Scams-n-Scandals - Nate's Corner (printer-friendly)

A Call To Truth and Honesty in Environmental Deliberations
Nate Dickinson

The time is ripe. The American people have had enough of the dishonesty and immorality that has become so common in the conduct of public affairs. For changes to occur the public must stand up and be heard, demanding reform. Their representatives and those individuals and groups who influence their decisions and votes, must be challenged to ensure that they perform in a totally honest manner.

The environmental movement, which had its beginnings in the 1960’s, has developed into one of very questionable character. This is especially true of the leaders and those in government who are so effective in furthering the movement’s agenda. Speaking of agenda, it often appears that it is one of power and control, with concern for the environment somewhere out in the wings. Many of the pronouncements are based on bad science and the movement’s successes are rooted in deception and play on emotions. The more radical elements exhibit a disdain for human beings, have little respect for private property rights, and abhor capitalism and big business. They are very effective in pitting different interest groups against one another.

It is amazing what the spokesmen for the movement get away with. They are in no way bound by any truth in advertising standards or laws. If they were a private business selling products for profit, the bulk of their time would be spent in the courts fighting lawsuits. If they were afforded fair trials, chances are good they would lose most cases.

Admittedly, the majority of those who join or financially support the many involved organizations are really the true environmentalists, who are sincerely concerned about the fate of the lands and waters, and the bountiful resources they support. Unfortunately, they have been subjected to intensive and very effective brainwashing. To put it bluntly, they have been duped. They must take the time to become fully aware of what the environmental movement is all about, objectively reviewing issues and then deciding what is in their best interests and that of their country.

Reviewing a few of the infinite number of false notions and misrepresentations foisted by those directing the movement will illustrate the points that have been made.

Those leading the charge against sensibility delight in creating the impression that open space is a commodity in short supply. Since the vast majority of humans live in the cities or suburbs, they tend to buy into the environmentalist’s game. When they do travel they generally do so by airplane, hopping from city to city. Most are probably quite oblivious of the landscape beneath. No extensive research is required to dispel the open space myth. One need only to refer to their Rand NcNally atlas and note how minuscule a part of each page is colored orange . Except for much of the Eastern Seaboard, which is decidedly congested, high density development involves a very small percent of each state’s land area. People should have no trouble finding ample open space on which to recreate.

In light of the unscrupulous false advertising, how many would believe that within twenty miles of the capital of New York State one could step off their porch, put on skis, and make a seven mile circuit without going by a house or crossing a road? Or if they chose, they could leave the front yard, drop down 400 feet in elevation to a magnificent gorge, and go upstream about a mile to a spectacular 60 foot high waterfall; and all on private land. Add to this the fact that the chances of encountering any other humans would be extremely slim. This may be why so many people are not aware of the opportunities. Or could it be that many have a wide variety of other activities to occupy their spare time.

Beginning with Rachel Carson and her book ,Silent Spring, endangered and threatened species of wildlife have been a rallying cry of the environmental movement. This subject is power-packed with emotional appeal and they have distorted definitions to suit their purposes. According to Webster endangered is threatened with extinction; extinction from existence. The movement and their allies in government changed things so that any species can qualify by considering individuals on marginal or sub-marginal portions of their range. This is very convenient for placing all sorts of restrictions on what an owner can do with his property or de facto taking of property without due compensation. The facts of the matter are that most species are very secure when they chose to live where they belong, in line with the dictates of nature. The notion that any wildlife is a glass figurine is nonsense.

Thanks to the movement, ecosystem has become a popular buzz word. They, of course, present all the associated concepts as if they were brand new. Responsible wildlife technicians have known for years they you cannot study a species out of context. All of the physical features, including the flora and fauna, must be considered, with a thorough understanding of all the relationships. They set goals of preserving ecosystems. It seems like a noble undertaking, but it is impossible, since ecosystems are continually changing and consequently all are endangered. Man must still take a back seat to nature and the clock cannot be stopped. The sensible manager focuses on taking advantage of what nature is providing at the present time. This is not to preclude sensible habitat management programs.

One of the favorite targets is the logging industry, using many mistruths and distortions to cast it in a bad light. Logging they refer to as devastation , including the destruction of wildlife habitat. Actually loggers replicate what nature does, but in a more orderly manner. And, they remove trees before they become overmature. As everyone knows, trees do not live forever. Over time, they rot, blow down, or are consumed by fire. Speaking of fire, the environmentalists should have some answering to do, what with the horrendous fires in the West in recent years. Logging creates and maintains a much healthier forest, which contain far less fuel and lower fire risk. Incidentally, habitat cannot be destroyed, only modified, to the benefit of some wildlife species and the detriment of others.

How they play up the supposed horrors of clearcuts, as if the aftermath was a perpetual desert. Clearcutting is a very acceptable scientific, forest management practice which, for example, is the most sensible prescription for even-aged stands of spruce and fir, species which are shallow-rooted and very subject to blowdown. Nature quickly sees to it that regeneration restores growth on the forest floor. Maybe environmentalists do not realize that they practice the ultimate in clear cutting when they mow their lawns. Trees never stand a chance of becoming established.

Even some of the most ardent environmentalists see the errors of their judgement. Dr.. Patrick Moore, founder of the extremely radical group Greenpeace, admitted to a public audience that he is now a strong proponent of large-scale commercial forest management.

Another unscrupulous practice is to proclaim that the parks and public forests are overcrowded and overused. This is a ploy to justify the locking up of existing lands and the purchase of additional tracts. Reference to available maps will show the myth of these pronouncements. Each of these entities will be transected by a few roads or only have roads near the edges. Development and human activity will be tightly concentrated along the concrete or blacktop. The remainder will never see much in the way of human activity. When dealing with the leaders of the environmental movement one must understand that they have insatiable appetites and a packrat mentality.

The list goes on and on, with multitudes of mistruths and misinterpretations. Most of their pronouncements and calls for action could easily be blown out of the water. That is, if all involved would be interested enough to take the time to look at and carefully weigh the evidence.

Let the truth prevail.

Revised February 2003 Nate Dickinson