Concerns remain despite increase in forest funding
By Steve Miller, The Rapid City Journal, February 27, 2010 [here]
President Barack Obama has included an increase of $35 million for forest management in his proposed 2011 budget.
That’s the good news, says Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, especially in a year in which the president has called for zero growth in total discretionary spending.
But Herseth Sandlin said she is worried about how the forest money might be allocated. The administration has proposed pooling all forest funds, suggesting that more of the forest budget could be spent on wildlife habitat, for example, and less on timber harvest and efforts to battle beetles and reduce the threat of big fires.
The South Dakota Democrat outlined her concerns Saturday at a round-table gathering in Rapid City of forest managers, state and local officials and forest-product industry representatives.
Herseth Sandlin said the additional $35 million might not be enough, anyway, to combat a growing mountain pine beetle infestation throughout Western forests. “I will be making the case to appropriators that we may need that, and then some,” she said after Saturday’s discussion.
Jim Neiman, chief executive officer of Neiman Enterprises, which owns forest-product companies in South Dakota and Wyoming, said he, too, is concerned about pooling the money.
“The current system, at least as it sits with the Black Hills, is not broken. Why fix it?” Neiman said. “In areas with no timber industry, it might be a moot point. Here, it’s critical. It has the potential to be devastating.”
Herseth Sandlin and Black Hills National Forest Supervisor Craig Bobzien said the local timber industry has been crucial to combating pine beetles and reducing fire danger through logging and thinning.
“This year, with the pine beetle onslaught, we’ve moved all of our projects for commercial timber sales into the areas where the pine beetles are,” Bobzien told the group.
Stop Al Gore Before He Lies Again..and Again…and Again!
by Alan Caruba, Climate Realists, February 28th 2010, [here]
The New York Times once again is Al Gore’s “enabler”, publishing a February 28 opinion editorial, “We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change”, despite the mounting evidence that global warming was and is a complete fabrication.
In November 2009, the Telegraph, a British newspaper, carried a story, “Al Gore could become world’s first carbon billionaire”, so let us disabuse ourselves of the notion that Gore just wants to save the world.
Heavily invested in the “carbon credits” scam and technologies whose success depend on people believing fairy tales about “clean energy” alternatives such as wind and solar energy, Gore has enriched himself by trumpeting the biggest hoax of the modern era.
It is no surprise that The New York Times published his latest collection of lies. The reportorial record of the Times has been decades of lies about global warming. Whatever patina of respectability it once had has been eroded by its participation in the fraud. Why should it stop now?
There is increasing discussion of whether testimony before Congress by Gore and other global warming advocates constitute criminal behavior that begins with lying under oath.
On February 24th The Washington Times reported on a hearing of the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee hearing on the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget. “Republican James Inhofe told EPA head, Lisa Jackson, that man-made climate change was a ‘hoax’ concocted by ideologically motivated researchers who ‘cooked the science.’”
“More than that, Inhofe in releasing a GOP report questioning the science used to support cap-and-trade legislation, hinted that such activities may be part of a vast criminal enterprise designed to bilk governments, taxpayers and investors while enriching those making the false claims.” … [more]
A perfect storm is brewing for the IPCC
The emerging errors of the IPCC’s 2007 report are not incidental but fundamental
By Christopher Booker, UK Telegraph, 27 Feb 2010 [here]
The news from sunny Bali that there is to be an international investigation into the conduct of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and its chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri would have made front-page headlines a few weeks back. But while Scotland and North America are still swept by blizzards, in their worst winter for decades, there has been something of a lull in the global warming storm – after three months when the IPCC and Dr Pachauri were themselves battered by almost daily blizzards of new scandals and revelations. And one reason for this lull is that the real message of all the scandals has been lost.
The chief defence offered by the warmists to all those revelations centred on the IPCC’s last 2007 report is that they were only a few marginal mistakes scattered through a vast, 3,000-page document. OK, they say, it might have been wrong to predict that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035; that global warming was about to destroy 40 per cent of the Amazon rainforest and cut African crop yields by 50 per cent; that sea levels were rising dangerously; that hurricanes, droughts and other “extreme weather events” were getting worse. These were a handful of isolated errors in a massive report; behind them the mighty edifice of global warming orthodoxy remains unscathed. The “science is settled”, the “consensus” is intact.
But this completely misses the point. Put the errors together and it can be seen that one after another they tick off all the central, iconic issues of the entire global warming saga. Apart from those non-vanishing polar bears, no fears of climate change have been played on more insistently than these: the destruction of Himalayan glaciers and Amazonian rainforest; famine in Africa; fast-rising sea levels; the threat of hurricanes, droughts, floods and heatwaves all becoming more frequent.
All these alarms were given special prominence in the IPCC’s 2007 report and each of them has now been shown to be based, not on hard evidence, but on scare stories, derived not from proper scientists but from environmental activists. Those glaciers are not vanishing; the damage to the rainforest is not from climate change but logging and agriculture; African crop yields are more likely to increase than diminish; the modest rise in sea levels is slowing not accelerating; hurricane activity is lower than it was 60 years ago; droughts were more frequent in the past; there has been no increase in floods or heatwaves.
Furthermore, it has also emerged in almost every case that the decision to include these scare stories rather than hard scientific evidence was deliberate. As several IPCC scientists have pointed out about the scare over Himalayan glaciers, for instance, those responsible for including it were well aware that proper science said something quite different. But it was inserted nevertheless – because that was the story wanted by those in charge. … [more]
Agriculture to merge Forest Service programs
By INES BEATRIX, Federal Times, February 26, 2010 [here]
The Agriculture Department’s Forest Service plans to merge three programs next year to better protect forests against the effects of climate change.
Tim Tidwell, chief of the Forest Service, said the merger will enable Forest Service managers to consider all aspects of forest maintenance and care — timber harvesting, tree health, watershed health, wildlife and fisheries, and vegetation — within a single program.
Creating “a single budget line item … will encourage folks to look at the [total] landscape” of forest management, Tidwell said in an interview.
The program merger is included in the president’s $5.4 billion Forest Service budget proposed for 2011, which would represent a $61 million increase over this year’s budget.
Cecilia Clavet, a policy analyst at the Forest Service, said the move will enable agency managers to “start thinking holistically about restoration of the forest and leaning away from strict timber management.”
Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he is pleased with the budget because it includes “significant improvements” in funding to fight wildfires.”
NAIS is Not Dead, Just Renamed
by Carolin Burch, Freedom Advocates, 25 February 2010 [here]
Contrary to what you are being told the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is not dead; just renamed, reworded and still very much alive. This was the message brought to the Ozarks Property Rights Congress (OPRC) meeting in Gainesville, Missouri on Thursday, February 11, 2010 by Bob Parker who said he hated to bring that news. “Being one of those who has worked hard over the past four or five years to stop NAIS, nothing would please me and my co-workers more than to be able to report that indeed NAIS has gone away. But sadly it is still here under a new name and coming at us with a reshuffled approach.” Parker read excerpts from a fact sheet released by USDA February 5th which outlined the new approach.
The animal identification program will now be called the Federal Animal Disease Traceability System and premise identification registration numbers are now “unique location identifiers.” Parker pointed out that the USDA paper says that since so much tax payer money has been spent on efforts to implement NAIS that as much of the failed program as possible must be salvaged and used in the new program such as use of the NAIS “840″ ear tags. They say it would be fiscally irresponsible to disregard all elements of NAIS.
USDA acknowledged that massive public opposition to their proposed NAIS program has caused them to revise the prior policy and offer a new approach.
Parker noted that while USDA says the frame work for the new approach will emphasize states participation, they are very clear and emphatic on one major point which seems non-negotiable in their view. They intend to enforce animal identification at the level of interstate commerce as they said they would do under the original NAIS plan. …
Parker expressed disdain for those elected officials who quickly put out news releases bragging how they were instrumental in stopping NAIS. “They evidently didn’t read the rest of the story and were quick to make political hay. They do their constituents a real dis-service by touting a hollow victory.” … [more]
Conflict of Interest or Double Agent?
Attorney General’s Senior Counsel Doubles as President of Law Firm Pushing CO2 Emissions Cap
By Jim Scarantino, New Mexico Watchdog, February 25, 2010 [here]
Stuart Bluestone wears two hats. He is Senior Counsel to Attorney General Gary King. He is also president of the board of directors of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, the law firm representing petitioners pressing the Environmental Improvement Board to impose an unprecedented statewide cap on emissions of carbon dioxide and gases they claim are causing global warming.
Bluestone has served as a director of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center (NMELC) since 2007. During that time, he has also served as Senior Counsel to Attorney General Gary King. In January 2010 he was named as president of the board of the NMELC.
NMELC is a law firm that represents private individuals and organizations in a wide range of environmental matters across the state. It sues private and public entities, participates in appeals, intervenes in lawsuits and administrative proceedings, and seeks to influence and persuade administrative agencies in adjudications and rule-making. It is the legal counsel representing the petitioners who are pressing the EIB to impose a cap on gases they claim are causing global warming. The cap they seek would cut carbon dioxide and other emissions by 25% below 1990 levels, the most drastic such emissions cap in the country. Electric power utilities, representatives of manufacturing, mining and agricultural industries, chambers of commerce and others fear this cap will have a devastating impact on New Mexico’s economy and tax base. … [more]
Utah House votes to curb stream access
By Brandon Loomis, The Salt Lake Tribune, 02/24/2010 [here]
The Utah House has voted to restrict public access to streams that cross private property except where anglers and others can prove a continuous use has existed for at least 10 years.
The bill, a substitute version of HB141, responds to a 2008 Utah Supreme Court ruling that said state law gives access to public waters. Representatives who supported it Tuesday said the bill reasserts constitutional protections for private property as the nation’s and state’s founders intended.
“The pilgrims came here not to go fishing, but to own land,” said Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan.
Recreationists who lost this legislative round viewed the issue very differently, saying the bill cuts into public rights to public waterways.
“The public has a right to its water through the [Utah] Constitution, period,” said Utah Rivers Council Executive Director Zach Frankel. “So unless [legislators] do a constitutional amendment, they’re not going to be able to change that.”
He said thousands of recreational users have become involved since the court ruling, and “people will be falling over themselves to sue” if the Senate passes the bill.
Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, said the court decision was based on statute, not constitutional principles, and granted public rights where none previously had existed. For instance, he said, a creek that passes through his land never had seen public use — there are no fish there — but the ruling meant people could wade through to hunt or pursue other activities.
He said it’s the Legislature’s duty to protect private-property rights of the few against the demands of hundreds of thousands of fishers.
“This is not a popularity vote,” he said, but a case of upholding constitutional principles that protect against a “tyranny of the masses.” … [more]
Go Monument Yourself, Mr. Prez
Local officials concerned about Vermillion Basin issue
By Brian Smith, Craig Daily Press , February 24, 2010 [here]
Craig — Some local officials have been left confused and upset by a document leaked Thursday from the Bureau of Land Management, which lists the Vermillion Basin as a potential site for “special management or congressional designation.”
In response to the leaked information, the Moffat County Commission approved a letter to be sent to U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar at its Tuesday meeting. The letter, drafted by Jeff Comstock, director of the Moffat County Natural Resources Department, said the commission is “deeply discouraged” by the potential designation.
Salazar released a statement Thursday following reports stating the internal discussion “reflects some brainstorming discussions” and that “no decisions have been made about which areas, if any, might merit more serious review and consideration.”
Local officials are concerned they were not involved in any decisions regarding local land.
“What is most offensive is an executive order telling you how to manage your land,” Comstock said. “Involve your local people before you start doing a ‘top-down’ approach.”
Opponents of potential designation contend that the Antiquities Act could be used to designate the 77,000-acre area a national monument. Such a decision likely would limit public access and use of the land. … [more]
Historic Signing Fills Capitol Rotunda, Parches Klamath Farmers
BY SARAH ROSS, OregonPolitico.com, February 19, 2010 [here]
SALEM- In a signing ceremony at the Capitol Rotunda on Thursday morning, Gov. Ted Kulongoski, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and other interested parties came together to sign a restoration agreement for the Klamath Basin region bordering Oregon and California.
The agreement will lead to the removal of four dams on the Klamath River and closes 30,000 acre-feet of agricultural water rights designated off the federal project lands. Additionally, it provides the funds to purchase about 90,000 acres of forest land for the Klamath Tribes.
Speakers at the ceremony included major players in the negotiations of the agreement including leaders of the National Marine Fishery Services, tribal leaders for the region, owner of the four PacifiCorp dams on the Klamath Rivers, as well as Gov. Schwarzenegger, Gov. Kulongoski, and Secretary Salazar.
Although this ceremony gave a glowing appearance of unity amongst its participants, the issues present in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement are controversial at best. Many citizens in the area are upset with the agreement process and with its outcome.
The two biggest issues presented by those opposed to the agreement are the retirement of 30,000 acre-feet which will be losing their water rights, making the land no longer irrigable for large crops, and the closing of four dams in the region, which is predicted to raise the price of electricity for the area. … [more]
Mayor calls town limits ‘no-predator zone’
Sun Valley concerned about wolves entering town
By Ariel Hansen - Times-News, Friday, February 26, 2010 [here]
SUN VALLEY — A large audience Wednesday heard Sun Valley Mayor Wayne Willich do some howling about community concerns of wildlife within city limits.
Willich called for the Wood River Elk Trust II to quickly come up with a plan to feed elk on a ridge above the Elkhorn neighborhood of Sun Valley next winter, hoping they won’t then attract predators into the city.
The elk have not been fed by an organized group in three years, and last year wolves hunted them as they wandered through town. The wolves have not been present in the city this winter, which is attributed to the wolf hunting season launched last year.
Following a self-described “lecture” about the wildlife situation in Sun Valley, Willich took questions, but refused to take comments, on his proposal to have the elk trust present its plan to the Sun Valley City Council in two weeks.
“I’m finished with these town hall meetings, we’re moving to a solution,” Willich said. “The time for discussion is over.”
He said if the elk trust can’t resume feeding, or if the council fails to approve a resolution in support of their feeding, he will demand that Idaho Department of Fish and Game be more proactive. Several Fish and Game agents were in the audience.
“We’ll put you on notice that whenever there’s a predator around, you need to use whatever techniques to get the predators out of town,” Willich said, calling Sun Valley a “no-predator zone.”
Fish and Game Regional Supervisor Jerome Hansen said that’s already the department’s policy.
“We’ve got a document specifically developed to deal with urban large-animal conflicts. This is all about public safety,” he said. “Our guys are Johnny-on-the-spot.”
The department’s policy is to avoid feeding programs whenever possible, although they maintain feeding sites in other areas of the state, including nearby Warm Springs.
“Their plan to start up a feeding program (in Elkhorn) is an easy short-term solution, maybe, but I don’t think it’s the long-term solution,” Hansen said. “It takes a while (for the elk) to develop new patterns. It takes longer than we’ve had.”
He said he would prefer to find other solutions to keep the elk out of town, such as reducing the size of the herd and enhancing habitat in areas to attract the elk to areas not as close to homes, such as Parker and Independence gulches.
Willich said the City Council will take comments on March 11 on the elk trust’s plan. He said the council would likely offer moral, not monetary, support for a feeding plan.
Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley Is a Lying Sack
Senators Boxer and Merkley Owe Apology, says SPPI
SPPI Blog, February 24th, 2010 [here]
In Senate EPA hearings today false claims were made by Senators Boxer (D-CA) and Merkley (D-OR) that the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is Exxon Mobil funded, implying its work and findings should be cast aside.
Says SPPI president, Robert Ferguson, “SPPI has never been offered or accepted funds or support in any form from Exxon Mobil. Senators Boxer and Merkley owe an apology and a correction in the record.” Added Ferguson, “It is rather simple for any senate staffer to call Exxon Mobil to verify the facts, or examine public filings for Exxon Mobil’s Contributions and Community Investments.
The intended slurs came as EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson faced stern questioning from Senator James Inhofe (R-AR) and Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) about recent revelations of the shoddiness of the science underpinning the EPA’s CO2 ‘endangerment’ finding.
Senator Barrasso referenced a recent study by SPPI indicating that NASA and NOAA temperature records had been manipulated, and asked the Administrator if she’d be willing to have the EPA IG investigate and review the allegations.
In Surface Temperature Records – Policy-driven Deception? [here], veteran meteorologists Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts analyzed world temperature records with the startling conclusion that instrumental land temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely and systematically tampered with that it cannot be safely said that there has been any significant global warming in the 20th century. In the oceans, data are missing and uncertainties are substantial. Comprehensive coverage has only been available since 2003, and shows no warming.
On the other hand, the Senators have not noted that in 2002, Exxon Mobil donated $100-million — $10-million a year for 10 years running — to Stanford University “for research into global warming and renewable energy alternatives.” Neither did the Senators suggest rejection of “oiled” testimony from any witness from Stanford University, including extreme alarmist Stephen Schneider’s in 2003.
Other academic institutions support by Exxon Mobil include Columbia, George Washington, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, North Carolina and Texas.
Also, MIT’s hurricane researcher, Kerry Emanuel, has accepted reimbursement payments from Exxon Mobile funded Frontiers of Freedom Institute for participating with NOAA’s Chris Landsea in a congressional staff briefing. Is Dr. Emanuel’s testimony considered tainted by Senators Boxer and Merkley?
“The act of dismissing information and data from SPPI which is not Exxon funded and accepting it from others who are Exxon funded — all the while saying Exxon funding disqualifies testimony — is Theater of the Absurd, “said Ferguson. “Perhaps California and Oregon voters will see it that way, too.”
Oregon Senate approves bill to cut greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks
By Scott Learn, The Oregonian, February 23, 2010, [here]
Despite unanimous opposition from Republicans, Oregon’s Senate passed a bill this afternoon aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions from cars, SUVs and pickup trucks in metropolitan areas even as the state’s population grows.
Senate Bill 1059 would require Oregon’s departments of transportation and land conservation to develop a statewide transportation strategy on greenhouse gases and educate the public about “the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles” and the costs and benefits of doing so.
The agencies would also establish a “tool kit,” planning guidelines and vehicle greenhouse gas reduction targets for five metropolitan areas: Bend, Corvallis, Eugene/Springfield, Medford and Salem/Keizer. The Portland area is already proceeding with legislatively mandated planning around vehicle emissions.
The tool kit would likely focus on mass transit, more compact development and measures to reduce traffic congestion, such as better timing of traffic signals, all aimed at meeting Oregon’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Seventeen Democrats supported the bill. The Senate’s 12 Republicans all voted against it, joined by Sen. Rick Metsger, D-Mount Hood, who said the bill doesn’t “mention anything about economic vitality.”
“We can certainly reduce greenhouse gases if nobody is working,” Metsger said. … [more]
Note: true environmental justice. The liberal urban centers elected the Dems in the Orygun Senate. Now they’ll reap the reward of their dystopian fancy: cars will be banned from their streets. Urbanites will be hoofing it to the welfare offices and soup kitchens.
USFS/DNRC fire protection swap would affect Frenchtown Face
by Cindy Super, Clark Fork Chronicle, February 18 2010 [here]
The Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) and the United States Forest Service (USFS) are working to exchange portions of their wildland fire protection acres to improve the suppression efficiencies of the two agencies responsible for protecting these areas. The DNRC is seeking public comment before March 15 regarding the proposed exchange.
Under the current proposal, the DNRC would exchange remote roadless portions of their current protection for lower more accessible valley bottoms.
The DNRC would acquire areas of the so-called “Frenchtown Face” in the Huson area. The Huson portion includes classified forested land in Roman Creek, Houle Creek and Sixmile Creek that is primarily private and state ownership.
The DNRC would also be responsible for the Lolo Creek area, which includes Highway 12 to approximately mile marker 20. This would include the majority of the private land on either side of Highway 12.
The Forest Service would become responsible for areas at the head of Gold Creek near the borders with the Rattlesnake Wilderness, the head of Deep Creek, Gilman Creek and Albert Creek, which is part of the Graves Creek Range. The Lee Metcalf Wildlife Refuge would also become the responsibility of the Forest Service.
If you have comments or questions please contact Matthew Hall with the Missoula DNRC at 406-542-4312. The public comment period will be open until March 15.
The myth of global warming blizzards
by James M. Taylor, Heartland Institute, ClimateChangeFraud.com, 23 February 2010 [here]
Faced with the embarrassment of record snowstorms this winter, global warming apologists are now telling us such blizzards prove the existence of global warming.
Global warming computer models, we are told, predict a higher frequency of extreme weather events, such as heat waves, drought, floods, violent storms, and, yes, blizzards. The problem with this theory is that there is no such increase in extreme weather events in the real world.
High temperature extremes are not becoming more frequent. …
Flooding events likewise show no sign of increase. …
A study of stream flows and flooding events published in the April 2009 peer-reviewed Journal of the American Water Resources Association confirms this. “There is broad evidence … for increased magnitudes of low and moderate flows both regionally and nationally,” while “trends in high flows have been much less evident,” the study concluded.
Nor is drought becoming a problem. …
The oft-repeated claim that violent storms are becoming more numerous is also demonstrably false. …
The hurricane record is similar. National Weather Service records show hurricanes struck the United States far more frequently in the late 1800s through the 1950s than has been the case since the 1960s. In fact, global hurricane frequency during the past two years was lower than at any time since at least the 1970s.
Which brings us back to blizzards. Global warming apologists are claiming this year’s frequent blizzards and record snow amounts are evidence of global warming because warmer temperatures allow the air to hold more moisture, which in turn leads to heavier snow events. The problem with this theory is that North America has experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. It is certainly not warmer air this year that is causing more blizzards.
Moreover, prior winter snow records, such as Washington DC’s prior record snowfall in 1899, were set during unusually cold winters, not unusually warm ones. The winter of 1899 was one of the coldest U.S. winters on record, especially during February when most of the record blizzards occurred.
Global warming apologists seek to blame anything and everything on global warming, but the assertion that global warming is causing more blizzards and extreme weather events simply does not stand up under objective analysis. … [more]
Interior Department faulted for preservation lapses
By Lee Davidson, Deseret News, Feb. 22, 2010 [here]
WASHINGTON — Inspectors say it is just one too-typical example of how Interior Department agencies care for — or don’t — the artifacts in their museums and research.
At the Boston National Historic Park, “antique furniture, carts and bicycles were stacked on top of each other or were leaning against each other without protection” in a storage area, a new inspector general report says.
At California’s Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, pests threatened displays of historic furniture. But “pest management controls were removed from the site due to the large volume of pests being trapped and they were unable to keep up with removing the pests being caught,” the report says.
“Countless artwork, artifacts and other museum objects are in jeopardy” because proper preservation and protection has been neglected at sites nationwide, according to reports on five separate Interior agencies released by the department’s inspector general last week.
None of the sites visited for the reports were in Utah. However, Utah was where a large federal raid occurred last year on private sellers of Indian artifacts found on public land. Officials then said such people were robbing the nation of its heritage. The new reports say poor preservation at federal museums may be doing the same.
The new reports follow up a report issued in December that said the department largely doesn’t know what is in its collections, often doesn’t know if items were obtained legally and didn’t appear to care for many items properly. … [more]