Automatic Weapons & Guards in Camo: Welcome to Mining Country, Wis.

Mary Annette Pember, Indian Country Today Media Network

Rob Ganson didn’t realize he was living in a war zone. On July 6, he was making his usual Saturday walk to one of the Gogegic Taconite drilling sites in the Penokee Hills. He hikes up there each week to photograph and document activities by the mining company, which has eight drilling sites in the area.

Ojibwe mining opponents have built a Harvest Camp to protest plans by Gogebic Taconite to dig a giant open pit iron ore mine adjacent to the Bad River Reservation in northern Wisconsin. Local tribes, environmentalists and concerned citizens say that the mine will pollute water in the Bad River watershed, home to several rivers that drain into Lake Superior. This pollution, they say, will damage fish, wildlife and wild rice and contribute to decline in quality of life in the region. Harvest camp occupants and supporters are making regular trips to the various exploratory drilling sites in the Penokee Hills in order to document work that GTAC is doing. (Related story: Fighting Mines in Wisconsin: A Radical New Way to Be Radical)

Ganson and his friends had walked about three-quarters of a mile from the Penokee Harvest Camp site to take a look at the most recent site where GTAC is conducting exploratory drilling. “We were just a group of middle-aged folks—we weren’t engaged in any activism. We just wanted to see where GTAC was drilling,” he recalls.

Walking slowly because of his emphysema, Ganson, 55, says he was surprised when he and his four friends approached the drill site and encountered a man dressed head to foot in camouflage, and carrying an assault rifle. Ganson was even more surprised when a second man suddenly appeared behind them in a similar outfit, also carrying an assault rifle. “I was kind of concerned for my wife,” he says. “I didn’t much like her walking into the midst of men carrying machine guns.”

Not a tree hugger (Courtesy Rob Ganson)
Not a tree hugger (Courtesy Rob Ganson)

 

Despite this unexpected display of firepower, Ganson focused on the job he had come to do: documenting what was happening at the drilling site. He also took some photos of the men.

As he was doing so, Ganson saw another man, also dressed in camouflage, sitting in a UTV parked at the drilling site. He reports that none of the men would speak to him. “I tried to strike up a conversation with them but they wouldn’t’ say a word,” he recalls. As Ganson and his friends approached the site, the first man met them at the entrance, clearly guarding the drilling area. He simply stood there facing them and holding an automatic rifle. Although they made no effort to follow the group; they made it clear that they were there to guard the site.

As Ganson and his group left he told one of the men, “Well, I hope they gave you guys some good mosquito dope.” He says that drew a small smile from the guard.

Paul Demain, co-founder of the Harvest Camp says he saw two men carrying assault rifles and dressed in camouflage during a visit to drilling site number 6 the next evening, on Sunday, July 7. He noted that one of the men was sitting in a vehicle with Arizona state license plates.

Bob Seitz, spokesperson for GTAC confirms that the company has hired security for the drilling sites and that the men have been up in the hills for a while. “These people aren’t supposed to be seen,” he explains. “This is probably the first time that visitors from the Harvest Camp have spotted them.”

He would not disclose whether the guards were employees of GTAC or of a private security company. “I will only say that we do have security on our property to protect our people. These guards are the same that we have had for some time.”

In a July 8 story in the Wisconsin State Journal, Sen. Bob Jauch, D-Poplar said that the guards are from Bulletproof Securities, an Arizona company that boasts a “no compromises security force.” Both Jauch and Rep. Janet Bewley, D-Ashland are writing a letter to GTAC, asking them to withdraw the guards, according to the WSJ article.

Seitz insists the security personnel are not there to intimidate Harvest Camp protesters. “These guards would tell you that they have not impeded any peaceful protest activities,” he says. That statement is difficult to confirm, since the guards refused to talk to Ganson or Demain.

According to Seitz, GTAC hired guards after a June 11 attack by mine protesters on their personnel at one of the drill sites. “About a dozen masked people attacked our rig and barricaded the road so that law enforcement couldn’t get in to help us. They threatened our personnel, a woman and threatened to harm her family.”

A woman from Stevens Point, Wisconsin, Katie Kloth, has been charged by the Iron County D.A. for alleged theft and damage to property resulting from the June 11 protest according to Wisconsin Public Radio.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled next week for Kloth.

Hunting for rabbits? (Courtesy Rob Ganson)
Hunting for rabbits? (Courtesy Rob Ganson)

 

Seitz says he does not believe that the occupants of the Harvest Camp are responsible for the violence. He adds, however, that there have been subsequent attacks on GTAC drilling sites but declined to elaborate, saying only that protesters have approached the drilling sites at night. (Related story: Eco-Terrorism or Diversionary Tactics at Harvest Camp?)

According to Seitz, there are several camps of protesters in the woods near the GTAC drilling sites. “We have had surveillance on these camps,” he says. “I am not going to go into detail, however, about our security arrangement.” He claims there have been threats of violent action against GTAC on several Facebook blogs but wouldn’t provide details.

He adds, however, that GTAC has no problems with the people at the Harvest Camp. “We support their right to peacefully protest and have not interfered with that right.”

Speaking about GTAC’s ramped up security measures, Demain told the WSJ, “It’s come to a bad situation when you have to have a machine-gun to protect a business that people around here don’t want.”

 

Related story: Wisconsin Tribes: What Part of ‘No Mining!’ Don’t You Understand?

 

Read more at https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/07/09/automatic-weapons-guards-camo-welcome-mining-country-wis-150342

Big Pine Tribe launches farmers market, demo garden

This is the beginnings of Big Pine Paiute Tribe’s new community garden permaculture demonstration garden swale that is planted with fruit trees, berries and shrubs and will “create an edible food forest in a couple of years,” states a news release. The garden is part of a newly-funded Sustainable Food System Development Project which also includes a tool-lending shed, seed bank and farmers market. Photo courtesy Big Pine Paiute Tribe of the Owens Valley
This is the beginnings of Big Pine Paiute Tribe’s new community garden permaculture demonstration garden swale that is planted with fruit trees, berries and shrubs and will “create an edible food forest in a couple of years,” states a news release. The garden is part of a newly-funded Sustainable Food System Development Project which also includes a tool-lending shed, seed bank and farmers market. Photo courtesy Big Pine Paiute Tribe of the Owens Valley

July 8, 2013

 Marilyn Blake Philip / The Inyo Register Staff
marilyninyoreg@gmail.com

 

The Big Pine Paiute Tribe of the Owens Valley’s newly-awarded sustainable food system grant is already sprouting a demonstration garden, farmers market and seed bank as well as fortifying a tool-lending shed and community garden greenhouse.

According to a Big Pine Tribe press release, the tribe recently received a $37,500 grant from the First Nations Development Institute of Longmont, Colo. to support the tribe’s new Sustainable Food System Development Project “with the purpose of increasing availability of locally-grown food as well as knowledge of sustainable gardening practices and native plants.”
For one thing, the grant will enable the tribe to create a permaculture demonstration garden – permaculture refers to an agricultural ecosystem that is intended to be sustainable and self-sufficient. The demo garden will be tended in the greenhouse that tribal members set up in February, Tribal Administrator Gloriana Bailey said.
(Read more in the Tuesday, July 9, 2013 edition of The Inyo Register.)

 

 

Native American High School Youth Learn About Jobs, Hike at Heather Meadows

What: 15 high school youth from Saturday Science Academy, a program of the Northwest Indian College will spend the day learning about jobs as a wildland firefighter, the importance of salmon in the Nooksack River and participating in interpretive hikes.
 
When: July 10, 10 a.m.-4 p.m.
 
Who:  Northwest Indian College, National Forest Foundation, US Forest Service
 
Where: Glacier Public Service Center-10091 Mt. Baker Hwy Glacier, WA
 
Directions:  From northern Bellingham off of Interstate 5, drive east 34 miles on the Mount Baker Highway (State Route 542).
Contact: Coordinate with Erica Keene, 425.783.6096, 425-530-8285, erkeene@fs.fed.us
 
 

U.S. House committee invites Crow Tribe chair to discuss production expansion

Jul 8, 2013 4:46 PM by Q2 News Staff

BILLINGS- The U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee will meet Tuesday to discuss the expansion of coal production on public lands in the United States.

Montana Congressman Steve Daines, who serves as a committee member, revealed that Crow Indian Tribe Chairman Darrin Old Coyote will be testifying during the hearing regarding a recent agreement with Cloud Peak Energy and the hopes the tribe has for that partnership.

Committee members in favor of coal production expansion, such as Daines, plan on using testimonials to tout the benefits of coal production in the western part of the country.

An expansion could mean a change for Montana and Wyoming, as the Powder River Basin accounts for 40% o U.S. coal production.

Opponents say an increase in production might be detrimental to tax payers, as they say coal is currently undervalued.

The hearing kicks off at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time in the Longworth House Office Building in Washington, D.C..

If you would like to watch the hearing, you can find a live stream at that time by clicking here.

Firms partner to push broad use of solar panels

M.L. Dehm / For The Herald Business JournalFrom left: Susan Mattison of Silicon Energy, John Westerfield of CrystaLite and Silicon Energy President Gary Shaver examine translucent solar panels that are part of the roof of a new picnic shelter across from CrystaLite's Everett plant. The two Snohomish County-based companies recently formed a partnership to manufacture solar panel patio coverings, picnic shelters and electric-vehicle charging stations for homes and businesses.
M.L. Dehm / For The Herald Business Journal
From left: Susan Mattison of Silicon Energy, John Westerfield of CrystaLite and Silicon Energy President Gary Shaver examine translucent solar panels that are part of the roof of a new picnic shelter across from CrystaLite’s Everett plant. The two Snohomish County-based companies recently formed a partnership to manufacture solar panel patio coverings, picnic shelters and electric-vehicle charging stations for homes and businesses.

By M.L. Dehm, The Herald Business Journal

Solar power is about to become more accessible for home and businesses owners. Two Snohomish County-based companies, Silicon Energy in Marysville and CrystaLite in Everett, have teamed up to create pre-engineered, customizable solar panel patio coverings, picnic shelters and electric-vehicle charging stations.

What makes these green energy structures unique is that the transparent solar photovoltaic panels actually serve as the roof. The attractive multiuse structures offer the ability to charge electric vehicles, run outdoor lighting or use other electric and communication systems in an off-the-grid capacity.

They also can increase property values in a time when energy costs are uncertain and the number of electric cars is on the rise.

“What we have been able to do by working together is to combine two outstanding products to give greater value to the consumer,” said Silicon Energy President Gary Shaver. “They have the expertise in the substructure and we have the expertise in the PV modules.”

This is a part of the solar market that is under-served, Shaver said. Most people don’t think beyond putting solar panels on the roof of their home or business. This concept expands the number of places where solar panels can be installed and expands the possibilities for the use of the power that is generated.

Home owners, businesses and municipalities looking for shade structures or shelters of any kind can now get a better return on their investment by making those structures work for them to generate electricity.

For electric-vehicle owners, there is the added benefit of knowing that even if the cost of electricity increases, the cost of the fuel to power that vehicle will not.

“When you put an EV charging station in, you’re literally creating your own e-gas for your electric cars,” Shaver said.

The energy can also be diverted for use inside the home or business. This can reduce or even eliminate electricity bills depending on the size of the PV system. In some circumstances, a home or business can put the excess power they produce onto the grid.

PV systems reduce demand on grid resources, which benefits the community as a whole. You could view it as supporting national energy security, Shaver said. The more people who are able to produce their own energy, the more robust the grid as a whole becomes without any additional upgrades. It’s also a green renewable energy source.

Currently there are state and federal financial incentives for adding solar energy to your property, which makes installation of integrated PV structures even more feasible. They also come with an added aesthetic benefit.

“What really makes these different and exciting is that it is an attractive product,” said Susan Mattison, national sales and marketing specialist for Silicon Energy. Silicon Energy’s tempered-glass solar panels are transparent. The PV modules blend in to allow the eye to focus on CrystaLite’s sleek railing system. The structure can be customized to complement the existing architecture on the home or business.

The glass-like PV panels are also suitable for diverting rain water for collection. The panel’s double glass construction is durable and the panels come with a 30-year warranty.

The idea of combining solar panels with carports, covered patios and picnic shelters is not new. It’s something that customers had been requesting of both companies’ installers for some time.

“There was a driving force for a partnership after we had done a handful of these jobs,” said John Westerfield of CrystaLite. In fact, talk of a partnership to develop this product line has been going on for about three years but it was only officially announced at the Seattle Living Future unConference in May.

Response has been positive. Since the announcement, both companies have been swamped with inquiries.

“It took off way faster than we thought,” Westerfield said. “They’re off and running.”

Both companies are also pleased that their partnership will benefit other local firms. Since the two businesses don’t sell directly to the public, Westerfield said, other firms will get work by doing the installation so the money stays local.

Both firms are also strong believers in using as much locally sourced materials as possible. The companies do all their manufacturing in the U.S. and source almost all materials from the U.S.

Interested customers can see photos of a number of existing projects at Silicon Energy’s website, www.silicon-energy.com, which also lists a contact page for installers.

But for an up-close view of a practical project installation, look no further than the picnic shelter across from the CrystaLite plant at 3320 Pine St. in Everett.

More from The Herald Business Journal: www.theheraldbusinessjournal.com

Fighting Mines in Wisconsin: A Radical New Way to Be Radical

Mary Annette Pember, Indian Country Today Media Network

A brand new tribe is emerging in Northern Wisconsin. Enrollment requirements for the Penokee tribe are stringent, according to Paul DeMain, co-founder of the Penokee Hills Harvest Camp—they require all members prove they are at least 70 percent water.

Water, the element that unifies all human life, is the binding force behind a surprising coalition of people and organizations near the Great Northern Divide in the Penokee Hills. Although many of these people have had opposing philosophies regarding economic development, they are united in their desire to ensure clean water. Public concern over the impact on the water and environment of a proposed 4.5 mile wide open-pit iron ore mine is creating a whole new tribe and new way to protest. The fictitious, allegorical Penokee Tribe effectively includes all human beings since everyone needs water to survive. The Harvest Camp and inclusive nature of other groups protesting the mine underscores this binding fact. More than a simple protest by occupation, the residents and supporters of the camp demonstrate and include visitors in traditional plant gathering and preparation. The goal is to instill awareness of the natural resources of the area and how they would be affected by the mine.

Despite opposition from citizens, tribes and environmentalists, Wisconsin’s Republican-led legislature passed a mining bill in March that substantially changed the state’s mining regulations. The bill, which was created with major input from Gogebic Taconite lobbyists, streamlines the mining permit process and weakens environmental protections as well as the responsibilities of mining companies to surrounding communities for damages to infrastructures or property. Gobegic Taconite (GTAC) is doing exploratory drilling in the Penokee Hills in order to get samples of iron ore to submit to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to gain permission to proceed with the mining process. If approved, GTAC can then proceed with “mini-mining,” a greater sampling process of about 10,000 tons of rock that would be extracted with explosives.

Recently, groups opposing the mine have taken a novel approach to building support and awareness of this issue. Instead of picketing, they began by educating county board members and talking neighbor-to-neighbor about the real human and community costs of such a mine.

Mining has been pitched in the state as job-creator for the economically strapped northern region of the state, notes citizen journalist Barbara With, a resident of Madeline Island. She and several tribal and citizen groups have worked together to steer the public discussion in another direction. “Instead of jobs, jobs, jobs, we’ve gotten people to begin talking about water, water, water,” she explains.

In June 2013, the Ashland County board, closest local governing authority to the proposed mine, voted to create county mining regulations that require mining companies to obtain special use permits and deposit copy00,000 in a county fund to address problems such as noise, dust, damage to public roads, etc. Further, the county requires mining companies to maintain the fund at $50,000, and make additional payments as needed. Formerly, Ashland County had been an ardent support of the mine.

According to With, the change in attitude by board members was the direct result of grassroots education efforts about the real economic, quality of life and environmental impact of the mine. She credits the more inclusive, educational efforts by tribes and advocates in the area with this change. For instance she noted that last year the Bad River Band of Ojibwe began inviting non-reservation residents to their monthly potlucks that are organized to educate and share information about the potential impact of the mine. The Harvest Camp is also welcoming to the public. More than an occupation alone, the Camp residents and supporters work to inform visitors about the potential impact of mining on the natural habitat. They do this by actively including visitors in traditional harvesting and cooking methods.

With did a risk management presentation to the Ashland County board that included factual information about how businesses need to create risk management plans in order to protect themselves. “I personally went from a combative relationship with the board to one of support and looking at ways I could support and educate them,” she says.

In February, the Lac Courte Oreilles (LCO) Band of Wisconsin Ojibwe helped created a unique way to draw public attention to the role the Penokee Hills plays in the health of the region by building a Harvest Camp not far from the proposed mining site. An 1842 treaty guarantees hunting, fishing and harvesting rights on ceded territory in the northern third of the state where the Penokee Hills are located. The site of the Harvest Camp is especially important for Wisconsin’s six Ojibwe bands since the area formerly contained almost 200 Indian allotments in the late 1800s that were stolen from Indians in favor of wealthy investors of the original shaft mining in the area. The camp will be open for hunting, fishing, harvesting (wild rice and maple syrup) and public recreational use as defined by treaty and public laws. The public is invited to pitch tents at the camp, join guided tours to the GTAC sample drilling site and participate in the traditional learn.

Residents of the camp are conducting demonstrations to youth and visitors about sustainable harvesting of plants, animals and medicines and in the process drawing attention to the role that clean water plays in a healthy environment. LCO elder Marvin Gasper told Wisconsin Public Radio WPR, “This is a brand-new way [to protest]. It’s a peaceful manner in which we are using a harvest area and showing what can be taken out of this and be saved.”

According to Demain, the camp is immensely popular, drawing visits from racially and socially diverse people. “Grandmothers, kids, county supervisors, journalists are visiting the camp to learn what is going on here,” he says.

Camp leaders also guide visitors to view GTAC’s exploratory drilling sites.

In describing the tribe’s motivation for supporting the Harvest Camp, its website says, “Any activity, mining or otherwise, that threatens water must be the subject of careful and thorough scrutiny so a healthy decision can be made.”

“The water is sacred to our people and vitally important to the survival of all the people in Northern Wisconsin,” says Gordon Thayer, Lac Courte O’reilles (LCO) tribal chair.

Iron County, partially affected by the mine, is also considering passing mining regulations similar to those of Ashland County. A rally is planned for July 1 in Hurley, Wisconsin to draw attention to a public information meeting held by the Zoning Commission about the proposed regulations. The Zoning Commission will pass their recommendations on to the Iron County board that plan to vote on passage of the regulations as soon as this week.

In the past, many Iron County residents and leaders were staunch supporters of mining, especially for its potential of bringing in new jobs. George Myer, former Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources secretary and current executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation, recently spoke to citizens in Iron County about the need for county level mining regulations.

He explained that the mine would represent a permanent land use change to the county and that local governments need ordinances to protect the property rights of its citizens and to protect taxpayers from shouldering the short- and long-term costs of a mine not covered by state law.

The public discussion about mining is definitely changing in Northern Wisconsin. On June 21, the Ashland Daily Press reported that Ashland County board chairman Pete Russo who represents the city of Mellen (the closest town to the mining site) said, “There are a lot of people with concerns on impacts [of the mine] on property values. They want guarantees on the water. We need that copy00,000 [from GTAC]. Nobody else will take care of us.”

Such sentiments represent a huge turnaround from 2011, when the board voted unanimously in support of the mine.

GTAC spokesman Bob Seitz told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that such county ordinances were unnecessary and may be impossible to meet since state regulations were already in place. In describing Ashland County’s recently passed mining regulations he said, “What they passed is an open checkbook. There is no limit to what the company would have to pay.”

Frank Kuehn, president of the Penokee Hills Education Project, and others opposed to the mine are skeptical about GTAC’s hints at discontinuing their plans. “I’m not convinced of anything that comes out of GTAC’s mouth. They’ve threatened to leave in the past. At one point they closed their offices but never really left. They may be trying to wait us out.”

In a June 22, 2013 interview with the Cap Times of Madison, With said, “Everybody who thinks this mine is good has been completely hoodwinked, and people in Iron County are waking up to it,” With says. “The tide has really turned up here.”

 

Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/07/07/fighting-mines-wisconsin-radical-new-way-be-radical-150308

The Southwest’s forests may never recover from megafires

Larry LamsaValles Caldera, N.M., after the 2011 Las Conchas Fire.
Larry LamsaValles Caldera, N.M., after the 2011 Las Conchas Fire.

By Richard Schiffman, Source: Grist

If you doubt that climate change is transforming the American landscape, go to Santa Fe, N.M. Sweltering temperatures there have broken records this summer, and a seemingly permanent orange haze of smoke hangs in the air from multiple wildfires.

Take a ride into the mountains and you’ll see one blackened ridge after another where burns in the past few years have ravaged the national forest. Again, this year, fires in New Mexico and neighboring states of Colorado and Arizona are destroying wilderness areas.

Fire danger is expected to remain abnormally high for the rest of the summer throughout much of the Intermountain West. But “abnormal” fire risks have become the new normal [PDF].

The tragic deaths of 19 firefighters in the Yarnell fire near Prescott, Ariz., last month shows just how dangerous these highly unpredictable wind-driven wildfires can be.

The last 10 years have seen more than 60 megafires over 100,000 acres in size in the West. When they get that big, firefighters often let them burn themselves out, over a period of weeks, or even months. These fires typically leave a scorched earth behind that researchers are beginning to fear may never come back as forest again.

Fires, of course, are a natural part of the forest lifecycle, clearing out old stands and making way for vigorous new growth out of the carbon-rich ashes. What is not natural is the frequency and destructiveness of the wildfires in the past decade — fires which move faster, burn hotter, and are proving harder to manage than ever before. These wildfires are not exactly natural, because scientists believe that some of the causes, at least, are human-created.

For one thing, the intensity of the recent fires, researchers say, is in part the result of a warming and drying trend which has been underway for over a decade, and which some climate scientists believe will become a permanent condition as anthropogenic climate change continues to increase.

Experts also blame the fire-suppression policy which has been in effect for much of the last century. In the past, frequent low-intensity lightning fires left behind a park-like patchwork of woodlands and open meadows. The Smokey the Bear philosophy of fire prevention interfered with this natural pattern. By always putting fires out rather than letting them burn freely, forests throughout the West have become thick and overgrown.

This well-meaning but unwise policy decreased fire dangers in the short term, but increased them exponentially in the long run on 277 million acres of fire-prone public lands. When forests do burn now, instead of the gentler, meandering fires of the past, the unnaturally high fuel loads often make for rampaging fire-storms that typically destroy everything in their path.

In earlier low-grade wildfires, the trees that survived seeded recovery in the next generation. Nowadays, by contrast, the fierce heat of the megafires frequently incinerates all of the conifer seeds and seedlings and sterilizes the soil, making it all but impossible for the forest to regenerate.

In the Jemez mountains west of Santa Fe, the charred remnants of the 2011 Las Conchas blaze stretch for miles above the atomic city of Los Alamos. It was the biggest wildfire in New Mexico’s recorded history, until the following year, when lightning ignited the Whitewater Baldy fire in the southern part of state, torching an area nearly half the size of Rhode Island.

Much of the Los Alamos burn resembles today a lunar landscape — vast slopes of denuded gray soil where little vegetation has come back. Hillsides, once covered with ponderosa pine and squat, drought tolerant pinon and juniper trees, now grow only clumps of cheatgrass, an invasive species, and occasional bush-like shrub oaks. Biologist Craig Allen of the U.S. Geological Survey, who has spent years studying the Southwest forest ecosystem, says that areas like these won’t be forested again in our lifetime, and possibly they never will be. The reason that Allen and others are pessimistic is that climate change is hitting the Southwest harder and faster than most other areas in the U.S. The region has warmed on average between 2 and 5 degrees during the past century, and this trend is expected to accelerate in the years ahead.

Add to this the danger from what scientists call a possible “mega-drought.” The Southwest has always been prone to extended dry periods, like the one which archaeologists believe drove the Anasazi people of Chaco Canyon in the Four Corners area to the wetter Rio Grande Valley in the late 13th century. But a study published last year in the journal Nature Climate says that, by 2050, the region will be even drier than in previous mega-droughts. Moreover, hot summer temperatures in the Southwest will literally suck the water out of leaves and needles killing trees in unprecedented numbers. “The majority of forests in the Southwest probably cannot survive in the temperatures that are projected,” one of the study’s coauthors, Park Williams, a bio-climatologist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory told Environment 360.

The stress that trees are already under becomes clear during a short drive north of Santa Fe. Whole hillsides near the town of Abiquiu, made famous by the haunting desert landscapes of Georgia O’Keefe, are now covered by the ashen skeletons of pinon pines. The trees, weakened by years of drought, were finally killed off in the late ’90s by bark beetles, insects which have also devastated numerous stands of ponderosa and spruce at higher elevations.

Given these plagues of biblical proportions — fire, heat, drought, and insects — the future for the Southwest’s forests looks dim. Whether they will survive at all may depend on what we do — or fail to do — in the next few years on the biggest plague of all: climate change.

This story was produced by The Atlantic as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Richard Schiffman is a reporter, a poet, and the author of two books. His environmental journalism appears regularly in the Guardian and other publications.

Quebec rail disaster shines critical light on oil-by-rail boom

By Scott Haggett, Dave Sherwood and Cezary Podkul

(Reuters) – The deadly train derailment in Quebec this weekend is set to bring intense scrutiny to the dramatic growth in North America of shipping crude oil by rail, a century-old practice unexpectedly revived by the surge in shale oil production.

At least five people were killed, and another 40 are missing, after a train carrying 73 tank cars of North Dakota crude rolled driverless down a hill into the heart of Lac-Megantic, Quebec, where it derailed and exploded, levelling the town centre.

It was the latest and most deadly in a series of high-profile accidents involving crude oil shipments on North America’s rail network. Oil by rail – at least until now – has widely been expected to continue growing as shale oil output races ahead far faster than new pipelines can be built.

Hauling some 50,000 barrels of crude, the train was one of around 10 such shipments a month now crossing Maine, a route that allows oil producers in North Dakota to get cheaper domestic crude to coastal refiners. Across North America, oil by rail traffic has more than doubled since 2011; in Maine, such shipments were unheard of two years ago.

“The frequency of the number of incidents that have occurred raises legitimate questions that the industry and government need to look at,” said Jim Hall, managing partner of consultants Hall & Associates LLC, and a former chairman of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

“The issue here is: are they expanding too rapidly?” he said. “Are they in a rush to accommodate and to make the economic advantage of carrying these?”

MUCH AT STAKE

There are many unanswered questions about the Quebec disaster that will likely shape the public and regulatory response, including why a parked freight train suddenly began rolling again, and why carloads of crude oil – a highly flammable but not typically explosive substance – caused such widespread disaster.

“There may have been some vapours, maybe? I don’t know. We don’t know exactly what happened,” Edward A Burkhardt, chairman of Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, said in an interview on Saturday when asked about why the tankers may have exploded.

Apart from the human toll, the disaster will draw more attention to environmental risks of transporting oil.

Much is at stake: Oil by rail represents a small but important new source of revenue for big operators like Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd (CP.TO: Quote, Profile, Research) and Warren Buffett’s BNSF, which have suffered a drop in coal cargo. It is also a flexible and cheaper option to more expensive European or African crude for refiners like Irving Oil, which confirmed on Sunday that the train was destined for its 300,000 bpd plant in Saint John, New Brunswick.

And for producers like Continental Resources Inc (CLR.N: Quote, Profile, Research) which have pioneered the development of the Bakken fields in North Dakota, railways now carry three-quarters of their production; new pipelines that can accommodate more oil are years away.

Saturday’s train wreck may also play into the rancorous debate over the $5.3 billion Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the U.S. Midwest, which is hinging on President Barack Obama’s decision later this year.

Obama said last month that approval for the line would ultimately depend on its impact on carbon-dioxide emissions. An earlier draft report from the State Department suggested that rejecting the project would not affect emissions because crude would still be shipped by rail.

As a result, the incident may strengthen the resolve of those opposed to the Keystone pipeline rather than soften resistance. The oil industry at large is already broadly supportive of both rail and pipeline transport.

“Committed critics … could conceivably seize upon the Lac-Megantic incident – in tandem with recent pipeline spills – to argue against oil production, irrespective of its mode of transport,” said Kevin Book, managing director of Research at ClearView Energy Partners.

MOVE IT BY RAIL

The railway industry has this year mounted a more robust effort to counter the suggestion that rail is a riskier way to transport crude than pipelines.

The American Association of Railroads has declined to comment on Lac-Megantic, but previously said its spill rate – based on the number of gallons of crude oil spilled versus every million miles of transport per barrel – is less than half that for pipelines.

The AAR also said the number of train accidents involving the release of hazardous material has dropped by 26 percent since 2000, and by 78 percent since 1980.

Since the beginning of the year, U.S. railroads moved nearly 360,000 carloads of crude and refined product, 40 percent more than in 2012, according to the AAR. In Canada, year-to-date traffic is up 24 percent.

With that growth has come a number of high-profile spills and accidents, many on Canadian Pacific Railway’s network, which runs through Alberta, the largest oil exporter to the United States, and the Bakken field.

Canadian Pacific suffered the industry’s first serious spill in late March, when 14 tanker cars derailed near Parkers Prairie, Minnesota, and leaked 15,000 gallons of crude. Regulators have not released the results of their investigation into the incident, and Canadian Pacific declined to comment.

Even before Saturday’s disaster, the practice of shipping oil by rail was stirring opposition in Maine.

“It’s a wake-up call of the worst kind,” said Meaghan LaSala, an organizer with 350 Maine, a group that opposes the hydraulic fracturing – or “fracking” – technology that makes shale production possible. “They say rail is the safest method, but there simply is no guaranteed way to transport such highly toxic and explosive materials.”

TOO SOON TO SAY

Many observers say it is too soon to say if the Lac-Megantic disaster will quell the crude-by-rail boom. Refiners not connected to the Midwest pipeline network will still use rail to access the cheapest crudes.

“On the face of it this should be a boost for pipeline solutions, especially given the improvements in pipeline technology over the past five decades,” said Ed Morse, managing director of commodity research at Citi Group.

But he and other analysts noted that not every devastating tragedy leads to new policy.

“We need all forms of transportation for oil, whether they’re rail, whether they’re pipeline, and no system is failsafe,” Charles Drevna, president of American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, said in a phone interview.

For Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, crude oil shipments are a relatively new phenomenon. With just 510 miles of line, the small railway primarily carried paper and forest products until the financial crisis, and had suffered in the years after until the shale boom came along.

In the first four months of the year, it carried about 16,500 barrels per day (bpd) of crude, 10 times more than a year before and up from zero in early 2011, according to data from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.

“In the 10 years or so we’ve been in business, this is the only serious derailment we’ve ever had,” Burkhardt told Reuters in the interview.

Henry Posner III, a former business partner who invested with Burkhardt in a railroad in Estonia, said he could not recall any incidents similar to what happened in Quebec during the 5-1/2 years they were in business together.

“Safety is the most important component of railway culture in North America and that’s one of the things we’re most proud of having exported to Estonia,” said Posner, who chairs Railroad Development Corporation, a Pittsburgh-based company that invests in railroads.

(Reporting by Scott Haggett in Calgary, Alberta, Dave Sherwood in Portland, Maine, and Cezary Podkul in New York; additional reporting by P.J. Huffstutter in Chicago, Jonathan Leff in New York and David Ljunggen in Ottawa; editing by Tiffany Wu and Matthew Lewis)

Navajo Nation declares drought emergency

Associated Press

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) – The nation’s largest American Indian reservation is awash in extreme drought, and that has forced its leaders to declare an emergency.

Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly signed the emergency declaration Monday along with a memorandum directing all executive branch agencies to develop plans for responding to the drought and educating the public about its effects.

“We are going to do everything we can to bring our people through this drought. We have many needs, and we are a strong people,” Shelly said in a statement. “Water is precious, and we have to learn how to conserve and change our practices to make sure we prevail through these drought conditions.”

Over the last month, drought on the Navajo Nation – from the tribe’s lands in New Mexico and Arizona to southeastern Utah – has gone from bad to worse. The latest federal drought maps show extreme conditions covering the Four Corners region.

Some areas of the reservation have seen just over one-third of their normal precipitation this year. The soil is dry and wells aren’t producing water like they have in the past, Shelly said.

Making matters worse is summer forecasts are predicting continued high temperatures and below average precipitation for the area. Navajo emergency management officials said that will likely result in lower river flows, which could have negative effects for livestock and municipal wells.

There are about 5,000 stock ponds across the reservation, and officials said as water supplies dwindle, more pressure will be placed on the tribe’s windmills and drinking water wells.

The tribe’s commission on emergency management said drought conditions have already created a critical shortage of water and feed for livestock.

“The land condition will continue to deteriorate and the socio-economic framework of the Navajo Nation will be negatively impacted,” the commission stated. “The livestock owners and farmers will need to plan to protect and preserve their land and their livestock.”

The declaration makes available emergency funds for Navajo communities and clears the way for the tribe to seek a federal disaster declaration.

The genetically modified food debate: Where do we begin?

International Rice Research Institute
International Rice Research Institute

Nathanael Johnson, Grist

I’ve lingered at the fringes of the debate over genetically modified foods since the ’90s, hoping that some solid fact would filter out and show me clearly who was in the right. But that hasn’t happened. Every shred of information, it seems, is contested, and all this turbulence keeps the water muddy.

Now the debate is coming to a head again. Britain is reconsidering its restrictive position. Here in the U.S., bills to require the labeling of GM foods were introduced to the legislatures in 28 states this year. Now that I’m writing on food for Grist, I can’t keep waiting on the sidelines for someone else to clear this up. I’m going to have to figure it out for myself.

A project like this requires humility. Many people — including, I’m sure, many of you — may have greater expertise in this area than I do. If so, let me know where you think I should be pointing the searchlight. Or, if you’re like me, and just want to get reliable information from someone who’s not bent on convincing you one way or the other, well, come along for the ride.

My goal here is to get past the rhetoric, fully understand the science, and take the high ground in this debate — in the same way that greens have taken the high ground in talking about climate. It’s hard to make the case that we should trust science and act to stem global warming, while at the same time we are scoffing at the statements [PDF] of *snort* scientists on genetic modification.

Now that doesn’t mean we have to stop thinking, and simply accept everything that the voice of authority lays in front of us. I’m going to look at the science critically, and take into account the efforts of agricultural corporations to cant the evidence. When Mark Lynas made his speech saying that he’d changed his mind about genetic engineering, I was unconvinced, because he didn’t dig into the evidence (he provides a little more of this, though not much, in his book). Lynas did, however, make one important point: There are parallels between opposition to GM crops and other embarrassingly unscientific conspiracy theories. If there are grounds to oppose genetic engineering, they will have to be carefully considered grounds, supported by science.

Of course people who are concerned about genetic engineering don’t have a monopoly on error and overstatement. As the journal Nature put it in a special issue in on transgenic crops:

People are positively swimming in information about GM technologies. Much of it is wrong — on both sides of the debate. But a lot of this incorrect information is sophisticated, backed by legitimate-sounding research and written with certitude. (With GM crops, a good gauge of a statement’s fallacy is the conviction with which it is delivered.)

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be writing a series of pieces, attempting to highlight legitimate concerns and identify the arguments that should be taken out back and … retired. In the courtroom, a judge will often work with both sides to determine a set of facts that all can agree upon, before moving on to argue about how the law should apply to those facts. I’d like to do something similar here: sort out established facts, and gain a sense for what the bulk of the science indicates.

I’m going to start with the most politicized issue: Is there any evidence that genetically modified food is directly harmful to people who eat it? There’s a one-word answer to this: no.

If you aren’t prepared to take my word for it (especially that particular word), things get a bit more complicated. The most persuasive evidence is that millions of people have been eating genetically modified foods for the past 20 years without any obvious ill effects. If anyone exhibited acute symptoms after eating GM food, we would have seen it.

At the same time, the absence of evidence of harm does not prove safety. If the effects were subtle and chronic, and showed up in only a small subset of the population, it’s possible that we could have missed something. And we don’t know what to look for.

That’s the point Margaret Mellon made when I called her at the Union of Concerned Scientists, in Washington, D.C. Mellon has been critical of U.S. policies on genetically engineered crops.

“People need to understand how hard it is to use the scientific method to address the issue of, ‘Is genetic engineering safe?’” she said.

The problem: It’s not a yes or no question.

“It does not appear,” Mellon said, “that there’s any risk that applies across the board to all genetically engineered food and to all people. Each plant is different, each gene insertion is different, each person’s response is different.”

In other words, every GM food could be wonderfully healthy until one particular gene insertion causes things to go awry in just such a way that it messes with the immune system of one particular person. How do you deal with this?

“You need to make a list of all the things that might be potential problems and analyze each of these risks in a wide variety of genetically engineered products,” Mellon said.

Dozens of scientific advisory panels have done this sort of brainstorming. The World Health Organization [PDF], for example, reached the fairly common conclusion that the problems in genetically engineered foods are fundamentally the same as the dangers that arise naturally in plant breeding. Each relies on mutations randomly mixing up the genome. Each sometimes provides unexpected outcomes — try to make corn disease-resistant, end up with too many toxins in the kernels. In both GM and conventional breeding, scientists rely on screening to weed out the bad cobs.

However, researchers generally acknowledge that there’s something a little different about genetic engineering. The United Kingdom’s 2003 Genetic Modification Science Review [PDF], led by David King, puts it this way: “By virtue of the different processes involved, there will be some sources of uncertainty and potential gaps in knowledge that are more salient with respect to GM food production techniques.”

If you have no idea what that means, that’s because it’s incredibly vague. Sure, King is saying, there’s something unusual about transferring a firefly gene into a tomato — that kind of thing doesn’t happen very often in nature. (Although it does happen, amazingly– scientists have found examples of genes moving between different species.) But we don’t know what that difference implies. The report goes on to say that the science so far suggests that those implications have amounted to nothing so far. All the same, this unique technique does create “uncertainty and potential gaps in knowledge.”

The quest for greater certainty on genetic engineering leaves you chasing shadows: When you’re dealing with gaps in knowledge, rather than hard data, it’s hard to tell what’s an outlandish hypothetical, and what’s the legitimate danger. Anything, of course, is possible, but we shouldn’t be paralyzed by unknown risks, or we’ll end up huddled in our basements wearing tinfoil hats. Exhibit A:

There’s no way to completely eliminate risk. The real question is, have we thought through the realistic potential for problems, and put regulatory safety nets out to protect ourselves?

Trying to answer that opens another can of worms. Critics like Mellon say that, right now, the producers of GM crops aren’t required to do any testing at all. GM boosters say that regulations are so onerous they stifle innovation. Clearly, someone is wrong here. I’ll take that up in my next post.