Recent comments

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    So what's your take on the IPCC's finding that it's 90% likely that humans are causing/have caused observed climate changes?

    I don't think concern about global warming necessarily equates to disdain for modern life; rather, it's founded in disdain of waste and pollution and a concern for those who come after us. And it takes more than giving up one's car to "walk the walk". Fossil fuels are involved in everything we consume and use from food to plastics to telecommunications. It's virtually impossible not to consume fossil fuels in one way or another, but that shouldn't mean that anyone concerned about climate change should be labeled a hypocrite. It's about recognizing a potential problem and working to fix it from the inside; it's not about living in a cave. The system can only be changed from the inside since that is where we all operate.

    And listen, there are far greater reasons in my opinion to wean ourselves from fossil fuels other than global warming including ozone pollution, volatile chemical emissions, 45000+ deaths a year from accidents, wars over oil, oil spills, habitat destruction, and so on. If climate change, actual or possible, is the impetus for making that break, then so be it.

  • Grand Teton Puts Down Another Bear   6 years 46 weeks ago

    So, when do they begin the sensible course of action......close the park until people can act responsibly? Hopefully, the winter snows will come early and often.

  • Private Party At Charlestown Navy Yard Doesn't Lack Alcohol   6 years 46 weeks ago

    I would just like to add that the parks were set aside for the benefit and enjoyement of the people. The parks were meant to be used!!
    Mather and Albright both believed in recreation first, most times at the expense of the resource!! In the begining park service shot wolves (so visitors could see more deer and elk), they fed the bears (so visitors could take their picture), they built large spacious hotels in the most pristine areas (so visitors had a comfortable place to sleep)...
    I'm sure others on this site, can think of others.
    Second, Check it out most of our historical sites have come into the park service system after they failed as private businesses. Local cities and not for private organizations expected the federal government to come in and protect their site. Why do people believe if a private organization is not making money on a site that somehow sticking a park service arrowhead on the site with no operating budget is going to turn things around??
    Well guess what the federal government doesn't have the money, the National Park Service does not have the money to continue bailing out these small nationally insignificant places.
    Why is it the park service keeps crying it doesn't have enough money to protect its 391 sites, congress keeps getting upset with the park service cuz they don't know where the money is going, but yet congress and the park service keep adding more sites to the system??
    My belief is we need to stop relying on the federal government to save all of our recreational, historical, cultural, and natural areas. Everyone from every sector needs to step up to the plate and do their part.
    And on a last note a pet peeve of mine... Law Enforcement Rangers are Police Officers, they carry federal commissions and are authorized to carry firearms, conduct investigations, and make arrests!!

  • Private Party At Charlestown Navy Yard Doesn't Lack Alcohol   6 years 46 weeks ago

    "On an earlier comment, the "guy in the yellow shirt" who stopped a visitor from entering the Navy Yard, that
    was one of the law enforcement fellows...funny they have "POLICE" on the back of their shirt..they wish..."

    From reading above it stated there was one arrest....then who arrested this guy??? I had heard it was one of Park Police Officers. I have seen them arresting drug users before.

  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Lone Hiker, I think your words ring true. Let my email be the first to say there is wisdom in what you have written.

  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Good job Kurt, you have indeed touched a common nerve.

    The cross, be it subtitled Latin or whatever, has through generations become associated with far more than just Christianity. However, in most cases, when initially viewed in virtually any landscape, the primary connotation is one of religion, which is a shame. I too hold no particular religious affiliation, but cannot say that I find this symbol offensive. If the intent of the memorial was religious or meant to inflame, as would be the cast with the broken cross, or whatever stupid symbol is currently in vogue with mideastern terror groups, then indeed removal would be the proper response. But I also agree that the obelisk, flower garden, "eternal" bunsen burner, hall of mirrors or many other alternatives would serve quite well in it's sted.

    Also, let's not make the assumption that the symbol itself represents the hypocracy of those factions that
    use(d) it for their rallying point. Purtians killed out of fear and public subjugation. Cathloics killed to spread Catholicism throughout "pagan" lands. Protestants killed too, as did Baptists, Agnostics, Mormons, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Judaists, and of course, Muslims. But the cross is also a widely accepted tribute to fallen soldiers. along with victims of drunk drivers, genocide, racism, etc. It is a symbol that honors death, strange as that sounds. Nobody needs be reminded that a certain religious leader was NOT the first nor the last nor the only human being put to death on the cross, just the most popular. But I also recall the white cross being utilized as a symbol of peace. Boy will I get e-mails on this one.

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Amen vink80! I could not have said it better!

    The last time that it was a widely accepted notion of science that nature was something that remains in a fixed and unchanging state was when Aristotle was tutoring a young and impressionable Alexander the Great.

    I'd like to see everyone that is so hell-fired sure that humans are causing global warming to start walking the walk. I'd like to know when you're going to give up your cars and stop using your energy consuming electronic devices and stop taking all those unnecessary treks to national parks using internal combustion power.

    Why don't we all go live in caves again and crap on the ground. This whole issue has more to do with those among us with a deep seated disdain for modern life and the supposed miseries it visits upon poor old Mother Earth. It has little to do with hard science. It has more to do with imposing restrictions on human freedom than with any concrete evidence that it will save the our sacred mother from her delinquent and thoughtless children.

    I'll make a prediction: the earth is going to get cooler in the next ten years. I mean it! The earth is going to be a colder place by 2017. Anyone willing to place a bet? I'm as confident as Julian Simon was in betting Paul Ehrlich back in 1980.

    In the meantime Al Gore needs to stop eating meat (what with all this cow farting going on) and stop traveling by Lear jet. I know, I know, he bought his carbon offsets from the officially sanctioned Church of Environmental Salvation but he really should start setting a better example for those of us who don't have access and the spare cash to tithe to such exalted and rarefied institutions.

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    I'm not particularly enthralled with the prospects for the future either. And to Jr. Ranger, I have six of my own who I am most concerned about, but to claim that the old farts aren't doing anything and the younger generation is spearheading the movement isn't at all accurate. Maybe due to having lived through other global issues, the threat of nuclear meltdown between nations, exploding populations, dwindling resources, and other events have lead a certain segment of the population to what I refer to as a more measured response. Yes, things need to be changed, but as I mentioned, change to what degree, where, and how? First, when you're figuring on changing things globally, it can't in all praticality be done quickly. Mankinds record on our knee-jerk reactions reads like a list of the "Greatest Debacles in the History of Earth", and maybe that is something that more people need to be aware of prior to demanding instant change. Second, we as a country still tend toward this topic as a political, not social issue. Sadly, by the time attitudes change it may indeed be too late. In our system of geovernment, rarely is anything undertaken, no matter how socially important, without profits driving the equation. One possible answer is to learn how to generate billions by cleaning up our collective act, then at least the econimic engine will drive the solution to it's proper end. Lastly, I under NO circumstances suggest that cattle are solely responsible. Methane is a byproduct of numerous processes in our environment. But the study that I referred to was independently commissioned by a "non-political" entity, that is, someone OUTSIDE of this country with no agenda to follow. The numbers are quite staggering in terms of total output, and the reductive capability of this gas is not to be questioned.

    Al Gore is correct in bringing this issue to light, but was hardly the first to promote environmental change. I suggest that he also promote behavioral change, and start walking the walk as he encourages the general public to do. As a leader, you're totally ineffective unless examples are set and followed. Just ask "W"......

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago


  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    It's tricky to respond posts like this (but watch me try anyway :) ). The best I can do I suppose is keep it personal. I'm an atheist. I'm also an occasional visitor to the Mojave preserve and have seen the cross. Am I deeply offended the cross is there? No. I'm regaled by Christian imagery everywhere I look, and quite honestly a bit numb to it.

    Am I offended? Yes.

    Like it or not the Latin cross is a symbol that carries many deep emotions across the entire spectrum, both positive and negative. For me when I see the Latin cross I feel frustration with what I consider to be an irrational, unreasonable, and unsustainable world view. I see crusades and wars. I see witch burnings, intolerance, hypocrisy, bigotry, racism and molestation. This is what I feel and can't be argued. Do I want references to religion (all religions) removed from money, pledges, government facilities and services? Yes. Do I honestly expect to see that? No.

    From a very personal point of view crosses like this bother more than some of the other things because I go to places like the Mojave preserve to get away and recharge, and I don't like the reminder. If it's a war memorial that's wanted let's compromise and put something else up there like a nice black stone obelisk. Or better yet carve one from the native stone that both blends in and stands out. I'll help.

    Longish indulgent personal answer to a short non-personal legal-type question, an essential part of a successful democracy.


  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Lone Hiker, good points and well taken but that does not satisfy my curiousity why you didn't blame this all on the cockroachs (emiittance of huge amounts of methane gas). In jest!
    However, in all this being said by you, don't you agree that Al Gore has taken the right steps to prepare us for unimaginable consequences of doing NOTHING about global warming. I don't see him as a alarmist in the slightest degree, but as a concerned private citizen who wishes to present the argument that something should be done about global warming. At least he has brought the ball to Bush's court who dribbles away from the issue (and whom has turned a deaf hear...but listens well to corporate money...that is the big polluters!). I have profound grievances against the Bush & Cheney Administration for there inability to work in earnest with world leaders to enact (and mandate) a policy for carbon negative...instead they opt to run the clock out with bureaucratic paper wrangling and public spiel of nonsense on the issue of global warming. Hopefully, the next administration will do a far better job and have the courage and dedication to foster a holistic and comprehensive policy with world leaders on the subject of global warming. I have spent 45 years working outdoors (in the parks) and I see my backyard slowly dying. That's why I truly believe Rachel Carson and Al Gore did something that is RIGHT!

  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Tom, I appreciate your diligence in tracking down the court order. But I would disagree with your analysis that this case is "not about religious symbols at all."

    Indeed, had Mr. Buono not initially complained about the cross in the first place this case would not have taken root. That the latest legal twist stems from an attempt by Congress to have the Park Service divvy up the preserve so as to place the cross on private late is merely an aside that sprung from efforts to keep the cross in place.

    The case's collision over separation of state and church clearly is laid out in the court's initial paragraph:

    Our court previously held that the presence of
    the cross in the Preserve—which consists of more than 90
    percent federally-owned land, including the land where the
    cross is situated—violates the Establishment Clause of the
    United States Constitution. Buono v. Norton, 371 F.3d 543
    (9th Cir. 2004). We affirmed the district court’s judgment permanently
    enjoining the government “from permitting the display
    of the Latin cross in the area of Sunrise Rock in the
    Mojave National Preserve.”

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    If only practical and effective solutions were that easy to implement. Environmental impact, usually in for form of irreversible damage, is the track record of man-made alterations to local geographies around the nation. Dams generate hydroelectric power in the southwest, at the cost of plant and animal habitats, allowing for exotic species to gain hold and further alter the terrain. Accidental introduction of zebra mussels and Asian carp threaten the eastern waterways. There are too many examples to list, encompassing agriculture sources, exotic plant species and a wide variety of mammalian, avian, aquatic and even bacterial life forms. None of these issues, though well documented, have been effectively managed, despite the agreement of various governing bodies that "something needs to be done before the landscape is forever altered".....and yet, we expect policy makers here to eradicate an issue that is global in origin, and while many of the contributors to the source of the issue simply aren't willing to "adjust" the internal consumption of raw materials that are utilized in developing their economic development?

    Specific to the park system's ability or lack thereof to contemplate and effectively adjust for environmental modifications, in my opinion, no, they aren't equipped in any sense of the word. Financially they haven't the resources or manpower to enact effective changes. Informationally (or scientificially) they haven't the data to plan effectively. Say what you will of the sources, that indeed is NOT the issue. Rate of change, past and anticipated, determine the best course of action, and a bit of research will show that rates vary by location due to multiple factor. So how quickly to act, where to act, and how MUCH to act become a complex issue. The evidence clearly shows some degree of environmental changes, but how the impacted species are responding without intervention is a relatively new and unfortunately poorly researched topic.

    Talking politicians, there's a novel concept. Let's face it, the last time poilticians decided they HAD to do something was in response to the tragedy that was Spet. 11, and we're still living with the remnants of that whole debacle. The joke that is Homeland Security, an ineffective war that refused to target the real issues and ring-leader at the root of the attacks, thousands dead, billions wasted, no end in sight. And you somehow interpret through an opinion on one issue that I align myself with either party of nitwits that foster the spread of world-wide democratic tyranny? Democrat or Republican, you're a loser either way. Bill was no better than George, Ron was no better than Bill, John was no better that Dick. Honestly is not exactly a strong suit up on the Hill. And insofar as representing the constituents, unless there's money to be had, you should know better.

    Finally, the "bogus" science that I represent....I should have known better than to inject chemical processes into this discussion. Mankind is indeed responsible, but to rest the blame SOLELY at the feet or industrial causes is simple not accurate. Kindly put, the largest contributor to the methane gas that is most responsible for the chemical reduction (again, not referring to the overall loss, but the process by which ozone is REDUCED, or molecules are split, chemically speaking) are domestic cattle. You've no idea, during the course of their digestive process, or the conversion of cellulose to enegry, the volumes of this gas are produced and released into the environment. Yes people, cow farts, along with other species of the ruminant family. As these populations have exploded into "third world" areas with the encouragement of the US during the past century, coupled with slash and burn farming techniques, general deforestation, leading to the current situation of the planet's inability to effectively "compost" our man-made gasses, maybe you can get a better sense that this simple solution of reducing one variable of an equation does not balance the equation. The entire point was that if not done carefully, changing on side increases the value of the other. Basic algebra. Now I'm REALLY in trouble.......But I NEVER said that things should remain status quo. And again I never pretended to be a proponent of EITHER side of this issue. Bush and Gore have about as equal an chance at being right. Their motives are both definately questionable, and neither is a shining poster-boy for their team. That is why I encourage your own personal investigation, preferably incorporating multiple sources that are not sponsored by dollars generated from left or right-wing special interest groups. And careful of the G-8 studies, they have a particular stake in this as well. But there are MANY independent international reports done with "good" science, as opposed to my allegedly "bogus" made-in-the-USA science, which merit further reading. The simple fact is there is no quick fix to this situation. Glaciers cannot regenerate overnight, sea temperatures are notoriously fickle, and land masses do not change from grassland to desert in a generation. Action is indeed required, by a measured response is cautioned lest greater damage befall the entire system. If that be the case, then we are indeed, as a species, screwed. THAT is what I'm trying to avoid. And if it be true that we're screwed already, as some would have you believe, then a slow demise should be or goal. Don't turn up the heat and burn the house down just because it's already on fire.

  • Federal Real ID May (Not) Be Required For Park Visit   6 years 46 weeks ago

    What's your phone number? 867-5309? :)

    Jim Macdonald
    The Magic of Yellowstone
    Yellowstone Newspaper
    Jim's Eclectic World

  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    I find it interesting that no one has bothered to read the actual court opinion, which just affirms my earlier point that “the public debate has been poorly informed and relies more on opinion than historical fact.”

    A quick reading of the opinion reveals that this case is not about religious symbols at all, but about whether national parks can be sliced up to allow special zones where private interest groups can avoid federal regulation. The federal judges of have said no, and anyone who values our parks and opposes the growing tide of privatization should applaud this ruling. I have posted more details at my site.

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Some who've commented are missing the point of the GAO report. Putting the issue of the cause of climate change aside for the moment, this report shows that field people in the NPS are lacking any guidance or consistency of approach on how to address the changes that are already being witnessed, and those that are projected to occur.

    The NPS mandate by Congress, from the 1916 Organic Act, is to conserve the resources of the parks "unimpaired" for the "enjoyment of future generations." Federal courts have consistently ruled that this is a single mission, that the NPS must do both, but that the conservation mission is paramount because without conservation the enjoyment of future generations will be compromised.

    So how does the NPS deal with climate change-induced effects in the parks, considering the "conserve unimpaired" mandate? Should park managers accept the changes as inevitable, try to artificially prop up species habitats to prevent their loss as the climate warms, establish refuges and transplant species to parks that might have more hospitable climates for vulnerable species, etc? Right now there is nothing in policy and, until recently, there has been little assistance from Washington to address this. If we are to have a national system of national park (and the Congress has also mandated that we think of it as a system with interrelated parts that contribute to the whole), then we should have a consistent approach. Not necessarily a cookbook where every park does exactly the same thing... but sideboards to guide local action, so we collectively move in the direction of conservation and avoid gross errors which may do more harm to the system and its components.

    THAT is what the GAO report revealed... that consistency and guidance are lacking. The good news is that the workshop which GAO reported on began a discussion which is moving quickly now and many people from all over the NPS are involved in trying to determine what the policy guidance should look like. GAO usually just reports on what's happening, but this time their inquiry stimulated needed action.

    NOW... back to the causes of climate change.

    Here are some direct quotes from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group I Summary for Policymakers released in February of this year (

    **Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have increased
    markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values
    determined from ice cores spanning many thousands of years. The global increases
    in carbon dioxide concentration are due primarily to fossil fuel use and land-use change, while those of methane and nitrous oxide are primarily due to agriculture. (page 2)

    **In this Summary for Policymakers, the following terms have been used to indicate the assessed likelihood, using expert judgment, of an outcome or a result: Virtually certain > 99% probability of occurrence, Extremely likely > 95%, Very likely > 90%, Likely > 66%, More likely than not > 50%, Unlikely < 33%, Very unlikely < 10%, Extremely unlikely < 5%. (page 3 footnote 6)

    **Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level. (page 5)

    **Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations... Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including ocean warming, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns. (page 10)

    The IPCC report is considered to be a conservative, consensus document. Even the Bush administration accepts its findings. DOI has now established a climate change task force (perhaps stimulated by the GAO workshop) and Deputy Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett on 6/25/07 said to the group (this is a paraphrase) that the administration does not question the scientific consensus put forth in the 2007 IPCC report that climate is warming and human activities are the leading cause. She went on to say that the task force should accept that and move forward with recommendations of how to reduce emissions and manage lands under climate change scenarios.

    So… while the GAO report was critical, and it remains to be seen what will come of the DOI task force, there’s positive movement.

  • Federal Real ID May (Not) Be Required For Park Visit   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Just last week I was at some big box store, paying cash for whatever it was I was buying, and the cashier looks at me with a straight face and says "I need your phone number" before he'll ring up the sale and give me my change.

    My response: "You're kidding, right?"
    After a blank stare and an awkward silence, I just said "No thanks" so the cashier could continue.

    He probably has no clue why I reacted that way. Today's kids are getting brainwashed into thinking this is the way it has to be. My advice would be to appeal to them directly Jim. They're in the most danger of having their brains turned off, and if you can get them excited about it, most likely to rise up against the trend.

    I've been giving out fake zip codes to cashiers for years now. It's fun to mess with the system. Sometimes I throw in a Canadian postal code just to watch them squirm. 99783 is a good one to use -- Wales, Alaska -- about as close to Russia as you can get.

  • Search Under Way in Rocky Mountain National Park for Fort Collins Couple   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Finally -- a happy ending.


    Rocky Mountain National Park (CO)
    Missing Couple Found After Lengthy Search

    A major, inter-agency search for a couple who failed to return from a hiking trip in the park last weekend came to a happy conclusion yesterday morning when they were spotted by a Civil Air Patrol searcher who’d seen smoke coming from a cliff on the other side of the Big South trailhead. Terry Jones, 56, and Marion Jones, 49, were found to be tired but in good health and able to walk out of the area with the assistance of SAR personnel. The Jones’ were dropped off at the Chapin Pass trailhead on Fall River Road in the northern portion of the park last Saturday. They had a backcountry permit to stay at the Flatiron backcountry campsite near Hague Creek that night. On Sunday, their plan was to hike north via the Cache la Poudre River trail and Big South trail out to the Big South trailhead, but did not show up as planned. A search was begun earlier in the week. The Jones’ told authorities that they took a wrong turn and decided to stay put at the location where they were found once they determined that they were lost. Their greatest concern was that they were unable to notify their family and friends to let them know they were okay. They said that they survived on mushrooms and berries after using everything in their backpacks.
    [Submitted by Kyle Patterson, Rocky Mountain NP; Kathy Messick, Larimer County Sheriff's Office]

  • Should the NPS Be Given Mount St. Helens?   6 years 46 weeks ago

    I agree, I worked for the Forest Service in a Ranger Station very near to the Monument and they do not know how to manage an area for the person that just wants to visit the area. Thier specialty is managing it for many uses, thus thier motto. The best example is thier pass system, for most people this is very, very confusing. A typical visitor sees Mt. St. Helens National Volcanic Monument and automaticly think it is part of the National Park Service and all it's standard nuances.

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    If I may so bold...

    No one is talking about the NPS taking action to reverse climate change -- just learning how to deal with it and to take action. The reason for the climate change doesn't really matter. Important questions like "Is the intensity of storms going so silt up this river and lake long before we expected it to?" or "Will this reservoir have the water in it to supply southern california with its water needs 100 years from now?" or "Does it make sense to build a new Jazz Site in New Orleans if we're expecting more frequent hurricanes of higher intensity?" or any number of questions that might be asked and considered for the future. The US military makes all sorts of contingency plans -- most of which never come to fruition. Why shouldn't the Department of Interior help NPS to do the same? It goes way beyond needing to rename a park.

  • Judge Orders Cross Removed from Mojave National Preserve   6 years 46 weeks ago

    It's too bad there are lots of Christians out there giving Christianity a bad name, but that's what it's come to. Too many "arrogant prosletizers" trying to drum up "business" and "followers" and let it be said -- "money". And now that religious leaders are putting their paws into politics, people are lashing out against it. While I'm sure the guy claiming to be offended probably wasn't, you can bet that if any other religious symbol was up on that hill, Christians would be lined up around the block to cast stones at it.

    But hey, this topic has opened up a tanker trucks full of worms. Do we remove the crosses from Arlington Cemetery? Remove the bible from Jimmy Carter's National Historic Site? Remove the doorknobs, gateposts, and steeple tops from San Antonio Missions? Take down all the roadside memorials to dead commuters along the interstate? Require that the Whitman Mission NHS visitor center be sensitive to Jewish and Islamic folk? Remove the Bible from the presidential swearing-in ceremony? Take the David Berger Memorial off the roster of NPS sites?

    Of course not. But it's very interesting to see where the government draws these lines of distinction. One administration does one thing and the next administration, if they feel strongly enough about it, can attempt to undo it. If you look around, it's easy to find inconsistencies in application of these types of decisions, and that will always be the case so long as the pendulum swings in the oval office and the supreme court grows older, wiser, and occasionally brings in fresh blood. One administration made a huge chunk of Alaska a National Park and the next breaks it into pieces to allow mining, drilling, etc. Our government is a flip-flopper.

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    jr._ranger, your comments tonight made my day!

  • GAO: Interior Failed to Provide Park Service With Tools To Cope With Climate Change   6 years 46 weeks ago

    If I maybe so bold....

    Before you start berating people for listening to

    bad sources of information
    , please consider the following:

    1. I will never be able to see the glaciers of Glacier National Park, the famed snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro, or any number of other threatened resources because by the time I can afford to travel to see these sights, they will be gone - thanks to humans or 'nature's cycles'. Period. The chance to see these things will be taken away from me forever. There is no going back. Why? Because the people in power refused to act when they had the chance. Thanks, guys.

    2. You people (yes, I mean YOU PEOPLE) out there who disregard global warming are the people who are in power today, and will die soon, to be blunt. It is MY generation and MY future that will be most affected by climate change, and it is MY future you are screwing around with.

    3. Regardless of whether or not climate change is caused by humans, by not doing anything, those people who sit idle are taking away my chance at living in a stable world. I do not, and will not accept this. I alone will determine my future.

    And in case you haven't noticed, we're [students are] doing a whole heck of a lot more to deal with it than anyone else. The high school and college students of America are taking our future into our own hands, and out of those who do nothing but dither and squabble. The Sierra Student Coalition registered over 70 victories this past school year on college campuses in the Climate Campus Challenge, with 13 colleges signing on the become carbon neutral. And the momentum keeps building - Towson University agreed to become carbon neutral just this past week, and the start of November will bring thousands of students together for PowerShift 2007 - the 1st ever international student conference on climate change.

    What have the politicians done? Ummmm - nothing.

    Oh, wait - they have talked. That always helps.

    "Good Planets are Hard to Find"
    President, CHS SPEAK (CHS Students Promoting Environmental Action & Knowledge)
    Founder and President, CHS Campus Greens
    Member, Sierra Student Coalition Conservation Committee Subcommittee for Campaigns and Materials

  • Federal Real ID May (Not) Be Required For Park Visit   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Jon, I definitely agree with you. And, I share your pessimism; I'm just not willing to give up. So, again, I'll ask what people are willing to do to organize. I put that out there not simply as a challenge I expect to fall on deaf ears, but one that's real. When I land in the Greater Yellowstone region, this is the kind of organizing I expect I'll be doing. So, it's a feeler out there to see who might be willing to bite. We can't simply be cheerleaders, and though I definitely agree that a third party President is not going to happen, all that leads me to think of is what other means would be effective. I'm interested in meeting and organizing with people interested in making that happen.

    Jim Macdonald
    The Magic of Yellowstone
    Yellowstone Newspaper
    Jim's Eclectic World

  • Federal Real ID May (Not) Be Required For Park Visit   6 years 46 weeks ago

    Jim, I'm not in favor of any of it. It's just that each little piece of our identity that gets collected by this company and that government entity is faced with a pathetic wimper from the masses against it, and the march toward everyone knowing everything about everyone continues. We can scream about it as individuals all we want, but until someone steps in as President of this country who's not a Democrat and not a Republican, nothing will change, and it will get worse. Money drives the two parties against each other, money from big business who wants all that information, and the government has access to most if not all that information when they want or need it. The fact that the government may collect it a little more directly doesn't really change much at all, except perhaps allow them to nab terrorists a little quicker than they might otherwise. The damage has already been done and it's doubtful there's any going back at this point.