Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
More on Bush's administration's impact on environmental resources.
For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our
resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...6292101830.xml Enjoy the wild places while they last. --riverman |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"riverman" wrote in message ... For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...e/110190629210 1830.xml Add this recent article to the list, too: http://tinyurl.com/5bvzl Some quotes from the second article: -------------------------------------------- Environmentalists see some of their worst fears playing out as President Bush moves to cement a second-term agenda that includes getting more timber, oil and gas from public lands and relying on the market rather than regulation to curb pollution. Bush's top energy priority - opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling - is shaping up as an early test of GOP gains in Congress. .................................................. .................. Bush's environmental priority is to rewrite the Clean Air Act to set annual nationwide limits on three major air pollutants from power plants and to allow marketplace trading of pollution rights rather than regulation to meet those goals. -------------------------------------------- I'm as tired of the political tirades as any of us, but I really do have a deep-seated fear that the landscape in America, as we know it, will be fundamentally changed forever from Bush's administration. These aren't one-off changes..."first development" of virgin land is an irreversable step. And he intends to rewrite laws which will continue to impact us once he is gone. If anyone can offer any alternative press that shows that Bush's intentions are to _preserve_ the wilderness, or even to add anything to it, and to ensure that at least *some* of our undeveloped, unmanaged land will remain protected and undeveloped, I'd like to read it. --riverman |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
My statement still stands, Bush is no worse than Bill Clinton, maybe better if your environmental focus happens to be on anything besides wilderness. You gotta be kidding. When Bush farts, I bet all you smell is fine perfume. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"riverman" wrote in message ...
For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...6292101830.xml But Bob Lohn, a regional administrator for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said that as a practical matter, the level of protection for the fish will not change. "By incorporating more accurate data about the presence of salmon, we were able to conclude that the area occupied by salmon was one-fifth as large as the area proposed in the older designations," Lohn said. Enjoy the wild places while they last. --riverman Sounds to me like a land grab to me by some enthusiastic Environmentalist in a previous administration counted 5X higher than what their data should have indicated was really needed. TnT |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Tinkerntom" wrote in message m... "riverman" wrote in message ... For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...6292101830.xml But Bob Lohn, a regional administrator for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said that as a practical matter, the level of protection for the fish will not change. "By incorporating more accurate data about the presence of salmon, we were able to conclude that the area occupied by salmon was one-fifth as large as the area proposed in the older designations," Lohn said. Enjoy the wild places while they last. --riverman Sounds to me like a land grab to me by some enthusiastic Environmentalist in a previous administration counted 5X higher than what their data should have indicated was really needed. TnT Possibly, or more likely they included a buffer zone to include watershed land that is not actually inhabited, but who's ecological health they deem important to the salmon habitat. The developers challenged that a) the financial impacts on them were not considered enough, and b) the proposed buffer land was not essential *enough* to the fish. Its that "enough" that worries me; its a degradation of our preservationist values in favor of development. When it comes to preserving our natural resources (the kind that only exist if you leave them alone), we need the same sense of 'resolve' that the Admin prides itself on in other arenas, but we're not getting it. What is landmark about this ruling is that is sides the Feds with the developers; it agrees that we don't have to so protectionist in our environmental stance, and sets the stage to completely reinterpret the EPA and associated laws. It puts the burden of defining *enough* on the conservationists, not the developers. Here's a related article, but with the same amount of spin from the other side of the debate: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.or...ritical_ha.htm In addition to the precent of compromising of standards of environmental protection, what concerns me in that article is the last part, about whether or not a species is delisted. The feds recently ruled that hatchery fish are the same as 'wild' fish, therefore if hatchery fish are released in a watershed, then the population is no longer endangered. That will change the nature of a region entirely, from a natural one to a completely managed one. A google search on "salmon california washington critical habitat" shows that this is the tip of an iceberg, with much history of legal battling between preservationists and developers. Interesting reading so far. --riverman |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
riverman wrote:
For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...6292101830.xml Enjoy the wild places while they last. Yes, I just heard the same thing on NPR. Also, there was a change in the definition of "wild salmon" to include hatchery-raised salmon, which effectively side-stepped protections of the Endangered Species Act. This happened in Bush's 1st term. Bush is a criminal environmental plunderer. -- Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me - From "Ballad of Serenity" by Joss Whedon |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
NPR, now there's a credible source.
"Frederick Burroughs" wrote in message ... riverman wrote: For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our resources than anyone else.... http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...6292101830.xml Enjoy the wild places while they last. Yes, I just heard the same thing on NPR. Also, there was a change in the definition of "wild salmon" to include hatchery-raised salmon, which effectively side-stepped protections of the Endangered Species Act. This happened in Bush's 1st term. Bush is a criminal environmental plunderer. -- Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me - From "Ballad of Serenity" by Joss Whedon |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike B" wrote in message ... NPR, now there's a credible source. Umm, sure. Why not? If your point is to pooh pooh the messenger, then don't just fire blindly; come up with some DISproof. But in this case, you won't. Both of his claims (the land ruling, and the Salmon ruling) are true, and are very widely reported on news channels everywhere, not just NPR. --riverman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
riverman wrote:
"Mike B" wrote: NPR, now there's a credible source. Umm, sure. Why not? If your point is to pooh pooh the messenger, then don't just fire blindly; come up with some DISproof. But in this case, you won't. Both of his claims (the land ruling, and the Salmon ruling) are true, and are very widely reported on news channels everywhere, not just NPR. I find NPR to be a reliable and credible news source. And, among mainstream news providers, they will air news of environmental importance. Actually, their story about land use/stream designation was quite balanced, mentioning government, timber, development and preservation interests. Give a listen (requires Windows Media or Real Audio player): http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4195582 -- Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me - From "Ballad of Serenity" by Joss Whedon |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Crimes Against Nature-- RFK, Jr. Interview | General | |||
( OT ) Bush in the National Guard: A primer | General | |||
) OT ) Bush's "needless war" | General | |||
A truly great man! | ASA |