Stuff(A Must-See Film)

Annie Leonard has created a masterwork. Her short film The Story of Stuffis hilarious, uplifting, and most importantly the clearest explanation of thefull cycle of environmental and social impacts intrinsic to our overconsum-tive, wasteful, corporate-driven global economy. Every school from middle-schools to colleges should have this film, and discussions of it, firmly in theircurriculums. It is amazing how much she has included in a mere 20 minutes,while also making it so very entertaining. This film deserves an Oscar.

Jerry Mander, author and ounder o theInternational Forum on Globalization

Annie Leonards fast paced video is a must-see for everyone interested in theconnection between shopping, the environment, and global economic justice.This fact-filled expose reveals the not-so-hidden costs of economic growth,warning us that Western norms of consumption are neither environmentally

sustainable, nor socially desirable.

Susan Feiner, Proessor o Economics, and Director o Womenand Gender Studies at the University o Southern Maine.

The Story of Stuff is brilliant! Annie Leonard is on point from start to fin-ish and makes us laugh and moves us to take action, all at the same time.

I especially liked the way she centers people and power in the film. This isa one of a kind, powerful work that I will show to my family, friends, andstudents again and again.

David N. Pellow, Proessor o Ethnic Studies, Universityo Caliornia, San Diego, and author o Garbage Wars

The Story of Stuff blows through the arid landscape of the consumptiondiscussion like the roadrunner, bringing humor, charm, and an acute politi-cal vision to this driest of subjects. It sets a new standard for how to frame anddeliver a complex message to a mass audience.

Andre Carothers, Executive Director Rockwood Leadership Program

Its Time For ZERO WasteWe Cant Afford not toCurrently we have a growing population aced with limits o resourcesrom the environment. We understand that our society and industrialsystems must begin to mimic nature and move rom being primarilylinear to being cyclical. Each material must be used as eiciently aspossible and must be chosen so that it may either return saely to acycle within the environment or remain viable in the industrial cycle.

The vision o Zero Waste can be seen as a solution to these needs anda key to our grandchildrens uture. Zero solid waste, zero hazardouswaste, zero toxic emissions, zero material waste, zero energy waste andzero waste o human resources will protect the environment and leadto a much more productive, eicient, and sustainable uture. The useo an endpoint goal o zero recognizes that simply making smallsteps without a goal may not achieve a sustainable uture while use oa clear deined goal will lead to more rapid innovative improvements.

Zero Waste promotes not only reuse and recycling, but also, and moreimportantly, promotes prevention designs that consider the entireproduct lie cycle. These new designs will strive or reduced materialsuse, use o recycled materials, use o more benign materials, longerproduct lives, repairability, and ease o disassembly at end o lie.

A Zero Waste strategy is a sound business tool that, when integratedinto business processes, provides an easy to understand stretch goal

that can lead to innovative ways to identiy, prevent and reduce wasteso all kinds. It strongly supports sustainability by protecting the envi-ronment, reducing costs and producing additional jobs in the man-agement and handling o wastes back into the industrial cycle. A ZeroWaste strategy may be applied to businesses, communities, industrialsectors, schools and homes.

(Source: www.zerowaste.org/case.htm)


9/9

16 F t V i f il

Say it aint so, Smokey.

I want to help get the word out. Please send a

complimentary copy of theForest Voice to:

Name __________________________________________

Address ________________________________________

City____________________ State_____Zip____________

I want to give a 1-year gift membership of $35 to:

Name __________________________________________

Address ________________________________________

City____________________ State_____Zip____________

Planned Giving

Native Forest Council oers a variety o planned giving

opportunities. Gits o stock, real estate and otherassets may oer tax savi

forest voice winter 2009

Documents