SOTU SNAFU

"I'm directing my administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes." - Barack Obama, January 24, 2012.

Translation: Fuck you, desert tortoise, golden eagle, bats... we're gonna give it all away.

In which we publicly thank the Arizona Game and Fish Commission

Dear Arizona Game and Fish Commissioners,

Thank you for coming to your senses and backing off the ridiculous policy of opposing all new releases of Mexican gray wolves until the recovery plan is complete. When you approved that in December, you looked like idiots. Now, however, you look more like rational human beings. Congratulations. We know it can't be easy to unanimously do something that's actually good for the environment and wildlife, what, with the composition of the Commission and all. (Nice hat!)

But, thanks. Replacing wolves lost to natural or illegal causes is the only way to de-incentivize the bad behavior of the wolf killers. We personally think it should be a 3-to-1 replacement rate to de-incentivize it even more, and we'd like you to consider 'evolving' your position even further.

We're so glad that the new year brought an about-face on this issue.

Sincerely,

The Landscapes

Even a Broken Clock is Right Twice a Day

Obama bans uranium mining around Grand Canyon

The Obama administration banned new uranium mining claims around the Grand Canyon for the next 20 years, a move hailed by conservationists on Monday as key to the president's environmental legacy...

Yes. It is true. President Obama banned uranium mining in the Grand Canyon. But let's not forget that his legacy includes expanded offshore drilling, the BP oil spill, imprisoning a young activist seeking to disrupt improper mining projects, massive industrial solar development in western deserts, and probably, the Keystone XL pipeline. (We'd love to be wrong about this last one. UPDATED 1/18/12: Looks like we are wrong! Yay Obama!)

So when you are sending your little "thank you note" to Cowboy Ken, you might consider amending the text to read, "The Grand Canyon is one our nation's most beautiful and priceless treasures and deserves to be protected for future generations to enjoy. Ditto for the rest of America's public lands. Ahem."

Three hundred reasons to release more Mexican gray wolves

While we are still struggling to understand exactly what happened with F1105, the Mexican wolf who was killed last week in New Mexico, we just keep thinking that the answer is to release more wolves into the wild. The blow of F1105's death wouldn't be quite so tragic if there was a robust wild population, and if it hadn't come on the heels of three other deaths in the last two months. (More here and here; all three are suspicious in our opinion.)

From the comments on our previous post about F1105's death,

There are only about 50 Mexican gray wolves("lobos") in the wilds of New Mexico and Arizona--not enough to ensure their survival. More than 300 lobos are in captivity, waiting to be released into the wild as part of a reintroduction program. Releasing wolves directly into New Mexico--where the best remaining unoccupied habitat exists--is critical to quickly boosting numbers and gene diversity in the wild population, but for bureaucratic reasons the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) won't do it, citing an outdated rule that prevents direct releases into New Mexico. The FWS could easily change this rule by issuing an Environmental Assessment and putting it out for public review, but it refuses to do so. Tell the FWS to take action before it's too late for Mexican wolves.

Please tell US Fish and Wildlife Service: Release Mexican wolves into New Mexico before it's too late. Sign our petition at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/tell-us-fish-and-wildlife-service-release-mexican-wolves-into-new-mexico-before-its-too-late/

Thanks, Anonymous, for alerting our readers to this opportunity to weigh in. Now, Dear Readers, please do!

Another blow to a stable wild populations of Mexican wolves

This sad news from yesterday: Environmentalists troubled by shooting death of female Mexican wolf in southwestern New Mexico. Turns out this lonely female wolf started hanging around houses, attempting to get close to other canids after a long solo year. And who can blame her, really? Wolves are intensely social and she was prime breeding age. Anyway, the feds were called in and shot her to death. It's a crying shame.

The usual suspects blame the wolf and try to portray her as a child-eater, again. In the comments of the above story, notorious wolf hater Laura Bryant Schneburger has this to say:

Two babies playing in the yard while mom unloads groceried, she comes out wolf is in yard with babies. F1105 nearly gets elderly woman bucked off while working heifers, f1105 stays at house and breeds with dog that is just her past year.

We personally love the one about the elderly woman "nearly" getting bucked off- like she somehow did it on purpose so she could eat the old lady. (Why not blame the horse?) These are the folks with the bus shelters, remember. They have an agenda to make wolves seem as menacing as possible.

We have no idea what F1105 was doing and maybe we would have felt threatened, too. Would we have called for her death? No. And the greater issue is that the ongoing hysteria and resistance to a biologically-sound recovery program and recent opposition to new releases isn't making things better for the project. Unless the project can get new wolves on the ground to form healthy packs in the wild, we're going to see a lot more unhappy endings.

It's creepy and wrong how much these guys like their job.

Probably most folks have already seen this post over at The Wildlife News. The photo is of a government plane marked with pawprints to indicate aerial wolf kills. There are really no words to describe how angry and sad this makes us. Who are these people? Have they no shame? No respect for life? It's sick and it's a sickness.

Reminds us of that Ed Abbey quote: "Whenever I see a photograph of some sportsmen grinning over his kill, I am always impressed by the striking moral and esthetic superiority of the dead animal to the live one."

More about the story behind those photos in the LA Times.

Up against it: Funding the resistance

(Via)

It's that time of year where you are being asked for your checkbooks every time you turn around, whether it is families in need or families in "want." To boot, every NGO sends out year end appeals for funds, the tax benefits of which are minimal unless your checks are maximal. But we good people of the world know that these groups need our support to keep doing what they are doing.

So here's one near and dear to our hearts: The Sierra Club Borderlands Campaign. If the border infrastructure ain't a symbol of what's wrong with this country, we're not sure what is. It's the habitat fragmentation of demarcated landscapes writ large. It's short-sighted posturing at the expense of the environment like few things are. The Sierra Club's Borderlands Campaign is the ONLY staff person of any environmental organization in the country working full-time on border issues. Isn't that amazing?

Please support this campaign by getting in touch with dan.millis@sierraclub.org or sending a check to 738 N. 5th Ave, Suite 214, Tucson AZ 85705 made payable to "The Sierra Club Foundation" with "Borderlands Program" written in the subject line.

Obama No!

We admit we were wrong about President Obama at the outset of his candidacy. We were speechlessly happy. We were stoked.

And we were quickly disappointed. Again. And again. [The list is lengthy and we'll spare you the repetition.]

So when Mrs. Obama's little holiday card/campaign fundraiser came in the mail today, it was all we could do not to barf. Not only will we not be giving money this year, Michelle, we won't be giving your dearest Barack our vote next November either.

Seriously, with announcements like these, you're asking us to donate?

Uh-uh. We'll be sending our year-end donations to groups that fight back against the Obama Administration. It's a sad fact that they have to.

Yes, it makes a sound, and we hear it

The documentary, "If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front" is not just a compelling tale of environmental activists frustrated by traditional methods to thwart (usually unsuccessfully) the destruction of the living planet, but also an exposé of the ratcheted up government response to what was really just property damage. (See: "Eco-terrorism.")

There are two kinds of brutality shown in the film. The first, short clips of oil spills, smokestacks, logging, slaughterhouses and mountain top removal mining. The second, law enforcement's excessive force against protestors, including direct application of pepper spray in the eyes of non-violent resisters, billy-club beatings, etc. Both of these are hard to watch.

A third kind of violence was depicted: that of black block protestors smashing store windows at the "Battle in Seattle," of unoccupied buildings burning, and similar actions. Even a sensitive viewer can watch these without visceral empathy, compassion, or despair. And for us, that's the difference. One thing causes economic pain; the other true, physical suffering. The slaughter of a whale, or a wolf, or a mountain is considered a legitimate transaction; an attempt to harm a corporation's bottom line is a federal crime. It's a fucked up world.

And speaking of suffering, Daniel McGowan is [one of many environmental activists] still in prison. He is the tree that they tried to chop down; let us be the forest that continues to resist.

We're with Tim DeChristopher on this, too

Via Grist.

It goes without saying that politics is a dirty system. It's so dirty that I believe there are only three reasonable approaches to politics: apathy/despair, overthrowing the system, or playing dirty to win...

[T]his is actually about the third option, playing dirty, and it's intended for those of you who intend to vote next year. I know lots of smart, engaged people who don't participate in politics because they don't want to play dirty. I understand their position as a sensible one. What I don't understand is the large percentage of liberals who avidly engage with the political system but refuse to win.

His analysis is smart and coherent, and he takes on the "What are you going to do, vote for someone worse than Obama?" argument that we hear so much.

For the record, we're not going to vote for someone worse than Obama. We're not going to vote at all, unless there is a huge shift in the candidate pool. Obama is a spineless mess of a President, not the President we hoped to elect by donating large-for-us sums of money to his campaign. Not the President we hoped would select a reasonable person to run the Department of Interior instead of Cowboy Ken Salazar and his Posse of Oil & Gasbags. Not the President who makes hard decisions instead of punting them (e.g. Keystone Pipeline).

We had such high hopes.

Thank you, Tim DeChristopher. You've got our vote.

Ooohh, Take the money and run.

Gentle readers,

A bit of good news: A legislative fix to endorse, promote, and be optimistic about!

Voluntary Grazing Permit Retirement Legislation Introduced in Congress

Bill would Provide Cash Option for Grazing Permittee

Conservationists hailed the introduction of the Rural Economic Vitalization Act (H.R. 3432) in Congress today, a bill that would allow federal grazing permittees to voluntarily relinquish their grazing permits back to the managing federal agency in exchange for compensation paid by a third party. The bill was introduced by Representative Adam Smith (D-WA-9th) and six original cosponsors.

"When enacted, this legislation will help resolve endless conflict on public lands, while providing ranchers with opportunities to restructure their operations, start new businesses, or retire with security," said Mike Hudak, author of Western Turf Wars: The Politics of Public Lands Ranching and leader of the Sierra Club Grazing Team.

Domestic livestock grazing is the most pervasive and damaging use of federal public lands. On public land across the West, millions of non-native livestock remove and trample vegetation, damage soil, spread invasive weeds, despoil water, deprive native wildlife of forage and shelter, accelerate desertification and even contribute to global warming.

Unfortunately, antiquated federal law generally prohibits closing grazing allotments to benefit fish, wildlife and watersheds. The Rural Economic Vitalization Act would authorize federal agencies to permanently retire grazing permits if requested by ranchers.

"Grazing permit retirement has been implemented in a few places around the West with marked success, but there is much greater need-and demand from ranchers-to retire grazing permits," said Mark Salvo of WildEarth Guardians.
One landscape that has benefited from grazing permit retirement is the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem where grazing allotments have been closed to reduce conflicts with wolves, grizzly bears and bighorn sheep, and to expand winter range for bison outside Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone bison, the last remaining genetically pure wild herd in the U.S., are subject to intensive management and control based on the irrational fear that they will transmit disease to domestic livestock.

"Bison are hazed, captured, shot and slaughtered to protect grazing interests on public land in Yellowstone country," said Josh Osher of the Buffalo Field Campaign. "REVA is the tool we need to finally, permanently address these conflicts."

In addition to being the source of immeasurable environmental harm, the federal grazing program is a fiscal boondoggle for federal taxpayers. The Government Accountability Office reported that the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service annually spend $132.5 million on grazing management, but collect only $17.5 million in grazing fees for a net loss to taxpayers of $115 million.

"We want to save public lands and do our part to solve the deficit," said Brian Ertz of Western Watersheds Project. "We just need Congressional approval to buy out willing ranchers and retire their grazing permits."

Grazing permit retirement is a voluntary, non-regulatory, market-based solution to public lands grazing conflicts. Permittees determine if and when they want to retire their grazing permits. Permittees and third parties separately agree how much a permittee will be paid for relinquishing their permit. And federal agencies facilitate the transaction by immediately retiring grazing permits received from a permittee. The Rural Economic Vitalization Act caps the total number of grazing permits that may be retired each year at 100.

"This is a win-win-win for ranchers, the environment, and taxpayers," said Rose Chilcoat of Great Old Broads for Wilderness. "Let's pass this bill so that we can finally take some common sense steps to ensure healthy public lands.

See also the press release from the office of Rep. Adam Smith.

THANKS TO ALL WHO MADE THIS HAPPEN! Let's get this puppy passed!

¡Viva Mexico! ¡Que vivan los lobos!

¡Muy bien, Mexico, y felicidades!

A consortium of Mexican conservation groups released Mexican wolves into the wilds of Sonoran last week. This was one of the primary goals of Mexico's President during his tenure. Mission accomplished! Hurray!

Mexican authorities released five Mexican wolves in the San Luis Mountains in Sonora, Mexico, on Oct. 12, 2011, approximately 80 miles south of Douglas, Ariz.

Mexico’s desire to release wolves in Sonora as part of its recovery effort has been known for the past two years, although the exact timetable for release was unknown. (Via)

This really is awesome news, especially with such mixed success in the U.S. recovery effort.

So, Suck it, Arizona Game and Fish Department. Try as you might, MEXICO IS A SOVEREIGN NATION! Ha! We're really glad that acts of intentional sabotage from a certain retiring Anti- Environmental Species Conspirator didn't stop this conservation success.

(More inspiring photos of the release can be found here.)

Acting to Endanger Species

Remember this "groundbreaking" settlement deal that Center for Biological Diversity and WildEarth Guardians cut with the feds last summer? The one in which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to provide timely and/or date certain listing decisions?

Question: How's that working out?

Answer: The agency has been issuing a slew of findings, right on time. However, so far, the decisions are mostly to deny species' protection under the ESA. Including the cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, the Mohave ground squirrel, the Northern leopard frog-- all clear cases of species tanking in the US due to loss of habitat-- and yet, USFWS inexplicably finds ways to keep them off the list.

So, MORE QUESTIONS: can these determinations be litigated as Section 4 merits challenges? Can other organizations bring litigation to challenge these determinations? Is there anything in the agreements precluding litigation by CBD or WEG about the determinations for any time frame?

Score 2.5 million acres for the good guys

In what is just the beginning of litigation in one of the largest environmental cases ever filed, an Idaho judge just kicked some cowboy ass, ruling against the BLM on 2.5 million acres of sage-grouse habitat. Oh yes he did.

The federal court ruled that resource management plans in Wyoming and Idaho failed to comply with legal obligations to adequately consider negative environmental impacts to wildlife and other environmental values that are affected by livestock grazing and oil and gas development. The two RMPs considered were just a subset of the larger case affecting 30 million acres, and its unclear where the ruling will go from here. This is just the first round, but it's a KO.

See that sage-grouse swagger? We're guessing that Western Watersheds Project and Advocates for the West, the two prevailing plaintiffs, have got a little of that today, too.

More here and here.