Americans are heard - Roadless Rule wins!

In a great demonstration of the democratic system at work, one of the greatest environmental travesties of the Bush administration has been overturned in a Federal Court. The Roadless Rule was established in 2001 after record breaking public comment in its support. It was created to preserve 58.5 million acres of pristine, roadless acres in our national forests for such valuable uses as recreation, wildlife habitat, and preserving water quality, among others. The Bush administration repealed this most widely supported rule in federal rule-making history and replaced it with a difficult and unwieldy state by state petition process in which governors of each state would have to petition if they wanted national forest roadless area protected in their state. Mass public outcry and our national system of checks and balances has defeated this selfish move. This ruling is a victory for the American public against the spoiled children types who feel entitiled to utilize our national resources for their benefit, yet cry when the government makes laws for the public good that don't allow them to do whatever they want, wherever they want.

http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/Statement/20060920.cfm
http://www.wilderness.org/OurIssues/Roadless/chronology.cfm

Thanks Steve -O, we'll miss you mate

It's taken me almost a week to even begin this entry. What a shock. What a loss. He was a voice and an energy, a kindred spirit to so many of us in the environmental field. He found a way to convey the passion that we feel for conservation, and to illustrate it in a way the general public could appreciate better than anyone ever has, I believe. My generation had Jacques Cousteau, and he was among the main reasons I fell in love with the ocean enough to pursue my Bachelor's degree in Marine Biology. In Steve Irwin I saw someone as passionately dedicated to the conservation cause as he, and someone with the charisma and gift for communication that gave him the ability to educate the public on the subject like no one else. I raised my daughter and then my son on his shows. In fact their favorite game was me pretending to be Steve, speaking in the closest thing to an Australian accent I could muster, while they ran around the yard pretending to be whatever animal their imaginations could create. When my daughter and I heard the news of his death together, it felt like losing a family member to both of us. After his tragedy I have felt a little less sure footed during my work, often alone in the Georgia woods. When I am able to step back from it, I am able to realize what a gift his life was to us all, and that he packed more living into his lifetime than perhaps 50 normal people, and he did it humbly and unselfishly with a cause that benefits all mankind, and the whole planet. I suppose I must now comfort my sellf with the idea that he died doing what he loved, and that from reports I've heard he was having among the best of times when he passed. I'm sure he was met in heaven with a great welcoming, and that he let God and St. Peter know very well the awe that he felt when he arrived. I can only imagine the hole left for his loved ones with his absence, and my family and I pray every night for them to find some healing with time. Those of us who never met him, but heard and understood his message feel the loss, but know the importance of carrying on his message to the best of our ability. Because of this I will regain my sure-footedness. Thanks for everything, Steve -O!

Kudos to Arnold

My home state is ahead of the curve in good environmental sense again. This is not by accident, but because California as the most populous state is the first to face the issues that all of us will eventually face with the rapid population growth in our country. Governor Schwarzenegger helped draft a bill which he will soon sign that vows to curb greenhouse gas emmisions in California using a market based approach. Opponents argue that this will cost money and possibly increase costs of energy and be burdensome to companies to the point of making them flee the state. I have heard the last argument many times before for other sensible environmental ideas and last time I checked California's economy was still doing quite well. As for the first argument, doubtless there will be increased cost, at first, with the new program. However, these same people that champion free market economies seem to have little faith that invention and entrepreneurship will create many new ingenious ways to limit CO2 emissions, and maybe even be profitable in the long term for everyone. Until now there has been little, if any, incentive in the U.S. to invest time and money into this area which will only become more critical into the future and so there has been no serious attempts at new technologies to address it. With the gauntlet thrown down in attacking this looming behemoth of an issue, why don't we watch and see what American ingenuity can create before we give up without even trying. I'm sure someday we will realize profits that go far beyond financial, and if we put off facing the issue we will be faced with throwing together last minute band aid solutions that will cost a lot more, if it will not already be too late.