The Newsletter of the Conservation Committees
Angeles Chapter, Sierra Club Email items or articles to Editor: Robin Ives, Publisher/Webmaster: Lori Ives
The Conservation Committees provide forums for Club members to discuss impending conservation issues and to coordinate efforts of conservation subcommittees with groups and sections. They meet monthly every third Tuesday (Orange County) and third Wednesday (Angeles Chapter). Contact the Conservation Committee Chairs by the end of the previous month for a place on the agenda. Deadline for newsletter submissionsarticles is 16 days before the Chapter meeting.

Katrina has made it clear who this government works for and who it does not. It is telling that three of the first acts out of Washington were to award Halliburton a major contract for cleanup and recovery; to suspend a law that requires federal contractors to pay a decent wage; and to suspend environmental and public-health laws.

—Carl Pope in a San Jose Mercury News op-ed entitled "In Katrina's aftermath, ideology threatens a damaged landscape".

Index - October 2005

A Better Environment for the Inner City

Arundo

"At Risk: Southern California's Magnificent National Forests"
Barton's Flawed Energy Bill Squeaks Through
Cache Creek—Wild and Scenic
Clean Air and Water Bills Die
Eagle Mountain Trash Train Derailed
Endangered Species Act Weakened

Forest Service Plans Have Many Flaws
GIS Committee Forming
Governor Signs Ban on Mercury Products
Griffith Park Plan
Hetch Hetchy on KCET
National Parks Under Attack
Off-Road Vehicle Abuse Conference
Old Westerners/New Westerners
Pombo Pushes Agressive Resource Extraction Agenda
Sierra Club Opposes Propositions 73, 75, and 76
The Times are A-Changing

 

Useful Information

Chapter Conservation Committees Calendar
Chapter Conservation Mgmt Committee
Chapter Conservation Grants Committee
Chapter Conservation Committee Agenda
Orange County Conservation Committee Agenda

Orange County Special Events

The Southern California Forests Campaign’s report, "AT RISK: Southern California's Magnificent National Forests" has just been published.
by Bill Corcoran

Read it on the forests campaign website at www.sierraclub.org/ca/socalforests. A press release and information on the impending release of the final land use management plans for the four southern California national forests is also presented on the website. If you want more information about the report, the forest management plans, or the forests campaign, please feel free to contact me.

John Monsen

Sierra Club/Southern California Forests Campaign

213-387-6528 x203
john.monsen@sierraclub.org

Forest Service Plans Leave
Southern California Forests at Risk

Management Plans Fail to Meet Needs of Majority of Forest Visitors

 

Los Angeles –The final land management plans for the four national forests of southern California fail to protect the forests from new and rapidly growing threats and do not serve most forest visitors, according to California conservation organizations. The final plans affect 3,530,723 acres of forest land, guiding decisions on everything from protecting wildlife and providing recreational opportunities, to deciding where potentially damaging development can be placed.

 

“The Forest Service has let down the vast majority of forest visitors. Four years and millions of dollars have been spent on a plan that will only lead to a further decline in the quality of visitors’ experiences and the health and beauty of the forests. Those who love and value our forests must champion an alternative vision that will serve the public and protect the forests in ways the Forest Service plans fail to do,” said Bill Corcoran, Sierra Club Senior Regional Representative.

 

The forests are visited by over eight million people a year—twice the number of visitors to Yosemite National Park. These forests are where many children play in snow for the first time, see their first pine cones and deer, and wade in their first sparkling creek. For millions of residents, a personal link with our natural world begins and is sustained on the four forests.

 

The final plans fail to address challenges that threaten the natural and recreational values in the four forests. The Cleveland National Forest is confronted with proposals to flood a popular recreation area for a hydroelectric plant, build a toll road through wilderness-quality lands, and construct massive power transmission lines along a spectacular scenic vista. A plan to drill for oil in condor habitat and ongoing off-road vehicle damage are key threats on the Los Padres National Forest.

 

A toll road has also been proposed through the Angeles National Forest, where visitors often suffer inadequate facilities and services, and major new developments are gradually encircling the forest, threatening vital wildlife migration trails, increasing the risk of fire and impacting recreation opportunities. The San Bernardino National Forest faces similar development risks, particularly from growth pressures on communities surrounded by national forest land.

 

Off-road vehicle damage on all of the forests is a key threat. The new plans will expand harmful, polluting off-road vehicle use on the forests while offering few improvements for the 95% of visitors who don’t use off-road vehicles.

 

The plans are virtually silent on addressing inadequate services and facilities for economically disadvantaged residents who use the forests for family vacations. “The four forests of southern California are in America’s most ethnically diverse region. The plans offer platitudes when action is needed to make our forests more inviting and rewarding places for the growing number of Latino and African-American visitors. A visitor to the East Fork of the San Gabriel River on a summer weekend will see thousands of visitors making do without safe walkways, adequate bathrooms or even basic educational materials,” said Chris Hicks, Center for Law in the Public Interest Attorney.

 

In the plans, the Forest Service largely rejected using its own best land designation tools to protect the forests from harmful development such as oil wells, toll roads, and transmission lines, despite public demand for stronger protection. For example, the Forest Service has retreated from wilderness protection for Morrell Canyon, a popular hiking destination on the Cleveland NF, facilitating plans to flood the canyon for a hydroelectric project. The recommendation for protection was included in last year’s draft plans.

 

“The Forest Service admits that there is not enough wilderness designation in the plans to meet public demand, but has refused to do much about it. Giving these last wild places the highest level of protection is the best defense against damaging development. When even a beloved place like Morrell Canyon can’t be protected, it’s clear that the plans have ignored the public interest,” said Sara Barth, Wilderness Society Regional Director.

 

The final plans also lack adequate protections for the 470 plants and animals on the forests, identified by state and federal agencies as threatened, endangered, sensitive, or of concern - including the Nelson bighorn sheep and the California condor. Viewing wildlife is one of the most popular visitor activities on the forests.

 

 “With these plans, the Forest Service has abdicated the regional leadership it alone can provide to protect our rapidly disappearing native wildlife and plants. Worse, their final plans leave our native wildlife and plants at increased risk. Providing management leadership now will ensure a future for southern California’s plants and animals so that our grandchildren can experience the joy of discovering nature,” said Monica Bond, Center for Biological Diversity Wildlife Biologist.

 

“The Forest Service has adopted plans that are out of balance with the needs of most forest visitors. As the amount of open space beyond forest boundaries dwindles and the population grows, protecting the scenic beauty and recreational opportunities provided by the four forests is of ever growing importance. These plans fail to provide the decisive leadership needed to meet that challenge,” said Corcoran.

 

Conservation groups will continue to encourage a positive vision for strong protection of the forests and communities, and support a sustainable future for non-motorized recreation on the forests. This vision will be the foundation for a long-range campaign to replace today’s failed forest plans with improved plans that reflect the needs and values of the majority of forest visitors.

CONTACT:

Bill Corcoran, Sierra Club: 213-387-6528 x 208

Chris Hicks, Center for Law in the Public Interest: 213-977-1035 x104

Monica Bond, Center for Biological Diversity: 415-436-9682 x305

 

Eagle Mountain Trash Train Derailed

Eagle Mountain dump land exchange and rights-of-way were reversed. Desert communities and Joshua Tree National Park breath a heavy sigh of relief upon learning the fate of the ill-conceived Eagle Mountain dump.

September 22, 2005 Eagle Mountain CA: The Eagle Mountain dump trash train to disaster was derailed by Federal Judge Robert J. Timlin when he ruled in favor of the environmentalists. The ruling reaffirmed what citizens and environmental organizations have been saying about the proposed dump for nearly two decades. Lawsuits against the dump were filed in December 1999 by local residents Donna & Larry Charpied. The Riverside based Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ), the Palm Springs based Desert Protection Society, and the National Parks Conservation Association filed a separate suit in January 2000.

“This is a great day for desert communities and Joshua Tree National Park, exclaimed a jubilant Donna Charpied. We always felt the land exchange was a phenomenal tax-payer’s rip-off when the BLM sells land, kissing Joshua Tree National Park for a mere $77.00 per acre, while these lands will make tens of millions of dollars for the polluters”. The Judge agreed in his ruling stating that the BLM did not appraise the value of the subject lands using the required “highest and best use” standard.

The Executive Director of CCAEJ said: “This has been a long hard fought battle, and now it's time for Riverside County to pull its approvals for the dump, and work with the community on their vision for sustainable economic development in Eagle Mountain. Desert communities ought not be the dumping grounds for Los Angeles.”

“Judge Timlin said the BLM’s decisions were arbitrary and capricious. We have been saying this all along and it feels great that the judge saw it the same way”, said local certified organic jojoba producer, Larry Charpied.

Judge Timlin’s ruling included an injunction stating that the defendants are enjoined from engaging in any action that would change the character and use of the exchanged properties pending the BLM’s preparation of a Record of Decision and preparation of a new Environmental Impact Statement.

Conference on Stopping Off-Road Vehicle Abuse in the California Desert

A conference on stopping off-road vehicle abuse in the california desert will be held in Victorville on October 22 and 23. It will address the growing problem of the siege of our desert communities by uncontrolled off-road vehicle use. The conference will feature presentations of the problem, workshops, a panel with law enforcement and public officials, and strategy sessions.

The conference will be held in the Student Activity Center at Victor Valley College, 18422 Bear Valley Road, Victorville, California. Parking on Saturday is $1.50 (the machines in the parking lot accept only quarters; Sunday parking is free.

For more information, contact Jason Fried at 951-781-1336.

Is It Time for the Sierra Club to Look Towards the City?

Is Saving Our Urban Environment a Means to Protect Our Suburban Fringe?

by Gordon LaBedz

The Angeles Chapter leadership has been fighting valiant struggles on the suburban edges of our megalopolis. Our resources and our volunteers have been working to fight suburban encroachment on our local hills and deserts, but we have had very limited success. Over the past decade the chapter has fought back developments in the Bolsa Chica Wetlands in Huntington Beach and in the Ballona Wetlands in West LA. We have limited the size and scope of many sprawl developments, but the incessant drive of over population and over consumption has increased the demand for large suburban houses. The price of gas and the endless traffic haven’t seemed to put a dent in consumer demand for suburban sprawl housing. Many Sierra Club members live in these areas.

 

Is it time to question our approach? The City of Los Angeles has the most environmentally responsive mayor in decades. The city council has some promising environmental leaders. Should our chapter shift our focus towards making Los Angeles a more livable city so that people will not want to flee to the suburbs?

 

Our membership is concentrated in affluent areas, yet most of the urban environmental injustice is in lower income areas. The Sierra Club Harbor Committee is doing some excellent work in the San Pedro/Wilmington/Long Beach area, but the Club is largely absent in central city environmental issues.

 

Last summer, the chapter executive committee added "livable communities" to our regional priorities. The next conservation committee meeting will be focused on implementing a strategy to prevent urban sprawl by making the central city a more pleasant place to live.

Clean Air and Water Bills Die at Hands of Republicans and Business Democrats in Assembly

Pesticide and Toxic Monitoring Bills are Bright Spots in Disappointing Session

by Bill Magavern

Republicans and business Democrats in the California Assembly, faced with a choice of protecting our air and water or protecting the profits of big polluters, sided with the polluters at the end of the legislative session. Corporate lobbies and their legislative allies killed two bills that make so much sense their passage should have been noncontroversial: SB 44 (Kehoe), which would require local governments to incorporate air quality considerations into their planning processes, and SB 109 (Ortiz), which would remove a barrier to prosecution of air polluters. SB 646 (Kuehl), which would improve enforcement of water quality laws and provide the public better information about water quality, also fell victim to unreasonable industry opposition.

These public health bills were targeted for defeat both by the entire Republican caucus and by a number of Democrats who frequently vote with corporate polluters like oil companies and developers. Public opinion surveys consistently show overwhelming support for stronger safeguards for our air and water, but these popular causes are stymied in Sacramento by the power of big campaign contributors.

The Legislature did succeed in passing a handful of bills in the final week that will, if signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, help protect the health of Californians from industrial poisons. These include: SB 455 (Escutia) would strengthen enforcement of existing pesticide safety laws; AB 405 (Montañez) would stop the use of experimental pesticides at schools; and SB 600 (Ortiz) would track environmental pollutants found in the bodies of state residents.

Other important bills languished in the Assembly without even receiving votes on the floor, including SB 1 (Murray), which would launch the biggest solar home program in the nation, and SB 999 (Machado) which would inject much-needed expertise and a statewide perspective into the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

The disappointing output of environmental measures in the Assembly came despite the best efforts of the Democratic leadership and environmental champions like John Laird, Fran Pavley and Hector de la Torre, who worked tirelessly to pass measures to improve environmental health and environmental justice in California.

The Senate Democrats, under the leadership of President pro tem Don Perata and committee chairs Sheila Kuehl and Alan Lowenthal, continued their excellent record of standing up for California's air, water and wild places. The Senate also carried out superbly its role in the confirmation process, rejecting a handful of Schwarzenegger's anti-environmental appointees, while confirming the appointees who will fulfill their agencies' missions of stewardship.

Sierra Club Urges Californians to Vote No
on Props 73, 75 & 76
Contact Paul Mason: 916-557-1100 x120 (Props 73 & 76)
Bill Magavern: 916-557-1100 x102 (Prop 75)

Sierra Club formally opposes Propositions 73, 75 & 76 on November’s special election ballot, and urges all Californians to vote No on these initiatives.

Proposition 76, the Governor’ proposal to change California’s budget process, is strongly opposed by the Sierra Club. “Prop 76 would allow the Governor to slash budgets for environmental protection under a variety of fairly common circumstances, without any oversight or involvement by the Legislature. This new authority could be devastating in the hands of an anti-environmental Governor,” said Sierra Club California Representative Paul Mason

Regarding Prop 73, Sierra Club supports a woman’s right to choose, and to have unfettered access to family planning services. “Prop 73 is a blow to women’s reproductive freedom, and would be an unreasonable burden on young women from abusive homes, as well as victims of incest,” commented Paul Mason, a representative of Sierra Club California. Sierra Club joins the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association and Planned Parenthood in opposing this initiative.

The Sierra Club also opposes Prop 75, the effort to limit the political activities of labor unions. "As a grassroots volunteer-driven group, Sierra Club supports the right of membership organizations to engage in political activities, and we oppose Prop 75's biased attempt to shift power toward big corporations," explained Bill Magavern, Senior Representative for Sierra Club California.

GIS Committee Forming
by Dean Wallraff

The Conservation Committee is forming a subcomittee to provide computer-based mapping and spatial-analysis services for conservation and outings entities in the Chapter. It's named the Geographic Information Systems Committee and it will make use of the ESRI ArcGIS software that the Angeles Chapter recently obtained in a grant from the software manufacturer. The committee chair is Dean Wallraff.

There will be quarterly meetings but most of the GIS work will be done at the Chapter office or at committee members' homes. The committee is seeking members who can volunteer a few hours of time per quarter. Familiarity with GIS software would be helpful but the committee can train new members who have facility with Windows computers and knowledge of general mapping concepts. Please call Dean Wallraff at (818) 679-3141 to volunteer.

The committee has produced a vision map showing the desired end state for land use in the Verdugo Mountains and San Rafael Hills and is working on a detailed map showing the current status of all parcels in this area. The committee is also working to revise the map of Angeles Chapter Groups. This is needed because zipcode designations have changed since the map printed in the Schedule was drawn up.

Dean Wallraff
818-679-3141; http://www.arsnova.org/deanraff

 

 

Griffith Park Plan
by Danila Oder

The LA Department of Rec and Parks as well as the Councilmember concerned both support getting rid of at least the worst parts of the Master Plan, and revising the plan's vision to make the park an urban wilderness. The community Working Group is currently rewriting the Vision. Many details will have to be haggled over to make sure the new Vision and the revised plan do not have loopholes. The Working Group members have told me that it is important that community members keep the pressure on Rec and Parks to make sure the revised Plan is environmentally sound.

There are many issues I don't have room for. For example, how does an urban wilderness concept apply to a partly developed place like Griffith Park? There's no standard definition, and how do you apply the concept to a golf course? Do you draw a line around the golf course and say "anything goes" outside the line?

In addition, the Councilmember wants more sports fields. The public transportation section will probably be difficult to deal with because it is so detailed about road closures, median strips, etc.

Danila Oder
213-387-5122; doder@usc.edu

MAHBU: Old Westerners and New Westerners

Required reading for anyone who considers himself an environmentalist....or cares about the land in the western USA.....

by Jim Stiles

This is not about compromise, it's about dialogue. Discussion. Ed Abbey once said, "What our perishing republic needs is something different...something entirely different." He was absolutely right.

The system is not working for any of us anymore. I can no longer tell the difference between the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys.' It's become a standoff between well-paid lobbyists — each side trying to outspend the other in the quest for Influence and Power.

I am terminally sick of hypocrisy. My own and everyone else's.

I don't care which direction the entrenched ideological contradictions are coming from left or right, above or below. I long for honesty and all things genuine and sincere, even if they are wrong-headed. If you're wrong-headed, or I am, then let's be truthful about it. That's the beauty of honesty. Boneheads talking to boneheads can reduce bone mass. As a self-confessed bonehead, I'm searching for a different and better way to reduce the thickness of my own skull, as well as yours.

I admit, Life was much easier when I viewed the world through a black & white lens. And easier is the critical word to note here; it's much easier to condemn everyone else's perspective when we're unwilling to honestly scrutinize our own. And it is easier to attack our adversaries when we don't know them. I have agonized over this for years now. I have shared my feelings with my friends and with strangers. Those feelings have been met in a variety of ways-blank stares, outrage, ridicule, silence and sometimes...sometimes with the look of a shared epiphany. "YES...I know exactly what you mean!" As if someone with a secret had just found a kindred spirit.

Those moments have given me some comfort. Not much, but a little. And so, it is truly, at long last, perhaps in the nick of time, and perhaps too late to nick anything...it is time for M.A.H.B.U. —Mormons & Heathens for a Better Utah.

First, about the name. Not everyone on one side of the mythical ideological fence is a member of the LDS Church. Not all people on the opposite side are heathens. I was looking for an acronym, to begin with, and one that might best suit Utahns. When I stumbled upon MAHBU it sounded as if I'd morphed Nauvoo, the site of the original Mormon temple in Illinois, with SUWA, Utah's most prominent environmental group—surely a frightening prospect for everyone involved regardless of their affiliation. But then, that's the point. To force everyone to be uncomfortable with their proximity to each other, instead of exchanging pot shots from the relative safety of across the fence.

At the heart of this war in the American West — and that's what we should call it — is a fundamental conflict of cultures over the future of its landscape. The vast majority of Americans who call themselves environmentalists, 78% in one survey, live in urban areas. They are the "New Westerners." Their connection to the land is mostly as observers, recreationists, and infrequent visitors. Most of those who oppose the environmental movement actually live and work in the small rural communities of the West and many of them make their living from the land itself. They still represent the Old West. For the urban enviros, there's the rub.

What has ensued in the last three decades has been increasingly painful to watch. Each side of the conflict has so savagely misrepresented the other, so excessively caricatured their opponents, that they have, in the process, turned themselves into pretty laughable cartoon characters as well. There is nothing like bloated self-righteousness to make anyone seem ridiculous; to me everybody looks goofy these days.

So what are the contentious issues driving this debate. Basically it's this: Rural Americans live in small towns and the core of their economies is extractive-ranching, mining, timber. To deny that the extractive industries have wreaked stunning and long-term destruction upon the Western landscape and its ecology is absurd.

Urban Americans want to eliminate these industries, or at least curtail them to a large extent. They believe that another kind of economy, what environmentalists have called the "amenities economy"— tourism mostly in all its forms — is a clean and viable alternative to mining and ranching and timber. They are convinced it can allow the rural West to prosper and prevail, without further degradation to the resource. To deny that this kind of transformation of the rural West has bleak and destructive consequences of its own is equally absurd. The amenities economy is just another extractive industry and should be regarded by environmentalists with the same concern. But they don't.

And so it's a standoff. Nobody wants to be honest for 30 minutes. And that is why MAHBU must step into the wide and yawning breach of credibility. We are about to be painfully honest. Let us begin...NOW:

Most Old Westerners oppose wilderness, since they believe it will limit their access to public lands. Sometimes their physical abuse of the land itself is dramatic and the damage is long-term. On the other hand, Old Westerners understand one key component of wilderness far better than their adversaries. They understand solitude. Quiet. Serenity. The emptiness of the rural West. They like the emptiness.

New Westerners are individually more sensitive to the resource but are terrified of solitude. They'll walk around cryptobiotic crust but leave most of them alone in the canyons without a cell phone and a group of companions and they'd be lost, both physically and metaphysically. And since they need to travel in packs, the collective resource damage is far more than they might realize.

Old Westerners like their jeeps and their ATVs. Among these thousands of motorized recreationists are a minority of reckless and thoughtless idiots who cause a disproportionate share of the resource damage. Many of their peers know this and don't like it, but don't apply peer pressure because the one thing they'd rather NOT do is be seen agreeing with an environmentalist. New Westerners drive hundreds or thousands of miles in gas-consuming vehicles so they can peddle their bicycles for ten and say they're non-motorized recreationists. Bicyclists gather for rallies and races just like their motorized cousins and cause extraordinary damage when the numbers are high enough; yet environmentalists refuse to acknowledge that many, many bicycles can sometimes cause as much damage as ATVs.

Old Westerners like cows. Millions of cattle still graze on public lands and some ranchers who hold federal grazing allotments are terrible stewards of that land. They allow overgrazing, destroy valuable and rare riparian habitat and turn some public lands into barren wastelands.

New Westerners hate cows. They think all ranchers are bad stewards. They want to eliminate all public lands grazing. But when they buy a condo in a New West town, they love the view of the adjacent alfalfa field from their picture window and complain bitterly when yet another development wipes out the pastoral scene.

Cows eat alfalfa. A few Old Westerners like to hunt. Mostly deer and elk. Each year a few hundred hunters in Utah get a permit to kill a cougar. They chase the big cat with their dogs, run it up a tree and shoot it. Sounds pretty barbaric to me.

Most New Westerners hate to hunt. And they would never kill a cougar. But when thousands of cougar-loving recreationists invade once empty public lands that are habitat for wild animals (like cougars, deer and elk), it is a hunt of sorts already—a hunt to eliminate the habitat that wild and reclusive animals like cougars need. Conflict is inevitable. Two mountain bikers were attacked and killed recently by a cougar in wilderness near San Diego. The cougar was promptly tracked down and shot by the authorities because the animal had become "a problem." No objections were heard by New Westerners this time. New Westerners build their homes farther into wildlands, so they can "live amidst Nature," but when a bear pinches off the head of a favorite French poodle, retribution is acceptable.

Most New Westerners long for the simple life and want to move to a small town. But they hold the Old Westerners in low esteem and abhor their politics. And when they move to a small town, they build an oversized home, complain about the lack of amenities and try to change everything.

Most Old Westerners actually live the more modest and simple lifestyle that their New West adversaries claim to admire. Their homes are smaller and their cars are older. They recycle their junk (or at least don't throw it away) and generally do without a lot of luxuries that a New Westerner could never endure. They despise the smug arrogance and urban ways of their new New West neighbors. But if they had more money they would probably live just as extravagantly.

New Westerners claim that the uncontrolled growth of the "amenities economy" is out of their hands, that market forces and the whims of American Culture are driving the New West, not them. As one Utah environmentalist said defensively, "It would have happened anyway." In effect they now refuse to take credit for the extraordinary "success" of the very economy they claimed would save the West. They actually distance themselves from the "solution" they continue to promote. Every new convenience store, every condo development, every golf course, every four star restaurant in a town with a population of 5000, even every ATV rally is an extension of the "amenities economy."

Old Westerners long for the "good old days" of ranching and mining, detest the tourists and the New West image of their towns, but never hesitate to make a buck from the "amenities economy" when the opportunity presents itself. Many Old Westerners are millionaires today because land they bought for next to nothing in the 60s or 70s is now worth a fortune.

Old Westerners love seismic exploration work. It brings money to the rural economy. But it also leaves a swath of destruction in its path. While restrictions have reduced the amount of damage that seismic work once caused, its effects can still be seen years later. But once the work is done, the land returns to "normal" as far as the habitat goes. Wildlife is most adversely affected by constant human intrusions. The one good aspect of a seismic crew is that when they complete their work, they leave.

New Westerners hate seismic exploration. They often hold on-site protests and to some animals, their long-term presence is more offensive than the thumper trucks. The fact that desert bighorns have vanished from the Gemini Bridges area near Moab is not because of the seismic work that environmentalists fought in the early 90s; it's from recreationists, both motorized and non-motorized, that have driven them into hiding. And, of course, many seismic trails never get a chance to recover because bicyclists and ATVs keep using them.

Old Westerners are unlikely to go backpacking or exploring for the sheer pleasure of it. Many of them would think such an effort to be pure folly. Sometimes they seem oblivious to the Beauty that surrounds them. But if they broke down or got stranded in the backcountry, they would probably be able to take care of themselves, because most of them have lived close to the land all their lives.

New Westerners love to go backpacking and exploring, but many of them, urban dwellers mostly, simply don't have the skills necessary to survive if something were to go wrong. As a result, the search and rescue budgets of many rural Western communities have increased astronomically in recent years. Most members of Search & Rescue teams are Old Westerners.

The Bush Administration has taken unprecedented steps to increase oil and gas development on public lands. Old Westerner advocates insist increased production is absolutely necessary to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Many of those same people mock efforts to reduce US dependence through conservation efforts, which is really stupid. Why would conservatives oppose conservation? Because they're afraid to be linked with anything remotely supporting an "environmentalist" perspective.

New Westerners oppose increased oil and gas exploration and advocate conservation efforts; yet most of them are bigger consumers of natural resources than the people who defend drilling in the public domain. And while they decry the loss of wildlife habitat, the fact is, most wildlife adapts quite well to inanimate objects, including oil wells. It's constant human intrusions that can critically disrupt their lives.

Most Old Westerners love the owners and major stockholders and corporate heads of oil and gas companies who are mostly rich, arrogant bastards and personal friends of the Vice President. Most field employees of oil and gas companies are hard-working middle-class Old Westerners, trying to keep food on the table.

Most New Westerners despise the owners and stockholders and corporate heads, not to mention the vice president. But they also detest the field employees, which is about as wrong-headed as the Old Westerners' admiration of Dick Cheney.

Most Old Westerners hate Ed Abbey, who once said, "If America could be, once again, a nation of self-reliant farmers, craftsmen, hunters, ranchers and artists, then the rich would have little power to dominate others. Neither to serve nor to rule. That was the American Dream." Despite such sentiments, they still despise him, and they stubbornly refuse to read his books.

Most New Westerners love Ed Abbey, even though they despise half of the people Ed honored in the preceding quote. They've read all his books and possess cherished signed copies, but understand far less than they realize.

OK...my thirty minutes are up...for now. But I've barely scratched the contentious surface. As long as Westerners, New and Old, refuse to acknowledge the fruitlessness of their own entrenched and inflexible positions, the West will suffer for our stubbornness.

This is not about compromise, it's about dialogue. Discussion. Ed Abbey once said, "What our perishing republic needs is something different...something entirely different." He was absolutely right.

The system is not working for any of us anymore. I can no longer tell the difference between the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys.' It's become a standoff between well-paid lobbyists—each side trying to outspend the other in the quest for Influence and Power.

For MAHBU, this is either just the beginning of a new global force akin to the "Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacree Movement," or spit in a pond that never makes a ripple. All I can do is write this stuff...

I do not present this alternative way of thinking with a great deal of hope or optimism. The Truth is generally used as a last resort, and surely this is the case here. If these words strike a chord with you, one way or the other, let me know. We invite your comments and criticisms. If you'd like to be a "member," send me an email c/o The Zephyr. Maybe I'll start printing a Friends of MAHBU list in future issues. Membership is free, although the price one pays for being honest can be dear. I won't send you a complimentary backpack with your membership. Or a coffee mug. Or ask you to leave MAHBU in your will. And I promise NEVER to offer "MAHBU Adventure Tours." If that ever happens, you can kill me.

MAHBU Forever

The Times are A-Changing
by Bill McKibben

If the images of skyscrapers collapsed in heaps of ash were the end of one story—the US safe on its isolated continent from the turmoil of the world—then the picture of the sodden Superdome with its peeling roof marks the beginning of the next story, the one that will dominate our politics in the coming decades: America befuddled about how to cope with a planet suddenly turned unstable and unpredictable.Over and over last week, people said that the scenes from the convention center, the highway overpasses, and the other suddenly infamous Crescent City venues didn't "look like America," that they seemed instead to be straight from the Third World. That was almost literally accurate, for poor, black New Orleans (which had never previously been of any interest to the larger public) is not so different from other poor, black parts of the world: its infant mortality rates, life expectancy rates, and educational achievement statistics mirroring those of many African and Latin American enclaves.

But it was accurate in another way, too, one full of portent for the future. A decade ago, environmental researcher Norman Myers began trying to add up the number of humans at risk of losing their homes from global warming. He looked at all the obvious places — coastal China, India, Bangladesh, the tiny island states of the Pacific and Indian oceans, the Nile delta, Mozambique, on and on — and predicted that by 2050 it was entirely possible that 150 million people could be "environmental refugees", forced from their homes by rising waters. That's more than the number of political refugees sent scurrying by the bloody century we've just endured.

Try to imagine, that is, the chaos that attends busing 15,000 people from one football stadium to another in the richest nation on earth, and then increase it by four orders of magnitude and re-situate it to the poorest nations on earth. And then try to imagine doing it over and over again—probably without the buses. Because so far, even as blogs and websites all over the internet fill with accusations about the scandalous lack of planning that led to the collapse of the levees in New Orleans, almost no one is addressing the much larger problems: the scandalous lack of planning that has kept us from even beginning to address climate change, and the sad fact that global warming means the future will be full of just this kind of horror.

Consider the first problem for just a minute. No single hurricane is "the result" of global warming, but a month before Katrina hit, MIT hurricane specialist Kerry Emanuel published a landmark paper in the British science magazine Nature showing that tropical storms were now lasting half again as long and spinning winds 50 percent more powerful than just a few decades before. The only plausible cause: the ever-warmer tropical seas on which these storms thrive. Katrina, a Category 1 storm when it crossed Florida, roared to full life in the abnormally hot water of the Gulf of Mexico. It then punched its way into Louisiana and Mississippi—the latter a state now governed by Haley Barbour, who in an earlier incarnation as a GOP power broker and energy lobbyist helped persuade President Bush to renege on his promise to treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant. So far the US has done exactly nothing even to try to slow the progress of climate change: We're emitting far more carbon than we were in 1988, when scientists issued their first prescient global-warming warnings. Even if, at that moment, we'd started doing all that we could to overhaul our energy economy, we'd probably still be stuck with the 1 degree Fahrenheit increase in global average temperature that's already driving our current disruptions. Now scientists predict that without truly dramatic change in the very near future, we're likely to see the planet's mercury rise 5 degrees before this century is out. That is, five times more than we've seen so far.

Which leads us to the second problem: For the 10,000 years of human civilization, we've relied on the planet's basic physical stability. Sure, there have been hurricanes and droughts and volcanoes and tsunamis, but averaged out across the earth, it's been a remarkably stable run. If your grandparents inhabited a particular island, chances were that you could too. If you could grow corn in your field, you could pretty much count on your grandkids being able to do likewise. Those are now suckers' bets—that's what those predictions about environmental refugees really mean.

Here's another way of saying it: In the last century, we've seen change in human societies speed up to an almost unimaginable level, one that has stressed every part of our civilization. In this century, we're going to see the natural world change at the same kind of rate. That's what happens when you increase the amount of heat trapped in the atmosphere. That extra energy expresses itself in every way you can imagine: more wind, more evaporation, more rain, more melt, more ... more ... more.

And there is no reason to think we can cope. Take New Orleans as an example. It is currently pro forma for politicians to announce that the city will be rebuilt, and doubtless it will be. Once. But if hurricanes like Katrina go from once-in-a-century storms to once-in-a-decade-or-two storms, how many times will we rebuild it? Even in America there's not that kind of money — especially if you're also having to cope with, say, the effects on agriculture of more frequent and severe heat waves, and the effects on human health of the spread of mosquito-borne diseases like dengue fever and malaria, and so on ad infinitum. Not to mention the costs of converting our energy system to run on something less suicidal than fossil fuels, a task that becomes more expensive with every year that passes.

Our rulers have insisted by both word and deed that the laws of physics and chemistry do not apply to us. That delusion will now start to vanish. Katrina marks Year One of our new calendar, the start of an age in which the physical world has flipped from sure and secure to volatile and unhinged.

New Orleans doesn't look like the America we've lived in. But it very much resembles the planet we will inhabit for the rest of our lives.

This essay was originally published in TomDispatch.com.

Governor Signs Ban on Mercury Products
by Bill Magavern

Governor Schwarzenegger has signed into law Assembly Bill 1415 to ban new mercury-containing products in the categories of switches, relays and measuring devices. Assemblymember Fran Pavley authored the bill and Sierra Club California sponsored it.

 

"This sensible new law will speed the transition to safer substitutes in switches, relays and measuring devices, the largest remaining source of mercury in products," said Bill Magavern, senior representative for Sierra Club California. "Mercury is so poisonous that it should be kept out of products whenever safe substitutes exist."

Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that is especially hazardous for children and pregnant women. California has previously banned mercury in products like thermometers, thermostats and motor vehicle light switches. Today's signing makes California the fifth state to ban mercury in switches, relays and measuring devices. The bill includes an exemption process for products that have no feasible non-mercury alternative.

Barton's Flawed Energy Bill Squeaks Through

Republican Leadership Held Vote Open Until They Got Their Way

Friday, October 7. This was a intense day on the floor of the House for Barton's Energy Bill, HR 3893. This disastrous bill exploited the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina to try and enact a host of anti-environmental provisions. For instance, the bill waived all environmental laws for building new oil refineries, cut communities and local governments out of the siting process and made it harder for them to oppose new refineries, and also weakened the Clean Air Act to allow polluters to postpone cleanup in areas that fail to meet clean air standards.

This bill was nothing more than another handout to the oil and gas industry exploiting Americans anger over rising gas prices out from Hurricane Katrina. Luckily, many members of Congress recognized this cynical bill for what it really was.

The Republican leadership's troubles started last night when they realized that they were going to have trouble passing this bill. In an effort to gain some Republican votes, the party leadership removed a contentious provision from the bill that would have enacted the Bush administration's weakening of the Clean Air Act's New Source Review (NSR) program. As the
votes began today, the Democrats got a strong vote, but were defeated, on their substitute amendment, which removed the bad environmental provisions from the Barton bill and strengthened the price gouging provisions.

However, the vote on final passage began as a 5 minute vote, but when it became obvious to the Republican leadership that they were losing they held the vote open to twist arms. Once the voting period had ended, we were winning the vote 210-208. So instead of accepting defeat, the Republican leadership extended the vote for almost another hour to try and get enough votes to pass the bill. Not only did the Republicans have a hard time getting their votes, but the Democrats succeeded in getting the three Democrats who had originally voted for the bill to switch their votes to stick with the party in opposition. After almost a hour of Democrats protesting and calling procedural questions while Republicans switched votes, they finally got the votes they needed and called it. Young (R-FL) and Gerlach (R-PA) flipped from NO to YES to make the vote a 212 to 210 win. Then Bradley R-NH switched from Yes to No to make it a 211 to 211 tie, which would have defeated the bill. Then Gilchrest R-MD switched from no to yes to pass the bill by 212-210. Not one Democrat voted for this damaging bill.

Pombo Uses Katrina Disaster as Rationale to Push Aggressive Resource Extraction Agenda

Representative Pombo, Chair of the House Resources Committee, marked up an energy package comprised of a whole host of measures designed to boost domestic energy production on our public lands and off our coasts. Using Hurricane Katrina as an impetus, Pombo pushed through this "second bite at the apple" in terms of energy legislation. The package was made up of many of the misguided proposals that were left on the cutting room floor to allow passage of last year's energy bill. It included, of course, a provision to open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.

This week, the Resources portion of the energy bill was to be paired with a package marshalled by Congressman Barton which deals largely with refinery related issues and together, they were slated for floor consideration on October 7. But rising opposition to the Arctic provision and the OCS moratoria "opt out" in particular, has put the Resources provisions in doubt. At this point, we don't expect the Pombo package to move this week.

Despite this recent flurry of committee activity, the real action on Arctic will be in the Reconciliation package that is expected to be considered by the Budget Committee the week of the 24rd of October, and voted on the floor the first week of November. Because the Arctic drilling provision will be wrapped up in the larger Budget Reconciliation package, we will need to defeat entire package to defeat Arctic development. This is a tough ask for anyone, but the last vote on defeating the Budget Resolution in April failed by just three votes in both houses. Since then, there has been renewed scrutiny of some of the fairly drastic cuts to entitlement programs in the Reconciliation package — cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and education funding. And Nussle announced that he will be seeking deeper cuts to all programs across the board. This gives us hope that the confluence of all these objectionable provisions might be enough to sink this massive bill.

Since August, activists have been hammering home the message "don't use the Budget to advance Arctic drilling" back in the districts and actively lobbying the 30 moderate Republican targets in the House. We had a huge gathering on the west lawn of the Capitol on September 20, Arctic Action Day. Thousands of activists who had bused in from around the country fanned out to meet with their Congressional delegation and urge them to oppose Arctic drilling. This lobby blitz was noteworthy because of the size of the meetings and the number of meetings that were actually with the member of Congress. We continue to capitalize on the tremendous energy and activism that emerged from that event and look to keep up the drumbeat until the votes in early November.

Cache Creek Added to State's Wild and Scenic Rivers
Governor Signs Legislation to Protect Popular Rafting and Recreation Destination
by Bob Schneider and Steve Evans, Friends of the River, sevans@friendsoftheriver.org 916-442-3155 x221

(Davis-CA) - California reinforced its commitment to preserving the Golden State's wild heritage today, when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill that will add approximately 31 miles of Cache Creek, flowing primarily through public lands in Lake and Yolo Counties, to the California Wild & Scenic Rivers system.

Authored by Assembly member Lois Wolk (D-Davis), the Cache Creek bill received bi-partisan support from county supervisors and city councils, dozens of businesses, conservation groups and scientists throughout California.

"This bill protects the environment and the water rights of many diverse stakeholders. The Governor did the right thing, not only for local residents, but for all Californians" added Ed Robey, Chair of the Lake County Board of Supervisors.

Wild and Scenic designation grants permanent protection to Cache Creek, prohibits new dams and water diversions, and helps protect wildlife, fisheries and the recreational opportunities Cache Creek provides for rafters, anglers, hikers and others. Designation will not affect the current management plans, invasive plant removal or mercury pollution abatement efforts.

The California Wild & Scenic Rivers Act (Public Resources Code Sec. 5093.50 et seq.) was passed in 1972. Today's signing brings the current number of rivers in California's Wild and Scenic system to thirteen. Conservation groups who backed the bill include Friends of the River, Cache Creek Wild, Trout Unlimited, Sierra Club and numerous other organizations. Republicans for Environmental Protection (REP America) also endorsed the legislation.

According to Steve Evans, Conservation Director of Friends of the River, "Assemblymember Wolk and the bill's supporters worked hard to address the interests of all who depend on this vital resource. It was a collaborative and bi-partisan effort, and we commend Governor Schwarzenegger on his action to preserve one of California's most spectacular wild places."

Bob Schneider of Cache Creek Wild adds, "We are ecstatic. State wide recognition for the wild and scenic values of Cache Creek is truly awesome. My thanks go out to the many volunteers that worked on this campaign and to the political leadership shown by Assemblymember Wolk and others that made this happen."

House Votes to Weaken the Endangered Species Act

Congress took the first step last week toward gutting the 30-year old Endangered Species Act, America's safety net for fish and wildlife at the edge of extinction, voting 229 to 193 for legislation crafted by House Resources Chairman Richard Pombo. If it becomes law, the bill will eliminate the requirement for "critical habitat" for endangered species and make the government pay developers and polluters not to kill publicly owned fish and wildlife.

The landmark Endangered Species Act, signed into law three decades ago by President Nixon, has prevented 99 percent of all species ever placed under its care from becoming extinct and has helped foster the return of wildlife such as the bald eagle.

Pombo's dangerous bill can still be stopped in the US Senate. Take action to tell your Senator that you support protection for endangered species such as the bighorn sheep, the American bald eagle and the grizzly bear.

Arundo Project Tour on November 4 Above Hansen Dam
by Bill Neill

A second Arundo project tour for Team Arundo Angeles is scheduled for Friday morning, November 4, near Tujunga Wash at Hansen Dam Recreation Area, in the northeast corner of San Fernando Valley. Our meeting time will be 10:00 am at the Lake View Terrace Recreation Center, located on Foothill Blvd. about one-half mile east of the Osborne Street exit from the I-210 freeway. Additional tour information will follow, at the end of October.

The purpose of this Arundo project tour will be to view Arundo clumps treated since July 2003 by low-volume foliar application of imazapyr herbicide, in both upland and riparian settings, and to observe that native trees and shrubs in close proximity to dead treated Arundo have not been harmed by either spray drift or root transfer of the systemic herbicide. This topic is now more relevant to riparian habitat restoration projects because the aquatic formulation of imazapyr was recently registered in California.

KCET to Air Program on Hetch Hetchy

KCET public television in Los Angeles will air an hour-long special program on Hetch Hetchy on "California's Gold" with Huell Howser. The program will air on Thursday, October 27 at 10 pm and Sunday, October 30 at 7 pm

The program features modern-day scenes of Yosemite National Park's Hetch Hetchy Valley, historical images, and interviews with Mark Cederborg, Chair of the Sierra Club’s Restore Hetch Hetchy's Restoration Committee and co-author of our Feasibility Study.

Our National Parks are Under Attack

In an outrageous proposal for the House draft budget reconciliation bill, Rep. Richard Pombo (R-11-CA), Chairman of the House Resources Committee (the most influential House committee on public lands issues), has outlined a plan that includes: selling 15 national parks off to oil and gas industries and private developers; turning park vehicles and facilities into billboards for commercial advertising; and selling commercial naming rights for park buildings.

These 15 parks represent 23 percent of the total National Park System acreage — which is already only 2 percent of US public lands.

Congress and the administration have a responsibility to protect our national heritage. Instead, Congressman Pombo seems prepared to put our American heritage on the auction block, insulting the American people and tarnishing the birthright of current and future generations.

This is just the latest attempt by Congressman Pombo … to undermine America's bedrock environmental protections and special places," said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club.

A Pombo spokesman Friday called some of the ideas "ridiculous," but said they were the kinds of options that would have to be entertained if the Arctic refuge were not opened up to revenue-generating oil drilling.

House Resources Committee spokesman Brian Kennedy called the ideas "a laundry list of possible options" that could produce the $2.4 billion in cuts or new revenue outlined in a budget resolution approved by Congress earlier this year. That legislation set income and spending targets that must now be worked out in a budget reconciliation bill the House will take up this fall.

"Without [Arctic Refuge] energy production, the only way we could come up with $2.4 billion is to come up with ridiculous and absurd things like selling national parks," Kennedy said.

Sign this petition today to urge your Representative to oppose Rep. Pombo's National Park give-away!

Go to http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/393625277?z00m=54067&z00m=54067&ltl=1128836756

Useful Information