Truth & Progress - Front Page

the lonesome death of Macho B

melvin — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:36:46 GMT

RIP Macho B

and he never done nothin' to the state of Arizona

Macho B was the first jaguar radio-collared in the US, and probably the last.

He was the only jaguar documented in the US in the last ten years, and very possibly the last we will ever see. Macho was euthanized by the state of Arizona on Monday, less than two weeks after being accidentally captured in a trap set for other critters, radio collared, and released.

Staff monitoring him via the collar noticed that his movement had become severely restricted. The alarm went up, and he was tracked down in person and taken into custody.

He was euthanized after being diagnosed with acute renal failure.

Arizona Game and Fish Department officials freely admit that the stress of capture may have contributed to his kidney problems. They deny that the drugs administered could have caused the problem, claiming they were proven safe on big cats. (Notice they don't cite any studies on jaguars.)

That collar does not look particularly unobtrusive either. On the other hand, Macho B was 16 years old, advanced age for jaguars, although a few have lived to 20.

Bird Control

PlanetBillard — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:02:36 GMT

A single bird can take out a jet engine, with potentially catastrophic results. There is, however, an ingenious, humane and natural way of keeping the birds out of the path of airplanes as they take off and land.

Watch the video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

The End of the Post-Industrial Economy

dnta — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 00:35:36 GMT

Every day the news gets worse and the realization sinks in. There is no turning back.

US economy shrinks stunning 6.2 percent

US jobless claims hit highest level since 1982

I'm glad that President Obama is projecting optimism and leadership in mitigating the worst effects of this collapse. And I'm pleased that Democrats are focusing on at least some innovative ideas for building a new economy out of the ashes of this disaster.

But I'm afraid that blind hope and fantasies of "recovery" have their limits. At some point, we have to face the fact that there is no getting back to where we once belonged: we will not "recover" the economic conditions that prevailed for most of the past few decades, not soon, not ever.

We are facing not just a Recession or Depression, but a transformational moment in global economic history. Call it the End of the Post-Industrial Era.

Please turn to Page 2
Harvard Sociologist Daniel Bell coined the term "Post-Industrial Society" in 1973 to describe what he saw as the ongoing transformation of the U.S. economy away from industrial, manufacturing-based activity into a primarily service-based socio-economic structure. The model that he defined proved impressively prescient over the ensuing decades: the decline of the manufacturing sector, the global diffusion of capital, and the dominance of service-based employment all took hold with increasing force throughout the latter 20th Century, reinforced by the Information Revolution, which Bell could not have fully anticipated.

The shift to post-industrialism was just as profound for the world's major economies, especially the United States, as was the transition from Agriculture to Industry in the late 19th century, although it did not occur quite as dramatically or painfully. We are now, however, evidently reaching the end of the shelf-life of the economic dynamics that underpinned and sustained the post-industrial model, and a new transformation is underway: one whose ultimate impact on our citizens, our workforce, and our society is yet to be determined. But the effects in the short run are already devastating.

The Precedent of the Great Depression

Many have discussed the parallels between the Great Depression of the 1930s and today's economic trends, as well as policy prescriptions. And these parallels are legitimate, but they need to be understood accurately. The "second" industrial revolution had created a new rift in American society, in which new industries and economic sectors came to dominate (steel, textiles, construction), while older segments declined (farming, hunting). There had already been a number of shocks to the U.S. economy during the transition, particularly the Panic of 1907, and a major downturn in 1921 (as well as the disruptions of World War I).

These shifts also created a new class of super-wealthy investors, financiers, and entrepreneurs, along with an underclass of impoverished and exploited laborers who had no alternatives but to work in low-wage, abysmal factory jobs. For a long time, however, much of the Old Economy continued to function, in the form of family farms, local businesses, and rugged individuals of various kinds. By the mid-1920s, a huge bubble economy was rapidly expanding, on the basis of exploding speculation in stocks and real estate.

None of this was sustainable, however, because a vast proportion of the labor force was not able to enjoy these artificially inflated benefits. And when the great crash came, it was not simply a bursting of an overhyped stock market - which would have corrected itself in a short time - but the harsh, final throes of realignment in the "real" economy: the jobs, consumption, and investment of the bulk of society that had not yet joined the modern industrial era. Countless farmers, laborers, and immigrants lost everything, and suffered through a decade of poverty and hopelessness. This prolonged and painful transition consumed most of a generation. Ultimately, the New Deal helped reduce the suffering by providing jobs and reversing the economic contraction, while World War II accelerated the redeployment of labor and the expansion of industrial production. By the post-War period, the transition was essentially complete, but at a heavy cost for a lost generation.

Thus, the Great Depression represented, in effect, the final birth pangs of 20th Century industrialism. In hindsight, it could have been mitigated, but not prevented.

Post-Industrial Transition

The transition from the Industrial economy of the mid-20th century to the Bell's Post-Industrial Society was rather more subtle by comparison. Industrial production and employment generally thrived from the post-War period through the 1970s, and advances in productivity, and new technologies and industries (air transport, motor vehicles, home appliances), helped sustain a long-term growth pattern. Not everyone benefited, of course, and a new underclass, based largely on race and region, persisted while relative prosperity spread to many new segments of the population. The other elephant in the room, however, was that virtually all of this industrial development was heavily dependent upon access to cheap sources of energy, principally coal and oil (which themselves were a major component of the industrial economy).

By the end of the 1970s, the shift was underway in earnest. The oil price shocks revealed the precariousness of the economy's underpinnings, while a major side-effect of the global transportation sector was to vastly increase international competition for industrial production, such as automobiles and steel, and soon much else. But the flip side was that creeping globalization meant that factory production could be moved offshore to cheaper labor markets. The well documented decline in the U.S. industrial sector began, while a relatively thriving service sector grew up to fill much of the resulting employment gap, albeit at lower real wages, and with much displacement along the way.

The disruptive impacts of the transition to post-industrialism were thus not as dramatic as the Great Depression, and were felt mostly in the form of concentrated job losses and underemployment in the Rust Belt, together with more subtle changes in lifestyles, such as the predominance of two-income families and increasing spread of consumer debt.

Still, the post-industrial period, especially since the 1980s, has yielded its share of short-term prosperity for many, leading up to the illusory economic bubble that has now blown up in our faces. In particular, those firms and entrepreneurs that got into the service and retail oriented sectors early and aggressively, realized the same immense growth as the industrialists of a century earlier: from Microsoft and Intel and Hewlett-Packard, to Disney and Wal-Mart, to the global financial behemoths that funded and leveraged all of it, and turned capital markets into the world's most massive Ponzi scheme. Along the way, there have again been intermittent shocks, including the early '80s recession which helped usher in the transition in a manner similar to 1907, and the dot-com boom and crash, which might be compared with the 1921 downturn as a portent of things soon to come.

As it turns out, Post-Industrialism has also proven to be an essentially unsustainable economic model. It could continue to thrive and grow only as long as our society was able to obtain its most basic needs - food, clothing, energy - from cheap outside sources in the developing world. While globalization and the outsourcing has been a natural, inevitable side effect of the service, retail, and information-based economy, they also have laid the groundwork for its collapse. It is now all too clear that the worldwide integration of financial markets is what led to the continuously inflating the bubble of real estate values, because real estate prices are ultimately based directly on the perceived "value" of an economy, and when that economy was artificially inflated, those prices (and all of the derivative financial instruments based on them) rose to false and precarious levels as well.

No Turning Back

The point of all this is: once one of these economic systems reaches, and then surpasses, the limits of its sustainable life span, it cannot "recover" back to its previous state. It may undergo a relatively smooth transition (post-1970s) or a major, calamitous disruption (1930s), but what comes next will NOT replicate what came before. And unfortunately we are now well beyond the point where a smooth transition is possible.

In the 1930s, the greatest impact of the industrialized transformation hit those who were not in a position to adapt: farmers and unskilled laborers. They were the ones who filled the tent cities and sank into abject poverty from previously decent livelihoods. In the 1980s, it was blue-collar factory workers, who had risen from "working class" to true middle class status, and fell back into a struggling, minimum wage existence at best. In the 2010s, however, the most vulnerable classes include not only or even primarily those at the bottom, but those who had risen to an even higher plateau: the middle and even upper middle class of white-collar, salaried employees.

These jobs are not coming back to anything like their pre-crash employment and income levels. Because the industries that provided them were themselves artificially fueled by the unsupportable speculation and inflated incomes and debts of consumers who were those same white-collar employees. The artificially high incomes and costly lifestyle choices of the 1990s and 2000s can't be revived, not in the context of a return to Post-Industrial socio-economic relationships anyway: the cycle is over, the Ponzi scheme has collapsed.

Here are some of the key business sectors, and jobs, that will not be returning to their previous levels:

* Expensive, gas-guzzling vehicles: Nobody needs a BMW; nobody needs a monster SUV; and with gas prices inevitably going back up, fewer people could afford to drive them even if they could afford to buy them. The auto industry shake-out is permanent: the practice of trading in your "old" car for a new one every 3 years is history.

* High-end consumer toys: Say goodbye to Blu-Ray: who needs yet another upgrade/replacement of their video collection? Families on unemployment won't be buying a lot of 52-inch flat screen TVs any more. iPhones and Netbooks will be scraping for customers for a long time to come. RIP, Circuit City and its employees.

* Overpriced "designer" fashions: The phenomena of $250 blue jeans and $300 sunglasses and even $50 t-shirts are already fading into obscurity, along with the endless mall boutique shops that sold them. Conspicuous fashion consumption, parading around in a $2,500 wardrobe used to be only for the nouveau riche and the Hollywood set, not the woman/man on the street. Thus it will become again.

* Cash-guzzling vacation hedonism: Why did real estate values shoot through the roof in Las Vegas? The same reason they've now crashed and burned: when millions of people had loose cash to spare and a gambler's mentality, mega-casinos and resorts could print their own money. But that era of delusion is now over, and dragging down Florida, the Caribbean, ski resorts and theme parks along with it. Casinos will continue to operate, but more and more on the local level, where it doesn't cost a couple grand for the privilege of losing a couple more grand.

* Bloated sports franchises: Anyone following sports has seen the impact already: lesser deals for multimillionaire superstars, franchises bleeding revenue and borrowing capital, worries about ticket and media and merchandise incomes. The only reason the A-Rods and LeBrons could command their ridiculous salaries was because the everything connected with being a sports fan could be ridiculously overpriced. Before long, most teams - those that survive bankruptcy - will be begging fans to come back to the park.

* Child-spoiling excess: The vast market for children's merchandise, clothing, toys, and other goodies has also grown up with the explosion of consumer credit and artificial wealth. Never before in history has any society plowed so much money into overpriced throw-away items (most kids' purchases have a lifespan of less than a year). With the return of the hand-me-down, specialized kids' stores and brands and the limitless merchandising and marketing budgets attached to them will become a fairy tale.

* Old Media: Newspapers are in a coma. Broadcasting is gasping for breath. CDs are already dead, and DVDs may soon follow. Book publishers are tanking. Not all of these will be completely obliterated by electronic media, but the jobs that are being slashed today (see the latest Doonesbury) are likely gone for good.

There is an unfortunate illusion attached to the misleading concept of "stimulus", the idea that simply "priming the pump" and "freeing up credit" can jolt the economy back to levels of growth, income, and spending relatively similar to their bubble-inflated peaks. It's good and important that the President's plan provides money to invest in building bridges and roads, but laid-off white-collar workers aren't going to get jobs building bridges. Most of the stimulus aims just to sustain consumers' ability to spend, through unemployment and health care benefits, and aid to state governments and the like, but this money won't be spent on non-essential luxuries. And a lot of those now unemployed are never going to get their old jobs, and incomes, back.

The key question is: how will all of these displaced workers survive the transition, and find new, meaningful ways to continue their now-defunct careers? And, what will their kids do for a living?

"Council of Elders" asks Obama to intervene in endless salmon nightmare

melvin — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:47:30 GMT

Recommendations to the Obama Administration for an Improved Columbia River Salmon Recovery Program (12-page pdf)

Thirty-five years on from the Boldt Decision, whole new generations in the northwest are experiencing salmon war fatigue. Millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on failed mitigation, lawyers have retired after entire careers spent in futile litigation, and the wild salmon continue to slip into oblivion.

A new group is asking the Obama administration to cut through the layers of bureaucracy, shameless biostitution, and dozens of of disregarded and defied court decisions and do two things: 1) Simplify and rationalize the recovery program and especially its oversight, and 2) make science and not ideology the guide in decision making, as Obama claims he wants to do. Seeing what they have seen through the years, these old veterans have earned the right to be cynical, to throw up their hands and walk away. But they're still giving it one more try.

If it sounds a little desperate, that's because it is. Hail Mary time.
First, who is this self-styled council of elders?

Lynn Axelrod, Staff Attorney, Resource Renewal Institute
Bert Bowler, Snake River Salmon Solutions, Boise, Idaho
Ed Chaney, Natural Resources Consultant, Eagle, Idaho
Don Chapman*, Fisheries Consultant, McCall, Idaho
Steve Huffaker, Former Director, Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Huey Johnson, President, Resource Renewal Institute; Former California Secretary of Resources
Jim Martin, Conservation Director, Pure Fishing; Former Chief of Fisheries, Oregon Department   of Fish and Wildlife
Rod Sando, Former Executive Director, Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Authority; Former   Director, Idaho Department of Fish and Game
Bill Shake, Former Assistant Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland,   Oregon

* Don Chapman was an experienced and highly respected career hydropower consultant and backer of the status quo until his dramatic about-face in 2005, when he announced that in view of irrefutable evidence of a warming climate, the lower Snake River dams should all be breached or removed. Changing one's mind in view of new and convincing evidence is called intellectual integrity.

At a guess, this group altogether represents well over a hundred years' combined experience in fisheries science and public conservation policy - some have been active since the late seventies. As the group very explicitly states in a prefatory note, many (read, the last five on the list and dozens more just like them) have been unable to freely express their opinions in the past.

However, the Council of Elders, upon moving to positions where objections to these practices can no longer be silenced, are able to speak freely to avoid further harm to the public good.

In other words, they're gonna tell it straight now, and there's no way to do that without mentioning facts such as

The politically driven administration of the Endangered Species Act has thwarted appropriate resource management.

and

Opportunities to enhance recovery strategies were systematically subverted by the Bush administration.

and more hard truths. But I encourage you to read it for youself. It is completely non-technical.

The Recommendations:

I. Establish an extension of the White House to lead and coordinate all the salmon recovery actions of the federal agencies. Immediately review the status of the current lawsuit and seek a stay if necessary.

The first three recommendations are all aimed at part in taking a sword to the knot of agencies repsonsible for salmon recovery. At the federal level, we have NOAA's NMFS (in the Commerce Department), USFWS (in Interior) the US Army Corp of Engineers, the Bonneville Power Administration, the Northwest Power Council, appointed by the governors of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon, all of which states clamor for a say in things as well. The room starts getting crowded wihen you toss in the Fish and Game Departments of the various states, the four "treaty tribes" acting sometimes together through the Intertribal Fish Commision but sometimes separately and at cross purposes, and dozens of other stakeholder groups from the Farm Bureau and the Chamber of Commerce to commercial fishermen, Trout Unlimited and the Defenders of Wildlife. Effectively, the courts are in charge. They have no wish to be, and are routinely ignored anyway, leading to another round next year and the year after that.

II. Consolidate Endangered Species Act responsibilities for all salmon species within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Nothing gets a new plan, and a new administration, off on the right foot like a turf war. One gets the distinct feeling that if Jane Lubchenco signed off, it would happen immediately. (That's assuming the Senate ever gets around to confirming her, and hasn't zeroed out NOAA's budget in the meantime for bipartisanship's sake.) The CoE's argument that NMFS is, has always been out of its element has a lot of merit. One thing they don't emphasize enough is that NMFS is still seen as an outsider, not by those who work with it like the tribes, but by the other locals for whom the FWS is a familiar and respected entity.

III. Move implementation of the recovery and mitigation programs from the Bonneville Power Administration to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, with the requirement that Bonneville continue to fund the program.

This is simply common sense. The BPA has been tasked with a project for which it was never suited, and asked to give equal weight to two contradictory goals, one tacked on sixty years late. Ever tried to play chess with yourself?

IV. Immediately initiate audits and oversight of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) and Bonneville Power Administration to ensure compliance with the Northwest Power and Conservation Act and court decisions.

Hear, Hear! The best these groups can hope for is that Obama will grade on the curve. One dead on quote from the CoE here:

Lack of federal oversight has allowed for coercion and funding threats.
Because of the charged political atmosphere surrounding the mitigation and recovery programs, and the large amounts of money in play annually, the programs have been corrupted. Bonneville and its utility and industrial customers have aggressively and successfully undermined compliance with the fish and wildlife protections of the NPA.

V. Direct federal agencies to include the impacts of climate change and population growth in the Biological Opinion and the Columbia River recovery plans.

Most people probably assume that is already the case. Far from it. Everyone has simply ignored climate change in the Bush manner, or should we say in the bureaucratic manner. The usual excuse is that exact, precise measurements of future warming effects are impossible, therefore it's best to just ignore them completely. As has been noted many places, this is a hell of a way to run a railroad, and not the way the federal government plans in anticipation of far less certain risks.

VI. Issue an Executive Order directing all agencies to foster and protect independent science and scientists contributing to the implementation of federal programs.

Among other things, this would strengthen the position and provide cover for literally hundreds of workers who want to do the right thing, and also want to continue collecting a paycheck.

VII. Support a congressional request for the National Academy of Sciences to complete a credible, exhaustive study of the economic benefits and costs of removing the four Lower Snake River dams with a full discussion of economic actions to assure regional stakeholders.

You mean a real one? A real, real, real one this time? There has been so much lying, obfuscation, and hysteria on the subject of breaching the dams that almost no one is willing to take anything at face value any more; no source is fully accepted as credible. This is true as well of the crowd that wants to return the river to a "natural" state - a term that has no meaning in the real world, where hundreds of miles of riparian habitat on the Columbia and Snake now consist of riprap and railroad and highway beds, or worse. No on wants to face the simple truth behind all the studies and opinions: you really can't swim in the same river twice.

VIII. Task the White House Council on environmental Quality to develop and implement a federal water management-salmon recovery plan for the Columbia Basin.

You can hear the groans already. "Another actor, another study, another plan?"

This Ain't Burger King: BLM Finalizes the WOPR

melvin — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 07:12:09 GMT

Talk about a news dump: on New Year's Eve the Bureau of Logging and Mining finalized its Western Oregon Plan Revisions to the Northwest Forest Plan.

This WOPR wasn't wanted by Governor Kulongoski, NOAA, the EPA, the Forest Service, hunting, fishing, and tourism interests (representing a significant chunk of Oregon's economy), any number of environmental groups, or the majority of citizens commenting on the proposed revision for over a year now. But this is the BLM we're talking about: you'll have it their way, or they'll cram it down your throat along with a side order of categorical exclusions.
(Click to enlare BLM's own map of the WOPR, right.)

The very thing Kulongoski hoped to avoid, another decade-long round of litigation, has already begun. Both Earthjustice and Forest Service Employess for Envronmental Ethics immediately filed notice of intent to sue to block the WOPR on the grounds that it has been illegally rammed through without the required review under the Endangered Specie Act. BLM claims all that can come later, the law be damned. In reality, they know very well that the Revisions put salmon and other species at risk. They were told so in March by their own Science Team Review, which they first tried to hide and have ignored since it came to light.

There are plenty of other defects. The WOPR imperils Oregon's sources of drinking water, authorizes the destruction of another 100,000 acres of old-growth forest, dumps an extra 180 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere, and authorizes over a thousand miles of new roads into the backcountry.

All this to get to the magic number of 500 million board feet of timber production a year. Timber that no one even wants at the moment. And all without the slightest thought of global warming. A perspective that took future warming into account would place far more value on the forest-groundwater relationship. These forests are reservoirs and should be valued as such. It seems never to have crossed anyone's mind at BLM.

The final decision comes in the forms of six nearly identical Records of Decision, one for each of the affected BLM districts in western Oregon. BLM's slip is showing even in these brief documents. Take the matter of riparian buffers, which the WOPR slashes in half compared to the old Northwest Forest Plan requirements. It is probably the most destructive feature of the WOPR with respect to both anadromous fish and drinking water for people. The subject is breezily dismissed in a half-page discussion of Mitigation Not Adopted. This is copied from the Medford District ROD:

(PRMP stands for Proposed Resource Management Plan, in other words what we're going to do come hell or high water.)

All practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from future actions taken in accordance with the PRMP have been adopted in these decisions, except for the following measures:
Prohibiting construction of new roads within 200 feet of streams to avoid any increase in sediment delivery from current levels was not adopted because it would require either a substantial reduction in activities or construction of a substantially greater length of road to avoid the area around streams. A reduction in the amount of timber harvest . . .

Requiring the retention of green trees, snags, and coarse woody debris in all regeneration harvest units to reduce the loss of habitat for species that use legacy components was not adopted because it would result in a substantial reduction in timber harvest levels . . .

Measures to reduce the overall risk of the introduction and spread of invasive plants under the PRMP from moderate to low (comparable to the No Action Alternative, for example) were not adopted because it would require a substantial reduction in timber harvest and road construction . . .

Measures to reduce the amount of detrimental soil disturbance under the PRMP from 0.6 percent of soils in the planning area to 0.4 percent were not adopted because it would require a substantial reduction in timber harvest activities . . . This reduction of impacts to soils would require either a substantial reduction in the amount of timber harvest or a substantial shift in timber harvest methods . . .

Worried about maximizing timber harvest are we? And in such a hurry we can't wait for Kulongoski and others to work out a more sensible plan. Timber demand is at its lowest in nearly thirty years, but BLM acts as if a pressing timber shortage is an immediate problem holding back the housing market and economic boom times.

The defense against the charge of violating the Endangered Species Act is twofold. First, there is a reliance on the new, review-free Section 7, another end of term gift from the Bush administration:

The recently published revised Section 7 regulations (73 Fed. Reg. 76272, Dec. 16, 2008) provide discussion of the Service's interpretation of effects cognizable under the Endangered Species Act. Since these regulations are not in effect at the time of this decision, they are inapplicable. However, the determination that we have made under the current regulations that consultation was not necessary for purposes of Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act would also be consistent with the guidance provided by these new regulations. The discussion in the new regulations reaffirms the approach the BLM is taking here.

Second, there is an absolutely stunning display of philosophical flimflammery. It goes something like this: Under ESA, two types of effects must be considered, "direct" and "indirect." The direct effects are disavowed by claiming that the WOPR plan in itself poses no threat to listed species, even though future actions that it authorizes may. The indirect effects are disposed of as follows: By their nature, indirect effects lie in the future. Therefore, they are not inevitable, as anything could happen between now and then. Therefore, we need not consider them under the ESA.

No I am not kidding. This snowjob recurs everywhere - there is obviously a specialist in the house, in the main body of the Revisions, in the BLM's response to Governor Kulongoski. Here's a little taste from BLM's response to the concerns of USFWS:

The timing, size, location, and design of future actions are too unctain and so widely variable that it is impossible to conduct an assessment of the effects of future actions that would allow the BLM or the Services to determine a level of the potential "take" of a listed species or changes to the environmental baseline. Before those future actions can take place, many things must happen; including appropriations, the design of project proposals, and completion of the analysis of environmental consequences under NEPA for those actions. Given the number of steps that must occur between adoption of the Plans and implementation of any future Federal site-specific actions that involve discretionary decisioins by Federal agencies, the "reasonably certain to occur" threshhold cannot be met at this time in and level of the decision process. Thus, the action of adoopting the Plans has no indirect effects on listed species or critical habitat.

This is not the least atypical. It goes on for page after page like that, an ink cloud of evasion, breaking out at times into speculation about the nature of causality and agency. We can't seem to escape Pinter's scintillating stratagem.

Language is actually employed to keep thought at bay.

There are other tricks being played in this report as well. A lot of variations on Hey! Look over there! Page after page on woody debris in stream channels - some grad student had a very fun summer - but not much to say about marbled murrelet habitat. Just kind of slide by and Hey! Look over there!

It is worth remembering what BLM's sibling agencies - Bush administration agencies - had to say about the WOPR. NOAA flaty accused BLM of cooking the books:

The following is a summary of the major issues with the DEIS and with the preferred alternative that NMFS found in its review of the DEIS:
The DEIS does not contain a coherent and cohesive conservation strategy for anadromous fish and their habitat in any of the action alternatives. A clearly defined, scientifically robust strategy is essential to conserving these resources.

The riparian management scenario proposed in the preferred alternative would not adequately maintain and restore the riparian and aquatic habitat conditions and processes that are critical to the conservation of anadromous fish.

The action alternatives do not include well-defined management objectives for fish habitat or firm standards and guidelines, both of which are needed to ensure adequate conservation of anadromous fish.

The action alternatives rely on reach-scale analysis and management, and thus do not accommodate the watershed-scale analysis and conservation that are the underpinnings of
conservation biology for anadromous fish.

Several of the critically important analyses (i.e., fish productivity, large wood, shade, peak flow) rely heavily on models that in some cases have not been fully documented, and in other cases have not been adequately validated for the entire plan area. This introduces considerable uncertainty into the analyses.

There are a number of assumptions or methods associated with the modeling exercises listed in number 5 above that do not comport with the findings of published scientific literature. These assumptions and methods cascade through the analyses, leading to some conclusions that likely are erroneous.

That "likely" is a wonderful touch. A little gift. NOAA's objections have not been addressed. Neither have those of the EPA:

EPA is concerned that Alternatives 2 and 3 would result in substantial, long-term impacts to water quality . . .
EPA is also concerned about significant impacts to drinking water . . .
. . . modeling conducted by EPA indicates that application of WOPR Alternatives 2 and 3 would increase stream temperatures substantially more than predicted in the DEIS. . . .
Our analysis, also detailed in the enclosure, indicates that the modeling approach taken in the DEIS likely underestimates the contribution of sediment from the road network, land management activities, and debris flow events . . .
Finally, we are concerned that the action alternatives in the DEIS do not afford additional protection for BLM lands in the WOPR planning area that provide drinking water to over one million Oregonians through 113 community water systems. Given the importance of BLM lands to drinking water in Oregon, the potential direct water quality impacts under the action alternatives, and the cumulative effects to water quality from harvest on BLM and adjacent private lands, EPA believes that a more protective approach should be pursued in source water areas on BLM lands.

That is the Bush EPA talking, folks. And a NOAA under their thumb as well, but still making it as clear as they possibly can what is going on.

Even the arch-whore, corruption incarnate, that is now US Fish and Wildlife, while tying itself in knots trying to find some way to go along, had to admit

We have significant concerns that the preferred alternative would undermine current efforts to provide conservation and recovery of currently listed species, in particular the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet.

With some of the money the Makah tribe got from an oil spill settlement, they purchased land and easements to lock up a chunk of forest for the marble murrelet. For two hundred years. If the rest of us had any sense, it is the forests we would be bailing out. We can do without spotted owls and hedge funds and even Wal-Marts. Water is a little trickier.

Energy Smart Candidates: A 2008 recap and 2009 look-ahead

a siegel — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:29:50 GMT

Eight months ago, the Vote Energy Smart, not Energy Dumb! effort began.

The opportunity is before us to bring focus to [energy and global warming] across campaigns, across the United States, and make Energy/Global Warming a winning issue come November and a higher priority for serious Congressional and Administration action come January 2009.

The Energy Smart Act Blue page worked on the philosophy of supporting underdog challengers, who were not "expected" to win when added to the page. And, most importantly:

The challenger understands energy / environmental issues and will bring a radically different perspective to the Hill compared to the incumbent.

Join below the fold for a recap of the 2008 candidates and the Energy Smart list and a look forward to 2009.
At the end of the day, considering that these were all 'underdogs' and, in some cases, sentimental extreme long-shot picks, the "list" didn't do poorly with two (of four (with footnote)) elected Senators and five (of ten) elected Congressmen. Aiming for 'underdog' candidates, a 50% win rate isn't so bad. Writ large, some of these were among the closest elections in the nation, with four of them not called definitively election eve.

This is electoral politics, thus: The 2008 election season is over, long live 2009 and 2010. Thus, the first two Energy Smart candidates of the 2009 election cycle are from the Commonwealth of Virginia: Brian Moran for Governor and Miles Grant for the House of Delegates in the 47th District. See a few words on them after the fold as well.

Changing the world?

The Energy Smart list began with great aspirations, to bring attention to global warming and energy issues. With some $5,000 raised across 50 contributors amid a multi-billion dollar election season, it is hard to say that it had much of an impact. And, to be clear, while there were close elections involved, it is impossible to claim with a straight face that the list had a real impact on helping any of those close campaigns win. On the other hand ... for more than one candidate, outside organizations that l;ater endorsed the candidate contacted this author to query about whether the candidate merited support and endorsement, other authors (traditional media and new media) made contacts prior to writing on Energy Smart candidates, and this list help spark three candidates (two incoming Senators) to join Netroots Nation in Austin, Texas, on the Energize America panel.

A lesson for the future, on seeking to spark attention, would be to seek to have an 'umbrella' re energy and global warming in the Act Blue arena, which multiple fundraisers could link into, to highlight that these are top-of-the-tier issues with those fundraisers and their contributors.

And, the importants of EMILY: early money! Thus, candidate endorsements for 2009.

Recapping the candidates:

Senate: There were four "core" Energy Smart Senate candidates: Energy Smart Senators-elect Mark Begich (D-AK) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Scott Kleeb, running for Senate in Nebraska, and Andrew Rice, running against James Inhofe in Oklahoma. Both Jeff's and Mark's elections were close, neither "decided" election eve. But both Oregon and Alaska are now represented by Senators who will bring real value to Senate deliberations when it comes to the necessity to act seriously on energy and global warming issues. Both Jeff and Mark joined the Energize America panel at Netroots Nation, providing quite thoughtful, passionate, and valuable voices to the discussion there.

To Scott and Andrew: Thank you for running. Your states, the nation, and our collective futures would have been well serve having you serve in the US Senate. You performed a real public service, traveling throughout your states and speaking truth about the challenges we face and the opportunities before us. We are proud to have supported you and hope that this is not the last that we will hear of you into the future.

Late 'additions': The Energy Smart list added, after the general election, Jim Martin, who lost to Energy Dumb Saxby in the runoff election. In addition, with the one major election not yet decided, Al Franken joined the list for the recount and into the future.

House of Representatives

From early on, there were six core candidates that include three new Congressmen (Tom Perriello (VA-05), Gary Peters (MI-09), Glenn Nye (VA-02)). Both Tom's and Glenn's election turned out be quite close and not decided election eve, with Tom's extending well past election day before the recount showed him as the definitive winner. In addion to the new Congressmen, the list included two candidates for whom we owe real appreciation for their taking on the serious task of taking on well-entrenched incumbents in R-leaning (heavy) districts: Debbie Cook (CA-46), Michael Skelly (TX-07), and Kay Barnes (MO-06). Debbie, Michael, and Kay would have made wonderful representatives and we can hope that they will build on their 2008 efforts for a win come 2010. Personally, Debbie's loss to global warming denier Energy Dumb Dana Rorhabacher 53-47 was perhaps the most disappointing defeat election eve. With a little more, a little earlier outside attention perhaps Debbie would have won. This was the House election that might have represented the starkest contrast between the energy smart challenger and energy dumb incumbent. Sigh ... Debbie, you are still on the page with, hopefully, fundraising to support your 2010 victory.

In addition, through the election season, two excellent new (extremely) Energy Smart new Congressmen from New Mexico (Martin Heinrich (NM-01) and Ben Ray Lujan (NM-03)) were added to the list.

Several others on the list did not get elected. Tony Barr (PA-09) made it to the list both due to 'energy smarts' (a biking enthusiast, who recognizes that there is no Silver Bullet solution, but a need for a "smorgabord of solutions"), but also as a favored blogger. Daniel Johnson (NC-10) was a shoe-in to the list due to the incumbent's ideological devotion to energy dumb concepts and demogoguery.

Sigh ...

There were many other worthy candidates. And, each one merited more attention and more support ...

But ...

Energy Smart Act Blue didn't change the world but some of the Energy Smart Candidates will be roaming the Halls of Congress a month from now, helping turn the nation toward a prosperous and climate-friendly future.

2009 and beyond ...

The election is over! Long live the next Election!

In 2009, the Commonwealth of Virginia will be holding elections. Two candidates, well prior to the primaries, stand out for their Energy Smarts.

Brian Moran is running for Governor and has shown a history of understanding that we need to change course on energy issues. He has a clear understanding that there is not a single point solution, but that we must address issues in a systematic fashion. In addition, he recognizes that it is not the economy versus the environment, but economy and environment. From a speech earlier this year

That's why we must reject the false choice between growing our economy and protecting our environment. We can create jobs by investing in a 21st century energy economy. That means putting Virginians to work in good, high-paying jobs in green construction, bringing manufacturing jobs back by investing in wind turbines, and creating new industries by investing in alternative energy research.

Time to get moving to help Energy Smart Brian become the next Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

This evening, energy and environmental blogger Miles Grant (The Green Miles) will be holding a fundraiser in Rosslyn, Virginia, from 6-8 pm (Piola Restaurant, 1550 Wilson Blvd). If you can't make it there, you can still support Miles' efforts to join the Virginia House of Delegates from the 47th District by Acting Blue in an Energy Smart way. Let's be honest, anyone who tracks our interactions in the blogosphere will know that we don't always agree and actually had some pretty strong confrontations in regards to the Lieberman-Warner Coal Subsidy Act. But, this is disagreement between the passionate and knowledgeable, arguing over approaches to solving our problems -- not over whether there is a problem to be solved and not over desired end states. Miles would be a knowledgeable and passionable Energy Smart delegate ... in a state that needs a lot more Energy Smarts in its political leadership.

Again

Congratulations and welcome to Washington Energy Smart Jeff, Mark, Martin, Ben, Tom, Glenn, and Gary. Your Energy Smarts are needed in the halls of power.

Thank you for willingness to take on the often task of running for public office Energy Smart Debbie, Michael, Andrew, Scott, Kay, Tony, Daniel, Gilda, Ashwin, and Possum.

And, looking to the future, lets work to make Energy Smart Brian the next Governor of Virginia and Energy Smart Miles (that is, The Green Miles) Grant the next delegate from Virginia's 47th District.

And, thinking to the future, how can we work together to foster energy smart concepts and global warming as key issues for candidates to focus on to win future elections.

NRDC petitions to list whitebark pine under ESA

melvin — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:43:06 GMT

A Petition to list the whitebark pine, Pinus albicaulis, as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (66-page pdf)

It is an icon of the high country. My floating band of hikers sometimes agreed not to stop for lunch until we saw a whitebark.

And it is disappearing. There is absolutely no mystery about the individual causes or their devastating synergy.

White pine blister rust, caused by the fungus Cronartium ribicola, which was introduced to North America a century ago.

The mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae. While outbreaks have occurred before, the current one is completely unprecedented in the time it has gone on, the area affected and the number of trees killed. And there is no end in sight.

Past fire suppression efforts that have left a continuous matrix of underbrush in which insects and pathogens flourish, and contribute to catastrophic fires.

Global warming. A threat in itself and the main driver of the pine beetle's population explosion and advance into new territory. This isn't rocket science: formerly the beetles were rarely able to complete their life cycle and reproduce at the altitude where whitebark live. Now they can, not because they attained superpowers or fur coats, but because the warm season is longer. and more survive the warmer winters as well.

Recovery for a species like this is tough. They will not reproduce seed for the first forty or fifty years. And when this keystone species dies off in large numbers everything goes with them.

The sick part is that the die-off has been steamrolling along for fifteen years now while a bunch of idiots rant and rave about sunspots and China and Al Gore's secret bank accounts.

Much of the public never sees the high country. But the media types and the politicians, they fly over it all the time. Look out the window. Take a glance down at the Rockies and the Cascades, that beautiful America you're always rabbiting on about. Look at what the beetles have already done to BC.

Soil and water retention? Modifying effect on the climate? Hello?

At least Joel Connelly gets it:

In two recent summers, 2006 and 2008, this writer has visited Yellowstone and witnessed the rapid death of high-elevation forests.
On slopes of 10,300-foot Mount Washburn, we looked into a meadow below where a sow grizzly and two cubs were feeding, but around us red-colored whitebarks were in the process of dying.
We camped near 10,000 feet in Wyoming's Wind River Range last summer, as scientists dug into dead and dying trees.
An airplane flight drove home the message: We lifted off out of Dubois, Wyoming. The great peaks of the Teton Range loomed in the distance. Below us, however, was a panorama of dead and dying forests.
Whitebark pines can be helped by protecting critical habitat, perhaps by changing federal forest fire suppression policies, perhaps by replanting, and definitely by controlling and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Don't believe the NRDC or Joel Connelly or me. Believe the Forest Service. It'a all right there in FS publication number R1-06-28: Whitebark Pine in Peril - A Case for Restoration.

Citizen Science in the Cascades

melvin — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:03:03 GMT

The amateur scientist may seem a thing of the past in the day of the LHC, the Hubble telescope, and the various ongoing genome projects.

But in certain areas trained amateurs can play an enormous role. Every so often a backyard astronomer finds something new, and the best known example of citizen science, the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Count, begins in a few days.

Here's a less famous example: last week the Cascades Citizen Wildlife Monitoring Project released its 2008 Remote Camera Field Season Report (22-page pdf).
CCWMP is a joint project and a pooling of resources of Conservation Northwest, a twenty year old Washington conservation group, the I-90 Wildlife Bridges Coalition and Wilderness Awareness School.
The latter two organizations have previously collaborated on wildlife monitoring efforts just east of Snoqualmie Pass, in an effort to ensure that expansion of the freeway from four lanes to six for a 15-mile stretch incorporates best practices for wildlife overpasses and underpasses. The first order of business was to document what animals were in the area and when.

The State Department of Transportation is in full cooperation with these efforts, which stand to save lives - human and other - and resources.

To do this kind of field work on a shoe string takes trained volunteers.

Our program engaged and educated more than fifty volunteers in wildlife monitoring this season, ranging in age from teenagers to retirees. The enthusiasm, increased knowledge, and dedication of this volunteer pool are indications of the success of the project. The value of public involvement is incalculable. As citizens become engaged in these issues and share their experiences with others in their community, momentum is built. Awareness and greater funding for conservation can be supplemental consequences.

Not to mention a sense of pride in the work itself and a sense of ownership going forward. These people will thoroughly own a piece of the completed highway project; something to tell their kids about in twenty years. For a few, it may even open the door to new careers.

CCWMP also continues CN's long time monitoring of carnivores in the North Cascades. One of its cameras caused quite a stir last spring when it captured a family group of wolves in the Methow Valley. This was the first documentation of wolves successfully breeding in the state since the thirties.

Volunteers tending equipment also heard the family group howling.

And in the Pasayten Wilderness, one of my favorite places, they got one lone photo of a lynx, a creature common enough further north but not doing so well in the US (and the last eight years of you know who certainly haven't helped).

Sadly though, no Washington photos of any wolverine, a definite target for the project. It just goes to show how hit and miss it is to catch an extremely rare animal at any given spot. The wolverine honors this year went to a Forest Service researcher who caught a photo of one in the Tahoe Forest when she wasn't even looking for them. Her photo was the first proof of a wolverine in California since the twenties. Unless of course you think it was an escaped pet.

Conservation Northwest has posted just a few of the the thousands of photographs from around the Cascades on its website, including the lynx, a marten from near Snoqualmie Pass, and various other interesting critters.

Large scale monitoring of watersheds and other ecosystems in the detail needed isn't in any public budget. Even the Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project that McCain loved to hate on relied on several hundred unpaid volunteers to come in on budget.

Citizen Science Projects blog explores all sorts of projects.

The Science Cheerleader takes it to another level: Let's Create a Very Public Office of Technology Assessment

Without the OTA, special interest groups, researchers, and politicians all rushed in-all of them claiming to speak on the public's behalf. A crisis of public trust escalated. As Bochelt and Hudson note, "an erosion of public trust that began as a trickle of doubt about radiation safety and pesticides has grown to program-threatening uprisings against emerging new technologies, from genetically altered "Frankenfoods" to concern over "grey goo" in nanotechnology."
It is time to have a new OTA, but one with citizen participation. Scientists and Congress should trust the public's capacity to learn, draw conclusions, and contribute. Invite the public to do more, and put a process in place so citizens and researchers can work together to impart sound policy advice to Congress.