Speaking of doo-doo: The Justice Department is investigating whether Ryan Zinke lied to inspector general

by

Get the full scoop from this breaking article in the Washington Post:

The Justice Department’s public integrity section is examining whether newly departed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lied to his agency’s inspector general investigators, according to three people familiar with the matter, a potential criminal violation that would exacerbate Zinke’s legal woes.

Zinke, who left the Trump administration Wednesday, was facing two inspector general inquiries tied to his real estate dealings in his home state of Montana and his involvement in reviewing a proposed casino project by Native American tribes in Connecticut. In the course of that work, inspector general investigators came to believe Zinke had lied to them, and they referred the matter to the Justice Department to consider whether any laws were violated, the people familiar with the matter said.

The department’s public integrity section has since been exploring the case, the people familiar with the matter said. The extent of its work is unclear, though the inspector general had questioned witnesses in an apparent attempt to scrutinize Zinke’s account, one of the people said.

Also, in other (stinky) Zinke news, shortly after the departing Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke shared with the public a rather bizarre message, which appeared to be scribbled in red Crayola marker, Zinke then penned a letter to his 70,000 Interior Department employees (30% of whom, Zinke infamously claimed were “not loyal to the flag”), which in part read:

“When I was a Boy Scout, I was taught to leave the campsite better than I found it. I am confident that over the last 2 years we have done that together for our public lands and the Department of the Interior.”

On Tuesday, Time Magazine wrote: “Human feces, overflowing garbage, illegal off-roading and other damaging behavior in fragile areas were beginning to overwhelm some of the West’s iconic national parks on Monday, as a partial government shutdown left the areas open to visitors but with little staff on duty.”

Meanwhile, yesterday ABC News reported: “As the government shutdown extends into the new year, public lands and national parks are struggling to handle the trash, waste, and other damage from visitors without staff to manage the situation.”

Here’s a couple of photos from the past few days showing – literally – how Secretary Zinke left America’s public lands campsite (and legacy?). Good riddance, Zinke!

More Pooping in Parks: Roxborough State Park near Denver

by

This story was in the same Denver Post as the AP story about National Parks. This park is staffed, and people are increasingly doing it. Mighty peculiar IMHO, especially since it seems to be a new thing. Another story reported that Roxborough had doubled the number of visitors in four years. I never heard about the rock/salt idea before. They have been training people in Leave No Trace.

Few things will ruin a hike through one of Colorado’s most distinct state parks faster than a pile of human feces.

Yet officials at Roxborough State Park say they’ve seen an increasing number of “very unsightly” piles of poop near the trails. No pets are allowed in the 4,000-acre park south of metro Denver, so employees there know humans are to blame.

“Over the past several months, we have found literal piles of human waste near our trails, and if not the waste itself, toilet paper left on the ground or under rocks or downed logs,” park officials wrote on Facebook last week.

While there are bathrooms at the visitor center and near a parking lot, the officials recognize that emergencies happen.

But there are socially acceptable and environmentally safe ways to take care of business in nature, the officials point out. If you have to go, dig a hole at least 6 inches deep and bury your waste at least 200 feet from any water sources. Pack out your toilet paper.

The state park also recommends urinating on rocks so that wildlife can lick up remaining salt after the liquid evaporates.

Poop in National Parks… AP and WaPo Weigh In

by
In this Monday, Dec. 31, 2018 photo provided by Dakota Snider shows a road lined with trash in Yosemite National Park, Calif. Human feces, overflowing garbage, illegal off-roading and other damaging behavior in fragile areas were beginning to overwhelm some of the West’s iconic national parks on Monday, as a partial government shutdown left the areas open to visitors but with little staff on duty. (Dakota Snider via AP)

We started this discussion here. Since then, more articles have come out to give more context.  This morning in the Washington Post, we have this story headlined “In shutdown, national parks transform into Wild West — heavily populated and barely supervised”. It looks like there are at least two sets of problems, (1) trash and bathrooms, and (2) people doing illegal things, and/or being mean to each other aka “Wild West” or “Lord of the Flies.” My original post wondered why people who use Parks would be so much worse than people who use National Forests or BLM land, who seem to get along at campsites without hosts. Are they different kinds of people? I’ve seen small campgrounds in the nearby (to Joshua Tree) Angeles National Forest (even campgrounds without water, nor trash pickup, nor people available to moderate disputes). It might be that people come from greater distances, spend more money and expect more at Parks, but why would that turn Sally the Camper into Lord (or Lady) of the Flies? That was my original question. I think it would be a fascinating and useful topic for social science research as all places get more crowded. It’s funny that we have spent zillions of dollars trying to predict how climate change will change parks, and we know so little about human behavior that is a more urgent threat.

From this AP story:

Campers at Joshua Tree National Park in Southern California’s deserts were reporting squabbles as different families laid claims to sites, with no rangers on hand to adjudicate, said Ethan Feltges, who operates the Coyote Corner gift shop outside Joshua Tree.

From a WaPo piece here:

It’s not quite ‘Lord of the Flies’ yet,” said Bryan Min, 30, who traveled to Joshua Tree with friends from Orange County and is camping outside the park. “Who knows how it’ll be tonight?”

In the WaPo article, they talk to different parks around the country. Most seem to be getting on with help from nearby businesses and Park concessionaires. They also look at the staying open vs. closing idea, and mention that some local businesses and visitors prefer staying open.

Some advocates for the parks aren’t happy about this situation, fearing that visitors will do permanent damage to the parks and disrupt fragile ecosystems. They’d like to see the parks fully closed.

“The parks are supposed to be heritage sites for generation after generation. I would rather they close than be damaged,” said Joe De Luca, a sales associate at Nomad Ventures in the town of Joshua Tree.

During a government shutdown in 2013, Joshua Tree was closed to all visitors. The winter holiday season is a busy time here and important for local businesses, and some people are grateful that the park hasn’t blocked access this time, said Kenji Haroutunian, president of Friends of Joshua Tree, a nonprofit climbing organization.

Here’s the tagline for this AP story: Unlike shutdowns in some previous administrations, the Trump administration was leaving parks open to visitors despite the staff furloughs.

The Trump administration is front and center, courtesy of the NPCA representative (remember, those are the folks who said the Trump administration was interested in logging in National Parks).

Unlike shutdowns in some previous administrations, the Trump administration was leaving parks open to visitors despite the staff furloughs, said John Garder, senior budget director of the nonprofit National Parks Conservation Association.

“We’re afraid that we’re going to start seeing significant damage to the natural resources in parks and potentially to historic and other cultural artifacts,” Garder said. “We’re concerned there’ll be impacts to visitors’ safety.”

“It’s really a nightmare scenario,” Garder said.

Find the Forest: A Look at Polis’ Boulder-Dominated Agriculture, Energy and Environment Transition Team

by
Note that the parts of Colorado with most federal lands are not represented on the transition team*. You can click on this map to better view Boulder and Longmont, NW of Denver.

Since our federal friends are on furlough, it might be fun, if wonky, to examine the Transition Teams for the new governors and compare them across states.  States are policy incubators and partners of the feds in dealing with federal land. Where are forests and public lands located in the teams? What kind of people, if any, represent our mutual interests? Of course, they are going to have been supporters of the campaign and likely partisan, but how diverse and representative are they in terms of backgrounds, ethnic, gender, professional, residence?

I tried to do this for Colorado, but unfortunately, the two media sources I found (Colorado Politics and the Colorado Sun) didn’t agree on who was on the team of interest (in our case, Agriculture, Energy and Environment). I wrote to each of them and pointed that out (and suggested this topic for a story) but did not receive a return email , not even a “we have received your email.” So here we go.

How are the teams organized? Where are forests and federal lands?

In Colorado, we seem to be included in the Transition Team for Agriculture, Energy, and Environment.

Are there people with forest experience including wildland fire?

Here are the folks that Colorado Politics identified:

  • Energy, natural resources and agriculture, chaired by former Gov. Bill Ritter, director of the Center for the New Energy Economy; and Andrew Currie. The transition team will include Jim Alexee, director of the Colorado Sierra Club; former Boulder County Commissioner Elise Jones; former Commissioner of Agriculture and water policy guru John Stulp; and Tim Marquez, former CEO of oil and gas company Venoco. The team will lead transition work on the Colorado Energy Office, the departments of agriculture and natural resources, and the Department of Public Health & Environment.

Here’s a link to Andrew Currie (he was actually hard to find until I typed in “Democratic Donor” on Google)

Here’s a link to Jim Alexee.

Elise Jones was the director of the Colorado Environmental Coalition and a  Boulder county commissioner.

Jim Stulp is an experienced water expert/rancher from Lamar.

When I looked up Marquez, it looked like his oil company deals mostly with leases in California and was in bankruptcy.. But he’s definitely a Colorado resident and a  School of Mines graduate.

The Colorado Sun had these names:

Hunter Lovins; (Longmont) “A renowned author and champion of sustainable development for over 35 years.”

Eric Washburn; Steamboat “Washburn previously held senior positions at BlueWater Strategies and Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell, and Berkowitz, at which time he became the founding Executive Director of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, a coalition of dozens of leading nations hunting and fishing organizations. He has worked on a number of Democratic presidential campaigns, assisting in outreach to sportsmen.” (I’ve read about the history of TRCP and it’s too complex for me).

and Jim Pribyl  of Boulder, of Conservation Colorado.

Now if we look at these folks who work on the Agriculture, Energy, and Environment team, we find one person from Lamar (with on the ground experience experience),  one from Steamboat, and the rest from Boulder county (plus one Denver). Our new Governor was in the House of Representatives and Boulder was his district. Nevertheless, Boulder is bit like Eugene in Oregon- not generally considered to be representative of the state as a whole (vast understatement here). Especially not the parts of the state engaged in agriculture or energy development, or that have large areas of public lands. (You can see the federal lands on the map above, agriculture is more dispersed throughout the state.)

Where are forests and/or public lands included in your state’s transition teams?  Are the team’s members from one part of the state or more broadly representative?

Can Visitors Be Trusted in Parks Without Staffing?

by

Note: I despise government shutdowns as ways to deal with political issues. So much money is wasted (invisibly) shutting down and starting up, so many people inside and out have their work and personal lives disrupted. So I understand why people want to write stories about how bad it is. Still..

In the Colorado Springs Gazette, I ran across a summary that mentioned this Time article.

Here are a couple of quotes:

Fullerton warned of possible dangers to visitors and local law enforcement, who may be deployed to parks with rangers on furlough. He also cited potential for serious damage to the parks themselves.

“If someone falls, gets lost or has any issue in a National Park or wildlife refuge, they’re on their own,” Fullerton tweeted.

In addition to possible dangers for police and visitors, Fullerton also cited the potential for major damage to the parks themselves.

“[Keeping parks open] also puts our parks at risk. No one to protect against damaging sensitive habitats, landscapes or historic sites. And trash will be a serious problem that will damage our public lands,” Fullerton wrote.

It looks like Time must troll Twitter accounts looking for news. An ex-Interior person in charge of Digital Strategy?

I know that the National Parks are “America’s best idea” and iconic, and so on, but many visitors who go to National Parks also visit BLM (another Interior agency) and Forest Service land. I’m not saying that there are no problems- as readers here know- anything but. Still 24/7, 365 days per year most by acres federal lands are absolutely open to anyone and millions of people use them without “damaging sensitive habitat or landscapes” and pack out their own trash.

This news item reminded me how amazing it is that in the 21st Century, we have federal lands that are open to the public for free, with relatively little external observation by law enforcement, and expect people to be careful, and behave responsibly. And incredibly, mostly, it works.

BiPartisan LWCF Effort Expected in January/More Congressional Land Allocation Decisions

by
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), likely or soon to be (?) chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, is promising to make a pending public lands package a priority. Natural Resources Committee

Here’s a Colorado-centric take on this from the Grand Junction Sentinel, from an interview with Senator Gardner. What I think is interesting is the pay grade of the folks making the land allocation decisions (Congressfolk) and yet it has still taken 10 years for 61K acres. The San Juan Plan Revision (2013) also took a long time but covers everything. Allocation- not easy work. If anyone has a synopsis of the provisions of the current bill, please send to me or post a link in the comments.

However, Gardner said another bipartisan agreement was reached for the fund to be one of the first bills the Senate takes up in January.

“So that is very good news for public lands in Colorado, very good news for a number of bills for Colorado and very good news for the Land and Water Conservation Fund,” he said.

Gardner said the January legislation will include a number of public-land provisions of importance to Colorado, addressing wildfire, water supply and sportsman issues and adding forest and national monument acreage.

As considered this week, the public-lands package didn’t include the San Juan Mountains Wilderness Act, a decade-old proposal currently being pursued by U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo. It would protect about 61,000 acres in southwest Colorado through a mix of wilderness designation and other land management actions.

It was left out of this week’s package due to a lack of bipartisan backing.

Gardner isn’t a sponsor of the San Juan bill at this point.

Said Gardner, “I support moving the bill forward. There’s some issues that I hope can be resolved. I hope that this bill can pass and receive support from our colleagues.”

He said some concerns surrounding water that were raised about the measure have been addressed.

“There are one or two others (issues) that need to be worked out but I’m confident they will be,” he said.

U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Colo., continues to have some concerns about the San Juan bill.

“There is still not local consensus on the San Juan Mountain Wilderness Act,” said his spokesperson, Kelsey Mix. “Congressman Tipton is open to meeting with Senator Bennet to discuss how this bill could be improved.”

There’s also a story on LWCF status in the E&E news here but don’t know how much can be seen behind the paywall.

********************************************

Update: Thanks to Kitty Benzar, here is a copy of the last bill.  We can do searches on it, but still have no overall description and analysis.  I got lost in the local land exchanges. I guess by Omnibus, they really mean Omnibus.

BLM land management plans maybe prevent species listing

by

 

At least that is what I think happened, but because of the government shutdown, I can’t confirm the details.

The Trump Administration has declined to extend federal protections for two plants native to the Mountain West.

Julie Reeves, plant and wildlife biologist with the service, said the plants didn’t make the cut because another federal agency, the Bureau of Land Management, prohibits energy development and other potentially damaging activities near their habitats.

“Those (threats) are not going to rise to the level of high magnitude that could affect the species because of protections put in place by the BLM,” she said.

A good idea for Forest Service plans regardless.

Down the Fracking Hole: Why Natural Resource Issues Are So Divisive and What to Do About It

by

During the government shutdown, I thought I’d run some posts about other organizations involved in the same kinds of issues as the Forest Service and see if they run into the same kinds of problems, and whether they’ve found solutions. It’s kind of a “you’re not alone” or “it’s not just you” approach.

This piece is by Tisha Schuller with the tagline “After years on the front lines of Colorado’s energy fights, here’s what I’ve learned about why natural resource issues are so divisive—and what to do about it.” The piece is well worth reading in its entirety. Thanks to PERC for providing the link.

Some women enter the field, as Schuller did, with the idea of peace-making. I wonder whether there’s a gender difference (not 100%, of course) in the attitude of folks like her, compared to what Chief Thomas called “paid gladiators”? The kind of people who think that if we all understood each other better, had compassion for each other, and worked together, we could make the world a better place despite our differences? Let’s keep an eye out for these potential environmental peacemakers (Patty Limerick is another).

Needlessly Dividing

To prevent the emotional discomfort of cognitive dissonance, we surround ourselves with like-minded people. The informational echo chambers allow us to experience more day-to-day harmony. By feeding ourselves news and intellectual conversations that reinforce our beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors, we create a cycle that further exacerbates the certainty of our own perspective.

This makes the exploration of scientific information quite challenging, especially amidst our polarized national politics. Loud, soundbite-spewing voices are needlessly dividing conversations about our environmental, natural, and economic resources. With this backdrop, intelligent conversations about tradeoffs of energy development become nearly impossible. In a cooler political climate, inhospitable to ill-founded passions, smart and reasonable people would discuss evidence concerning fracking. How I long for this elusive place.

…
Monitoring.. Or Maybe Not

The voluntary baseline sampling program was a clear success. It demonstrated that operators were willing to be proactive to assuage public concerns. A year later, the program would be codified as a state regulation with official COGA support. Today, tens of thousands of water sampling data are publicly available. The new mountain of data took the question of whether oil and gas development was systematically contaminating groundwater off the table. It was not.

The program, however, did nothing to resolve the conflicts around oil and gas development in Colorado. Public concern about oil and gas development quickly morphed into new issues. Initially, I was surprised. Each time one topic was resolved by a study or a new regulation, the next surfaced seemingly instantaneously. Now I understand the dynamic more clearly: Communities were concerned about fracking in their hearts and their guts, so they would find no shortage of new issues to worry about.

..
Difficult Conversations

Combining all of these biases, we can begin to understand why having a conversation about resource conflicts is so difficult. Cognitive dissonance makes us seek out sources of information that we are likely to agree with. We hear data that fit our worldview. Then source amnesia and the repetition effect kick in. All of this is exacerbated by the most familiar of all biases: confirmation bias. We seek out sources of information that confirm what we believe and dismiss the data that doesn’t. The result is the opposite of a virtuous cycle.

Five Reasons To Donate to Support Us This Year

by

1. We need it! Our website needs an overhaul- the first in nine years and the first ever done by a professional. Your donation makes a difference here in a way that it might not for a larger organization. We are committed to no advertising, and free access and so we depend on you. We’ve budgeted $3,000 based on several bids. So far, we have probably received less than $100 total each year, which doesn’t even cover the basic maintenance costs. Nevertheless, those folks who have donated are greatly appreciated!

2. This is the first year of the new tax law. You might not be itemizing deductions because of the higher standard deduction, and if you don’t itemize, then you might as well donate to us (not tax deductible). While I’m posting this now because many people are planning their donations, since it isn’t tax deductible, you can donate anytime in the next few months.

3. Our mission and our unique way of going about it is increasingly important, as media outlets are bought by large corporations, journalists are laid off, news sources funded by partisan interests spring up, and local and regional outlets struggle to hang on. What we think about the world is at least partially based on our news sources. Right now we have major media corporations seeking their own interests (whatever those are) and then outlets supported by those with one view or another. We have well-orchestrated media campaigns funded by a variety of groups with positive desires to change our minds, and those by foreign governments with goals to drive us apart. It’s harder and harder to find a straight story that tells both sides of an issue. Not to speak of the issues that aren’t covered at all.. that drop through the cracks and yet are of interest to us who care about the National Forests and forests in general.

4. Our uniqueness makes it difficult to find external funding
I’ve been looking for a similar website as a template for our new design, but was unable to find anything like us. This is a place where a community with diverse views where news is tested in the crucible of knowledge and experience that we jointly share, so that we all learn from each other. And we provide a model for civil discussion. It’s not exactly collaborative journalism, nor citizen journalism, nor exactly anything that others have defined. Our uniqueness also makes it difficult to seek funding, as we don’t fit easily into many of today’s funding boxes. and even to apply for most we would have to become a 501c3 which would require funding and more ongoing work.

5. Once we’ve renovated, we can go back to low-cost maintenance This is a once every ten years kind of thing- once the website is renovated you won’t receive more requests or emails (like many not-for-profits). We can celebrate and then go about our normal business for the foreseeable future.

Happy Holidays Everyone!

by


A special shout-out of support and blessings to current Forest Service and other federal employees today.

Here’s a prayer borrowed from my spiritual community with a few additions:

With hearts broken open we pray

for compassion that opens our arms wide this day to embrace as our sister, our brother, each person with whom we share this lovely planet

for vision that clears our sight to recognize the Light and Goodness that flow in abundance this day in every situation, every place and within every being

for obedience
that opens our ears to the cries resounding throughout every quadrant of our earth this day, cries for life, for deep happiness, for a just peace, for care for the earth

for wisdom that discerns well and brings forth the thoughts, works and acts that may bring life this day.

With full hearts we accept the blessings of this day and wish one another peace.

Peace to all!