Recent comments

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Pointing fingers is a poor game. Indeed, personal responsibility does play a big role in everyday society, whether it's related to energy consumption or some other issue.

    But I don't see this is as simply pointing a finger at government and asking for a solution, a panacea for our collective woes. As you point out, Frank, everyone needs to chip in. And if you believe the latest fuel consumption numbers, Americans are cutting back.

    At the same time, businesses are in business to *GASP* make money. And as the latest quarterly reports indicate, some, such as Exxon/Mobile, are doing very, very, very well, thankyouverymuch.

    Is it government's role to rein-in those profits? No. But I don't think the unfettered free market is going to take good care of our natural resources, either.

    That's the skeptic in me. I could very well be wrong. There are many companies that do good deeds. But someone has to be the watchdog, of both corporate America and the government, (whether that's federal, state or local government). When there's already an abundance of exploration leases out there that are not being acted upon, I think it's perfectly legitimate to ask why the Bush administration wants more on the market.

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Sorry to butt in. Here's another question:

    Should people who are concerned about our consumption of foreign oil (the vast majority of it is from Canada and Mexico) drive from Portland to Crater Lake and back (about 500 miles RT) for a weekend visit?

    We point the finger at the government and say, "Hey! You're the government! Solve this problem!" when the solution is really in our own hands. If we don't like consuming foreign oil, then we as individuals should attempt to limit our consumption. But as Beamis intimates, it is much easier to demand a solution from a coercive government than it is to change our individual life styles.

    Solutions to our energy "crisis" will occur on the free market once we take responsibility for our own actions.

  • National Park Quiz 9: The American Revolution   6 years 6 weeks ago

    You are somewhat correct. The Battle of Bunker Hill was fought on Breed's Hill, not on Bunker's Hill. The only ones who knew the difference between the hill names were the residence of Charlestown at that time. Most of the men fighting weren't even from there. Even on some of the earliest British maps from the 1770s, it is recorded as bunker hill where the battle would be fought and breeds hill will the church is now. So even the British thought that's what it was called. So today the Freedom Trail goes to both Breed's Hill and Bunker Hill. Even though it is officially Breed's Hill, it is still commonly known by many since as early as the 1830's or the people who had fought there...as Bunker Hill.

    Ed: There is no reference to Breed's Hill or Bunker Hill in Quiz #9, thanks to a revision made last July after Mookie pointed out a critical error. The point Jonathan makes here -- that the Freedom Trail leads to both Bunker Hill and Breed's Hill -- relates to this comment that Mookie posted on July 2:

    The Freedom Trail in Boston does not actually go to Bunker Hill. It starts (ends) at Bunker Hill Monument, but that is actually on Breed's Hill, where most of the fighting of the Battle of Bunker Hill took place.

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Beamis, please tell me you don't have one of those "When We're Done With the Earth, We'll Mine the Moon" bumper stickers on your Hummer.

    Why are so many infatuated with the "drill, baby, drill" anywhere and everywhere mentality? This isn't about "out of sight, out of mind." This is about conserving resources (both scenic and natural) for future generations, rather than hogging them all ourselves and leaving the mess and consequences for others (ie our kids, and their kids, and their kids, etc) to cope with.

    This is about moving away from carbon fuels and into alternative fuels. And yes, I realize that alternative fuels aren't anywhere near the point of development where society can fully rely on them and do away with fossil fuels to keep everything neat and tidy. And yet, I don't think we're that far away, either.... if we have the mindset.

    Let me pose three quick and easy questions:

    1. Are you concerned about our nation's energy problems?

    2. Do you worry that our reliance on foreign energy poses a national security problem?

    3. Do you worry at all about climate change?

    If you answered "yes" to any one of those three, there's one solution that addresses that one answer, as well as the other two. And that answer is to develop alternative energy sources here at home. The longer folks say that likelihood is a fairy tale, the deeper the hole will be that we dig for this country and our future generations.

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Rachel----I don't think you understand the mindset at work here. The people who drive their fossil fueled vehicles to recreate in these western national parks, with their very expensive aluminum framed (we won't go into the unpleasant details of bauxite mining just yet) bikes safely tethered to a fashionable rack, are quite content to fuel their excursions with oil extracted from somewhere far, far from the "pristine" wildness they have come to commune with. They won't come right out and say it but the reality of it is this: out of sight, out of mind.

    I mean come on, there's still lots of Nigerian coastal wetlands and Venezuelan lake basins that can be readily raped first. The Arabian Peninsula and coastal Mexican waters are fine and dandy places for their leisure time oil to be extracted from, just so long as their favorite playground areas won't be marred by such an unsightly scene of debauchery like, GASP, oil exploration. They seem to much prefer consuming energy derived from the swamps of Louisiana and the steamy reaches of the lower Euphrates than the delicate "wildlands" of the Colorado Plateau.

    God forbid that it should gusheth forth near one of these sacred playgrounds. It might just ruin an otherwise perfect weekend for these urban recreationists who just burned 200 miles worth of fuel to get there. Let's not go and bum 'em out.

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    I guess I use "sensitive" because I've been out in the landscape and seen it first-hand, Rachel.

    Utah's arid climate makes it very hard for the soils to recover from trampling; access roads, while temporary to reach drill pads, create scars that last for decades. And if you've been to Vernal or Price lately, you know about all the oil-field traffic that can stir up enormous clouds of dust, which in turn can settle onto the rock art and obscure it. And then there are the various brines they use to keep down the dust, brines that also can damage rock art as well as vegetation.

    And let's not forget the seismic thumper trucks that are used at times in exploration. They're certainly not innocuous.

    Oh, and if you think there would be "ZERO effect" on the neighboring parks, I heartily recommend you make a trip to the Jonah Field, a natural gas development near Pinedale, Wyoming. Look at the air pollution that hovers over the field, listen to the concerns from the north in Grand Teton and Yellowstone national parks about air pollution from this energy development.

    Or you could read what the Wyoming locals -- hunters, conservationists, residents, recreationalists -- have to say about the problems with energy developments. Here's a link to one such story.

    Heck, I didn't even mention the possible impacts to wildlife.

    Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting we pull the plug on energy exploration. But when there are thousands of leases that haven't yet been drilled this seems like pointless overkill.

  • Bush Administration Poised to Sell Oil and Gas Leases Around Dinosaur National Monument, Arches and Canyonlands National Parks   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Why do you say it is "sensitive?" A VERY tired, worn out argument.
    With today's technology, there will be ZERO effect on any of the parks. They can drill down, then sideways miles from the park boundary and even go into the park itself (if they wanted to, but won't), sink vertical to the deposit and no one would know any different.
    Stop the fear mongering. We need the energy resources, unless ya wanna go live in a cave somewhere...but then again, make sure the cave isn't in a park!

  • NPS Entrance Fees Waived on November 11th for Veterans, Military Personnel and Their Families   6 years 6 weeks ago

    I would venture that it's largely coincidence.

    I think McCain had two main things going against him:

    1) His age. Like it or not, 72 is not perceived youthful, and with the tasks facing the next administration, that no doubt played a factor in many minds. In fact, I think that's what the exit polling indicated, that his age was a greater factor than Obama's race.

    2) Sarah Palin. Again, like it or not, she was perceived by many as a drag on his candidacy. Though perceived by some as fresh and vibrant on the political scene, nationally, she lacked the experience one would seek in a VP. She also got off to a bad start with national interviews (ie Katie Couric) and never seemed to recover. Frankly, I think she also exhibited a nasty streak. Whether that was natural or called for, it didn't endear her outside the far right.

    As for John Kerry, well, conspiracy theorists no doubt would say his campaign was Swift-boated. Al Gore lost the election in the courts, which, again, conspiracy theorists would have you believe were jiggered.

    As for George Bush senior, "it's the economy, stupid!" And Jimmy Carter, well, best intentions....

  • NPS Entrance Fees Waived on November 11th for Veterans, Military Personnel and Their Families   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Perhaps you can help me sort this one out. Why is it that, in all five of the most recent presidential elections, the candidate with the best (or only)record of military service has lost the election? What does this say about military service as something that conditions or qualifies a person for political leadership in America?

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    In reply to the latest Anon---

    Thanks but my background is biochemistry and biotechnology, not engineering. Part and parcel of the biochem is a specific background in physics, solely pertaining to the properties of gasses, light and light energy as they are utilized in my field for diagnostic purposes. But the properties that we make everyday use of are quite similar to the technologies relating to solar cells and the compressed air vehicles now in production in France. But I digress, again. So in those instances when the topics turn to alternative energy, the overdone global warming discussions, the evils of fossil fuels, and the like, yes, I do tend to get my shorts in a knot reading the postings that were in my opinion, based in no small part by media disinformation and further misinterpretation or complete misunderstanding of data by the general Joe Poster on this and other sites.

    Insofar as the Enron situation, those responsible were the group of idiots who attempted to run an energy supply conglomerate who in reality had absolutely NO idea how to manage a power grid, and probably had difficulty understanding how to operate a light switch as well. Most people tend to point out that the rolling blackouts that many citizens of California were forced to suffer through were rooted in a lack of "cooperation" amongst utility companies, the lack of a national power grid that could serve to backup any portion of the system by diverting supplemental power sources and some justifiable environmental concerns and fears surrounding nuclear facilities in and around the state for obvious reasons. The statement you make about greed and profiteering is all well and good, but cutting to the chase, had Enron not bankrupted PG&E and forced the only experienced and legitimately knowledgeable power management professionals to find other suitable employment, then mismanaged the entire west coast network due solely to their own ineptness, in all likelihood the entire episode would have been avoided. The profiteering, as it was called, never actually materialized beyond the executive levels of the company as was discovered by a federal audit of the corporate ledgers. That's not profiteering, that's grand larceny or grand theft, I always get those two mixed up, or more appropriately, strong armed robbery. The ignorance at the corporate levels (excluding the accountants, whom I would like to do my books sometime) that created the whole problem in no way can be attributed to the nightmare that is Bush / Cheney. And didn't Enron actually receive their corporate charter under the Wet Willie Clinton / Green Al Gore holocaust?

    And I'm not now casting dispersions on anyone or their right to their opinion. Or ever. Under any circumstance.
    My point was (and is) that the gullibility factor needs a drastic reduction in order for the nation to achieve a better understanding of the issues that cause us ALL daily grief. And those cute little plays on words and flat out misnomers that are "politic-speak" need to be CLOSELY scrutinized before becoming part of one's own everyday dialect. Otherwise, you begin to sound just like the goofs that uttered the phases in the first place. And we have enough of those people already.

    And I NEVER criticize typos!!! Just what seems (to me) to be emotion over substance.

  • Woman Dies in Fall From Angel's Landing   6 years 6 weeks ago

    My 11 year old daughter & I ascended to Angel's Landing two days ago. It was an outstanding experience. My wife & I elected to leave our two 7 year old twins down in the valley and they hiked the Riverside trail. I think it's up to each individual to determine whether they can safely proceed on any given "adventure." We certainly don't need rangers to enforce the types of shoes to wear. What about all those people who choose to free-climb on some of the fantastic walls? I'd never do it, but if they wish to take the risk, know the consequences and feel they can handle it...more power to them! I've been on several back-country skiing trips in this country and elsewhere that have substantially more risk than hiking Angel's landing; it would be the end of outdoor adventure as we know it if there was a ranger at every trailhead dictating who was "fit and capable" of going ahead. It's sad when someone dies in an accidental fall, but those who've died did so doing something they enjoyed doing and did so of their own free will. We as a society need to stop worrying so much about having our government officials make sure we live long, and start living well.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Whew! Talk about a polarized thread!

    I fully agree with this statement, as the division between the factions grow wider each year:

    "Instead of a "them against us" mentality, true environmentalists should strive to build coalitions with hunters, ranchers, fiscal conservatives etc etc. to build a broad based consensus on preservation. That means compromise and the end of misrepresentations. "

    And don't forget Fishermen, ORV Enthusiasts, Snowmoblilers, Mountain Bikers, and any other folks that love our national lands and wish to preserve them, regardless of their chosen mode of transportation, political leanings or the lack thereof.

    Lone Hiker, I couldn't agree with you more! I had hoped that this day would come...

    "OF COURSE there will be change, but only due to that fact that a new family is moving into the Pennsylvania Avenue address. Politically speaking, that's change, and thereby no lies were made nor people hurt in the production of their commercial. The problem is that what the system needs isn't CHANGE......its REFORM."

    And reform needs to happen at all levels, but nowhere does it need to happen more than at the congressional level, where the true devils reside.

  • Yosemite National Park Officials Considering Improvements to Tioga Road Trails   6 years 6 weeks ago

    I worked on NPS trail crews for 28 years. New construction, upgrades, and "improvements" were ALWAYS a higher management priority than just taking proper care of what they already had. This development was done in lieu of actual maintenance and was/is a major factor in the so-called maintenance backlog.

  • Yellowstone National Park Releases Winter-Use Proposal   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Dan, I have raised that issue several times in the past. There was a Utah company, Raser Technologies, I believe, that had built a prototype. I've mentioned it to Yellowstone officials, but to the best of my knowledge they have not reached out to the company for any information or a demonstration.

    One would think an electric snowmobile would address several issues, mainly pollution related. I know in the past there have been concerns that electric 'biles would not be as powerful as 2- or 4-stroke machines, but I believe that issue has been overcome.

    I also understand some college engineering departments have built prototypes. Why more attention isn't being given to this alternative I'd like to know.

  • Yellowstone National Park Releases Winter-Use Proposal   6 years 6 weeks ago

    How would a quiet electric snowmobile effect policy? If they would have a positive effect, how quickly could they be brought to market (if they are not already available)? I have seen a prototype in action on TV.

    Dan

    Notice
    There are no guarantees expressed or implied of the accuracy or correctness of the contents of this message, and the Author is not liable for the taking of any action in reliance upon the contents of this message. As always, do your own research. To the extent that opinions are expressed in this message, they are not necessarily the opinions of the Author.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Lone Hiker: If I'm not mistaken, regarding the Enron collapse, there is various White House memos that suggest that Dick Cheney was involved indirectly to the scandal. Kenneth Lay and Dick Cheney did have a meeting in April 2001 regarding Enron's wishes to refrain the federal authorities for imposing price caps to stabilize runway electrical prices in California...and which eventually made into Cheney's energy plan. The memo states: "The administration should reject any attempt to re-regulate wholesale power markets by adopting price caps or returning to archaic methods of determining the cost-base of wholesale power". The intent was to mitigate higher electrical prices to enhance and increase private investment. Perhaps the White House did not have a indirect input to the Enron scandal but the inference is there regarding some meddling into the energy shenanigans. This is nothing new here regarding the Bush & Cheney loosey goosey policies regarding hands off on big business to exploit illegal profiteering.

    Question, why do mock those that try there best to express there opinions in the best way possible on NPT. Perhaps it's not in the best way grammatically or intelligently but they have a voice. Maybe it doesn't quite meet up to your standards of higher learning or reflect a lofty ivory tower of mentality with a Ph.D. If I'm not mistaken, your the one that has the background in chemical engineering. No!? Not all of us have been bless to live by the slide ruler. Anyway, your opinions are much enjoyed to read.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Why is it a liberal slant? Can't you just leave a little room for doubt that Bush might just be doing what tha article says. It's pretty easy to check.

  • Winter's Not Far Off In Glacier National Park   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Jane What a wonderful picture.
    Having recently moved from the Flathead I do so miss the Mtns.
    Keep them coming.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Lame.......a term never more appropriately used than when in description of politicians. We've been saddled with nothing short of lame for more years than I can remember, dating back to 40's. Bush's leadership post-9/11??? THAT'S your idea of leadership??? I thought leading is defined as an ability to direct or manage for the betterment of the common good or specific to the group being "lead"? Pardon me while I regurgitate over the quality of our leadership.....

    Did I misinterpret on an above post or was someone actually trying to blame the current administration for the Enron debacle? How naive the general public these days.

    I agree with the intent Rick, but Beamis is right. Whether "we, the People" cast our ballots or not, certain factions of the governmental system are beyond the scope of the electoral process, at least as they pertain to an ability to effectively "change" with one electoral process. And the most ridiculous notion put forth that the gullible, ever-ignorant American public has swallowed hook, line and sinker is this absurd rhetoric purporting CHANGE by the Jackass Party. OF COURSE there will be change, but only due to that fact that a new family is moving into the Pennsylvania Avenue address. Politically speaking, that's change, and thereby no lies were made nor people hurt in the production of their commercial. The problem is that what the system needs isn't CHANGE......its REFORM. A does not equal B, and the differences between these two terms is not at all insignificant, but since most of the general public can't even speak or write proper English, put together a coherent sentence or comprehend the nuisances of the language (color and national origin be damned), or even grasp the simple yet subtle differences between the terms "democracy" and "republic", the public gets what it deserves. Maybe that's why funding for education is so hard to come by in this "great nation". If the masses actually understood the processes, reform would be the buzz-word, not some useless conceptual nonsense as "change". But the theory goes that if you use small words with multiple inferences, you can say many things without actually specifically saying anything meaningful. Ah the government practices of business as usual. But just as they promised, we sure got our change, didn't we?

    The most accurate slogan for this election WOULD have been:
    BLACK OR WHITE, NEITHER'S RIGHT
    EVEN GREEN'S A BETTER OPTION
    TUSKS AND MULES ARE FOR FOOLS
    REFORM THE ORGANIZATION

    Ok, so the pentameter is off a bit, sorry.

    GO OBAMA.....GO McCAIN.....and take the rest of the bastards with you!
    Maybe that should have been the slogan.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    G. Pinson uses the example of the Yellowstone bison management controversy to seal his argument that critics of the Bush administration are not to be trusted where matters of environmental stewardship and national park management are concerned. I think that Traveler readers are sharp enough to realize that a body of evidence is the sum of its parts, not any individual part (as the instructions to juries make abundantly clear). An overwhelming body of evidence supports the conclusion that systematic weakening of environmental protection laws has been an identifying trait of the Bush administration, and that the pace of the activity has accelerated dramatically in recent months. No amount of bobbing and weaving is going to change that. I've predicted that the pace will become even more frantic in the weeks to come, and I cordially invite G. Pinson and anyone else to monitor the relevant events and heap ridicule on me if I'm proven wrong.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    John K asks me if an Obama administration would be any better. I don't know, nor can I say whether McCain would do any better either. What I can say is this: no matter who occupies the oval office, we'll be carefully monitoring his environmental stewardship -- especially as it regards the national parks -- and we'll hold his feet to the fire if he uses unethical tactics to undermine the laws Congress has enacted to protect environmental quality.

  • Yellowstone National Park Releases Winter-Use Proposal   6 years 6 weeks ago
  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    I'm an independent who is sick and tired of politically based misrepresentations by democrats and republicans alike. My 6th grade teacher taught me "Figures don't lie, but lier's figure". I'm thinking you and your partner, Repanshek, are figuring you have a gullible readership. Your article cites the Grijalva report and links to an article wherin several allegations of said report are reprinted. Let's look at Democratic congressman Grijalva's first allegation (that's all that's needed to prove we can't trust anything he states):

    Grijalva states "The Bush Administration has presided over the largest slaughter of bison since the Great Plains herds were slaughtered nearly to extinction by unscrupulous buffalo hunters in the late 1800s. "

    What Grijalva doesn't mention are these facts which are attained from various websites of Buffalo advocacy groups and from the New York Times (hardly friendly to the Bush Administration)*:

    1) In 1996 (during Bill Clinton's reign) about 1000 Yellowstone buffalo were "slaughtered"*. That means, until 2008, the Clinton Administration "presided over the largest slaughter of bison since the Great Plains herds were slaughtered nearly to extinction by unscrupulous buffalo hunters in the late 1800s." The 2008 numbers were a wee bit larger, so Grijalva's point isn't a lie depending on what you mean by "presided over". I can't help but wonder if Grijalva, Repanshek, and other democrats, were denouncing the Clinton Administration in 1996 for their record of slaughtering bison.

    2) A rooster crows at dawn, but does that mean he's responsible for the sunrise? Or does he just "preside over" the sunrise? Neither the Clinton, nor Bush administrations, were responsible for the culling of the Yellowstone Buffalo herd, in 1996, 2008 or any other year. The herds are adminstered over jointly by a group of federal and state organizations, but it is the state of Montana that has authority for the culling of the Yellowstone herd.

    3) Buffalo are only killed if they leave the park. No Buffalo are killed within Yellowstone. There are fears that the Buffalo will not only damage rancher's fences and other property, but also spread Brucellosis to the rancher's cattle herds. Buffalo advocates say these are unrealistic fears, but in the past many of the park's buffalo have tested positively for Brucellosis. Brucellosis in humans is known as undulent fever. While it is unlikely to be spread from Buffalo to humans, even through a cattle intermediary, it is still cause for concern among the ranchers surrounding the National Park and also the states in which they reside. To ship cattle out of state, the state (without expensive testing) much have a "brucellosis-free" status indicating that brucellosis has been eliminated from it's cattle. Foreign countries can refuse to accept American beef, if they fear it might be contaminated, or use contamination to excuse protectionism against American beef imports (it's happened). Montana spent an estimated $30 million between 1985 and 1997 to maintain their "brucellosis-free" status. A rancher must slaughter any of his cattle infected by brucellosis and cannot use, or sell the meat. Anyone that has traveled in Montana, or Wyoming, knows that they have small economies relative to a state like California and those economies are highly dependent on cattle. So, not only does an individual rancher have fears of his livelyhood being decimated, his state also has fears of huge financial hardship. Unrealistic fears aren't so unrealistic when there are big consequences to yourself.

    4) The Buffalo are not being slaughtered to the point of extinction as Grijalva would like you to believe. He knows he's planting that thought, when he uses words like slaughter and extinction in his false accusation. There are an estimated 250,000 buffalo in the United States (from various sources including the N.Y. times. PBS estimated only 200,000 plus). They are mostly located on private ranches, but there are large herds in many Federal and State Preserves. I've personally seen herds, in excess of several hundred buffalo, in The National Bison Range in Western Montana, Theodore Roosevelt National Park in N. Dakota and Custer State Park in S. Dakota.

    5) Meat from culled brucellosis-free Yellowstone buffalo is donated to local tribes and food kitchens. Custer State Park (one of the best parks in North America for viewing wildlife) has funded a lot of it's costs by auctioning excess Buffalo (more than the park can maintain) from it's herd.

    6) The reasons why Buffalo stray across Yellowstone N.P. boundaries, leading to their culling by the state of Montana, is that the Yellowstone Park ecosystem, is not able to maintain a herd of more than a thousand, or so, year round. In a bad winter, hundreds, perhaps a thousand buffalo can freeze to death or die of starvation. In one year, it's reported 850 died. I don't know if that was a modern record, exceeding "all since the frozen buffalo records established by the plain's Indian administrations of the 1700's and 1800's."

    Conclusion: Based on this one issue: A) Grijalva is not to be trusted. But he is a partisan politician and his "report" probably earned a lot of good donations from "concerned environmentalists". Do some investigating of your own and see if you can debunk a few more of his allegations B) This websites authors are probably "concerned environmentalists" (aren't we all?), but accepted Grijalva's partisan "report" hook line and sinker. Instead of a "them against us" mentality, true environmentalists should strive to build coalitions with hunters, ranchers, fiscal conservatives etc etc. to build a broad based consensus on preservation. That means compromise and the end of misrepresentations.

    * See New York Times article ("Shooting and Harsh Weather Take a Toll")

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    Mr Janiskee, do you think an Obama administration will be any better, guess what "it'll be worst," then you'll be wishing for somebody else. its easy to pick on George Bush, but nobody remembers his leader ship during 9/11 and afterwards. President Bush has done plenty for this country and the environment and our national parks which i greatly cherish, lets look beyond the negetive and quite gripping. and be appreciative! for what we have.

  • Lame Duck Bush Administration Hastens to Weaken Environmental Protection Laws   6 years 6 weeks ago

    As long as we are compelled, under threat of imprisonment, to surrender a hefty portion of our net worth to the IRS each and every year we can bitch as loudly as we want.

    This year especially there is no lesser of two evils. There is socialism or fascism. The true American spirit should guide every voter to have no part of either.