The video works on this version. Click on the play arrow to view and hear the fourth video short take on Cable Access Television Cox channel 18 in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Energy companies advocate state rules to keep pollution legal
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Group to advocate for energy, environment policies
By Jason Wiest
THE MORNING NEWS
LITTLE ROCK -- A new group comprised largely of energy companies announced Tuesday it will advocate for energy, environmental and economic development policies in the state, some of which could be contrary to those of the state's global warming panel.
Bob Lamb, chairman of the newly formed group Progress Arkansas, said recommendations made by the Governor's Commission on Global Warming would provide fodder for analysis and that the group will lobby its positions on the recommendations.
"I would think there would probably be some issues that would come out of this report that this group will support. There may be other issues that they may not support," Lamb said, declining to be more specific.
While the group has not yet discussed the commission's recent report to be submitted to the governor and Legislature, it is not likely to take a position on Southwestern Electric Power Co.'s proposed $1.5 billion coal-fired power plant in Hempstead County, Lamb said.
By an 11-10 vote, the commission recommended a moratorium on coal-fired plants until technology to capture and store carbon emissions is fully developed.
"This group does not have any position on the SWEPCO coal plant at all, and I would not think they would take one," Lamb said. "They've already gone through a lot of process. This group's just getting started. We're not in a position to join the discussion."
Lamb formerly served as executive vice president of the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce-Associated Industries of Arkansas, as well as an officer, director and vice president of community development for the Arkansas Western Gas Co. He also is a former lobbyist for Southwestern Energy Co. and its subsidiaries. Southwestern is the largest natural gas developer in the Fayetteville Shale play.
Lamb said Tuesday he is not currently acting as a lobbyist for Progress Arkansas but that he may serve in that capacity as the group lobbies the Arkansas Legislature and the U.S. Congress.
He said the group likely will advocate its position on a number of recently opened dockets at the state Public Service Commission regarding rule-making, rate-making and energy efficiency.
"Perhaps out of those dockets we'll develop some legislative initiatives that we might could support," he said.
The group will also work to create jobs in Arkansas, specifically service and manufacturing jobs to replace recent losses in those areas, he said.
Scooter Hardin, spokesman for the Arkansas Economic Development Commission, said the group would provide welcome assistance.
"As a state agency, we're certainly supportive of organizations such as Progress Arkansas and the goal that this organization is working toward," he said. "We'll cooperate and work with Progress Arkansas."
Lamb said that while the group will seek to assist economic growth and increase the quality of life in Arkansas, there are also many challenges in the energy field.
"We want to be supportive of ensuring that Arkansas continues to have a reliable source of energy, both electricity and natural gas at the retail level," he said.
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Group to advocate for energy, environment policies
By Jason Wiest
THE MORNING NEWS
LITTLE ROCK -- A new group comprised largely of energy companies announced Tuesday it will advocate for energy, environmental and economic development policies in the state, some of which could be contrary to those of the state's global warming panel.
Bob Lamb, chairman of the newly formed group Progress Arkansas, said recommendations made by the Governor's Commission on Global Warming would provide fodder for analysis and that the group will lobby its positions on the recommendations.
"I would think there would probably be some issues that would come out of this report that this group will support. There may be other issues that they may not support," Lamb said, declining to be more specific.
While the group has not yet discussed the commission's recent report to be submitted to the governor and Legislature, it is not likely to take a position on Southwestern Electric Power Co.'s proposed $1.5 billion coal-fired power plant in Hempstead County, Lamb said.
By an 11-10 vote, the commission recommended a moratorium on coal-fired plants until technology to capture and store carbon emissions is fully developed.
"This group does not have any position on the SWEPCO coal plant at all, and I would not think they would take one," Lamb said. "They've already gone through a lot of process. This group's just getting started. We're not in a position to join the discussion."
Lamb formerly served as executive vice president of the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce-Associated Industries of Arkansas, as well as an officer, director and vice president of community development for the Arkansas Western Gas Co. He also is a former lobbyist for Southwestern Energy Co. and its subsidiaries. Southwestern is the largest natural gas developer in the Fayetteville Shale play.
Lamb said Tuesday he is not currently acting as a lobbyist for Progress Arkansas but that he may serve in that capacity as the group lobbies the Arkansas Legislature and the U.S. Congress.
He said the group likely will advocate its position on a number of recently opened dockets at the state Public Service Commission regarding rule-making, rate-making and energy efficiency.
"Perhaps out of those dockets we'll develop some legislative initiatives that we might could support," he said.
The group will also work to create jobs in Arkansas, specifically service and manufacturing jobs to replace recent losses in those areas, he said.
Scooter Hardin, spokesman for the Arkansas Economic Development Commission, said the group would provide welcome assistance.
"As a state agency, we're certainly supportive of organizations such as Progress Arkansas and the goal that this organization is working toward," he said. "We'll cooperate and work with Progress Arkansas."
Lamb said that while the group will seek to assist economic growth and increase the quality of life in Arkansas, there are also many challenges in the energy field.
"We want to be supportive of ensuring that Arkansas continues to have a reliable source of energy, both electricity and natural gas at the retail level," he said.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette editorial endorses Lioneld Jordan for mayor
For Lioneld Jordan
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Northwest Edition
Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/241825
LIONELD JORDAN has a reputation for working hard. He’s the city alderman in Fayetteville who’s never missed a city council meeting in his nearly eight years in office. Alderman Jordan has brought the same dedication to the monthly meetings he’s held in his ward.
He’s also known for his thorough knowledge of city government, for his ability to understand complicated city business, and his just plain love of his hometown.
One of the candidates Lioneld Jordan is running against is the incumbent, Dan Coody. Mayor Coody is winding up his eighth year as mayor with a mixed record. He’s certainly done some good things for Fayetteville. Like establishing the current system of trails in the city. And he talks up environmental issues, even if he hasn’t always lived up to his own standards.
But the Coody administration has had some notable shortcomings, too. There’s the $ 60-million-plus cost overrun for the expansion of the city’s wastewater system. The project came in three years late and had to be bailed out with an increase in the city sales tax. Then there’s the stalled development the mayor backed on the site of the old Mountain Inn. Instead of a big hotel, the city got a big hole, which is now to become a big parking lot. That’ll be an improvement, but not much of one.
The mayor’s also presided over a takeover of the city’s Government Channel. The biggest result has been an end to its forums, where issues were discussed openly and fairly. A fear of fair and open discussion is not a good sign in a mayor, especially a mayor of a town as freespirited and open to argument as Fayetteville. What a shame.
Mayor Coody, maybe reflecting what he learned in the military, says a city’s chief executive is responsible for what happens during his administration. We agree. The wastewater project, the downtown hole in the ground, the canceling of issue forums... he must take responsibility for all of them along with the city’s accomplishments during his tenure.
As an alderman, Lioneld Jordan hasn’t always been right. But he’s consistently shown a willingness to dig into issues and take every side into account. As his supporters have noticed, when he disagrees with anybody, he tells them why. And his explanations tend to be well thought-out. (It’s hard to imagine him shutting down any public forums. )
His long service on important committees, such as the Street, Water-and-Sewer, and Equipment committees have given him a thorough understanding of how the city works. He does his homework. And he’s served as vice mayor, which would be good experience for the top job.
If it’s time for a change in Fayetteville, and it is, its name is Lioneld Jordan. That’s why we’re endorsing him today.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Northwest Edition
Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/241825
LIONELD JORDAN has a reputation for working hard. He’s the city alderman in Fayetteville who’s never missed a city council meeting in his nearly eight years in office. Alderman Jordan has brought the same dedication to the monthly meetings he’s held in his ward.
He’s also known for his thorough knowledge of city government, for his ability to understand complicated city business, and his just plain love of his hometown.
One of the candidates Lioneld Jordan is running against is the incumbent, Dan Coody. Mayor Coody is winding up his eighth year as mayor with a mixed record. He’s certainly done some good things for Fayetteville. Like establishing the current system of trails in the city. And he talks up environmental issues, even if he hasn’t always lived up to his own standards.
But the Coody administration has had some notable shortcomings, too. There’s the $ 60-million-plus cost overrun for the expansion of the city’s wastewater system. The project came in three years late and had to be bailed out with an increase in the city sales tax. Then there’s the stalled development the mayor backed on the site of the old Mountain Inn. Instead of a big hotel, the city got a big hole, which is now to become a big parking lot. That’ll be an improvement, but not much of one.
The mayor’s also presided over a takeover of the city’s Government Channel. The biggest result has been an end to its forums, where issues were discussed openly and fairly. A fear of fair and open discussion is not a good sign in a mayor, especially a mayor of a town as freespirited and open to argument as Fayetteville. What a shame.
Mayor Coody, maybe reflecting what he learned in the military, says a city’s chief executive is responsible for what happens during his administration. We agree. The wastewater project, the downtown hole in the ground, the canceling of issue forums... he must take responsibility for all of them along with the city’s accomplishments during his tenure.
As an alderman, Lioneld Jordan hasn’t always been right. But he’s consistently shown a willingness to dig into issues and take every side into account. As his supporters have noticed, when he disagrees with anybody, he tells them why. And his explanations tend to be well thought-out. (It’s hard to imagine him shutting down any public forums. )
His long service on important committees, such as the Street, Water-and-Sewer, and Equipment committees have given him a thorough understanding of how the city works. He does his homework. And he’s served as vice mayor, which would be good experience for the top job.
If it’s time for a change in Fayetteville, and it is, its name is Lioneld Jordan. That’s why we’re endorsing him today.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Monday, October 27, 2008
Environmental workgroup meeting at 7 p.m. November 5 in room 2267 of the Bell Engineering Building of the University of Arkansas
We have a new location for Wed. Nov. 5 Environmental Working Group meeting.
NOV. 5: BELL ENGINEERING CENTER ON DICKSON ST. RM. 2267. (See Bob's
instructions to the classroom below)
Thank you, Bob!
Thanks to all the sub-committees for your intervening work prior to our
getting together again.
Please be sure and let Barbara Boland know if your sub-group needs any maps
for our meeting to be most productive.
See you all next Wed. Nov. 5 at 7 pm.
Delia Haak, working group chairman
NOV. 5: BELL ENGINEERING CENTER ON DICKSON ST. RM. 2267. (See Bob's
instructions to the classroom below)
Thank you, Bob!
Thanks to all the sub-committees for your intervening work prior to our
getting together again.
Please be sure and let Barbara Boland know if your sub-group needs any maps
for our meeting to be most productive.
See you all next Wed. Nov. 5 at 7 pm.
Delia Haak, working group chairman
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Mark Kinion the clear choice for Ward 2 seat on City Council. He has built a resume of actual service to this community.
Mark Kinion
AGE: 51
EDUCATION: University of Arkansas, BS, food science and technology
OCCUPATION: Retired senior executive for GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals
LENGTH OF RESIDENCY IN THE AREA YOU WISH TO SERVE: About 20 years
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Fayetteville Housing Authority, board of commissioners, past vice-chairperson;
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, member;
Partners for Better Housing, board of directors, founding board member;
Fayetteville Council of Neighborhoods, past chairman; Wilson Park Neighborhood Association, past coordinator;
Humane Society of the Ozarks, past president, past finance committee chairman, lifetime member;
Ozark StageWorks, board of directors, financial development chairman; Planned Parenthood of Arkansas/Eastern Oklahoma, advisory board;
University of Arkansas Alumni Association, lifetime member;
United Way of Pulaski County, former vice president of campaigns;
No. 1 issues: Transparent government, open communication, mutual respect and trust.
No citizen should feel disenfranchised from local political activity. All residents should feel they have an avenue to be heard and know their opinion is respected and valued.
I will have regular Ward 2 meetings to let people know relevant information in a timely manner regarding issues facing our city. Additionally, I will encourage open and mutually respectful dialog between the constituency, other members of the City Council, city officials and city administrative divisions.
Trust will be built by promising transparent and measurable actions in regard to economic, environmental and social impact of city projects.
By open dialogue, transparent action, and measurable benchmarks accountability can be established.
This open communication model will be applied to every issue and concern.
AGE: 51
EDUCATION: University of Arkansas, BS, food science and technology
OCCUPATION: Retired senior executive for GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals
LENGTH OF RESIDENCY IN THE AREA YOU WISH TO SERVE: About 20 years
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Fayetteville Housing Authority, board of commissioners, past vice-chairperson;
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials, member;
Partners for Better Housing, board of directors, founding board member;
Fayetteville Council of Neighborhoods, past chairman; Wilson Park Neighborhood Association, past coordinator;
Humane Society of the Ozarks, past president, past finance committee chairman, lifetime member;
Ozark StageWorks, board of directors, financial development chairman; Planned Parenthood of Arkansas/Eastern Oklahoma, advisory board;
University of Arkansas Alumni Association, lifetime member;
United Way of Pulaski County, former vice president of campaigns;
No. 1 issues: Transparent government, open communication, mutual respect and trust.
No citizen should feel disenfranchised from local political activity. All residents should feel they have an avenue to be heard and know their opinion is respected and valued.
I will have regular Ward 2 meetings to let people know relevant information in a timely manner regarding issues facing our city. Additionally, I will encourage open and mutually respectful dialog between the constituency, other members of the City Council, city officials and city administrative divisions.
Trust will be built by promising transparent and measurable actions in regard to economic, environmental and social impact of city projects.
By open dialogue, transparent action, and measurable benchmarks accountability can be established.
This open communication model will be applied to every issue and concern.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Global Warming Commission approves revision of report
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Global Warming Commission approves final revisions to report
By John Lyon
THE MORNING NEWS
LITTLE ROCK -- The Arkansas Governor's Commission on Global Warming on Thursday approved final revisions to its report containing 54 recommendations for reducing the state's contributions to climate change.
The 21-member commission was created by an act of the Legislature last year and is required to present its final report to Gov. Mike Beebe and legislators no later than Nov. 1.
The commission's report recommends that Arkansas adopt goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions below 2000 levels by 20 percent by 2020, 35 percent by 2025 and 50 percent by 2035.
The commission includes representatives of several fields, including conservation, industry, government and academia. The panel approved some recommendations unanimously, but it was divided on some votes, including an 11-10 decision to recommend a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the state until technology to capture and store carbon emissions becomes available.
The committee approved a final set of revisions to the report during a meeting Thursday held by conference call. Committee Chairman Rep. Kathy Webb, D-Little Rock, thanked the members for their work.
"I know people have very strong opinions about all of these issues," Webb said. "We did a really fine job. Thank you all for all the time that you've given in the last year on this."
In a period allowed for public comments, Ken Smith, executive director of Arkansas Audubon, told the commission, "Congratulations, all of you, for a great job."
Among the revisions the commission approved Thursday was a slight change to an assertion in the report that peer-reviewed literature is "unanimous" in concluding that human activity is causing climate change. The commission changed "unanimous" to "virtually unanimous."
Steve Cousins, vice president of refining for Lion Oil, said although no vote was taken on whether global warming has a human cause, he knew of "at least three commissioners that are agnostic" on the issue.
The report states that Arkansas' greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than those of the nation as a whole, according to research conducted for the commission by the nonprofit Center for Climate Strategies. From 1990 to 2005, gross emissions in the state increased by 30 percent while national gross emissions rose by 16 percent.
On a per-capita basis, the state's emissions increased by about 10 percent between 1990 and 2005, while national per-capita emissions decreased by 2 percent.
The report notes that Arkansas has large forests which negate some of its greenhouse gas emissions. In 2005, the state's gross emissions accounted for 1.2 percent of national gross emissions, while its net emissions accounted for 1 percent of national net emissions.
Electricity consumption and transportation were the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Arkansas in 2005, accounting for 32 percent and 26 percent, respectively, of the state's gross emissions.
The direct use of fuels such as natural gas, oil products, coal and wood in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors accounted for 18 percent of emissions. The agricultural and forest wildfire sectors together accounted for 14 percent of emissions.
Other sources of emissions included industrial processes, landfills and wastewater management facilities.
The commission analyzed the costs to implement 29 of its recommendations and estimated a net cost of $3.7 billion between 2009 and 2025.
Among other things, the commission recommends new nuclear power plants; a carbon tax program; a consortium to develop renewable energy production facilities and market renewable energy to consumers; and numerous measures to improve energy efficiency.
Web Watch
Governor's Commission On Global Warming
www.arclimatechange.us
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Global Warming Commission approves final revisions to report
By John Lyon
THE MORNING NEWS
LITTLE ROCK -- The Arkansas Governor's Commission on Global Warming on Thursday approved final revisions to its report containing 54 recommendations for reducing the state's contributions to climate change.
The 21-member commission was created by an act of the Legislature last year and is required to present its final report to Gov. Mike Beebe and legislators no later than Nov. 1.
The commission's report recommends that Arkansas adopt goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions below 2000 levels by 20 percent by 2020, 35 percent by 2025 and 50 percent by 2035.
The commission includes representatives of several fields, including conservation, industry, government and academia. The panel approved some recommendations unanimously, but it was divided on some votes, including an 11-10 decision to recommend a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the state until technology to capture and store carbon emissions becomes available.
The committee approved a final set of revisions to the report during a meeting Thursday held by conference call. Committee Chairman Rep. Kathy Webb, D-Little Rock, thanked the members for their work.
"I know people have very strong opinions about all of these issues," Webb said. "We did a really fine job. Thank you all for all the time that you've given in the last year on this."
In a period allowed for public comments, Ken Smith, executive director of Arkansas Audubon, told the commission, "Congratulations, all of you, for a great job."
Among the revisions the commission approved Thursday was a slight change to an assertion in the report that peer-reviewed literature is "unanimous" in concluding that human activity is causing climate change. The commission changed "unanimous" to "virtually unanimous."
Steve Cousins, vice president of refining for Lion Oil, said although no vote was taken on whether global warming has a human cause, he knew of "at least three commissioners that are agnostic" on the issue.
The report states that Arkansas' greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than those of the nation as a whole, according to research conducted for the commission by the nonprofit Center for Climate Strategies. From 1990 to 2005, gross emissions in the state increased by 30 percent while national gross emissions rose by 16 percent.
On a per-capita basis, the state's emissions increased by about 10 percent between 1990 and 2005, while national per-capita emissions decreased by 2 percent.
The report notes that Arkansas has large forests which negate some of its greenhouse gas emissions. In 2005, the state's gross emissions accounted for 1.2 percent of national gross emissions, while its net emissions accounted for 1 percent of national net emissions.
Electricity consumption and transportation were the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Arkansas in 2005, accounting for 32 percent and 26 percent, respectively, of the state's gross emissions.
The direct use of fuels such as natural gas, oil products, coal and wood in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors accounted for 18 percent of emissions. The agricultural and forest wildfire sectors together accounted for 14 percent of emissions.
Other sources of emissions included industrial processes, landfills and wastewater management facilities.
The commission analyzed the costs to implement 29 of its recommendations and estimated a net cost of $3.7 billion between 2009 and 2025.
Among other things, the commission recommends new nuclear power plants; a carbon tax program; a consortium to develop renewable energy production facilities and market renewable energy to consumers; and numerous measures to improve energy efficiency.
Web Watch
Governor's Commission On Global Warming
www.arclimatechange.us
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Environmental conservationist's video clips support Lioneld Jordan for mayor of Fayetteville, Arkansas
Please click on control below each video to play.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Nick Brown Clarifies relation of man and natural world
Guest writer : Conserve and protect
BY NICHOLAS R. BROWN SPECIAL TO THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/240588/
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a unique, diverse collection of ecological systems and the home to caribou, muskoxen, sheep, foxes, moose, wolves, black bears, brown bears, polar bears, and over two dozen other species of mammals. It’s one of the largest, most ecologically intact wildlife refuges in the world.
Recently, columnist Bradley R. Gitz described ANWR as an “uninhabited, pestilence-ridden wasteland.” This thoroughly anthropocentric view of the world—that there are no important existing values if they are not of immediate economic benefit to humans—is the very kind of thinking that has led us to a wide range of environmental problems. As Albert Einstein said, we cannot solve our problems with the same type of thinking that created them.
Our planet, whether you think of it as the Creation, Gaia or simply the third rock, is driven by ecological processes that may or may not be observed and valued by our industrial culture. To assume that an ecosystem is “wasteland” just because there’s no perceived economic value is human arrogance of a very dangerous sort. Political and economic decisions should be made with a biocentric view, which serves human interests and conserves ecological values over a long term.
All ecological systems have values that relate to the continuing healthy existence of the planet, whether we understand the importance of those values or not. This is a general statement that may be discomforting to economists and industrial developers, but it’s just a paraphrase of the well-known and well-understood axiom, everything’s connected to everything else. Ecology, which is the study of interactions among species and between species and their environments, inescapably leads us to this conclusion, though as a science it is silent on its meaning and importance.
Ecological thinking dictates that we assume that there are connections of which we are oblivious and that we accordingly manage ecosystems with precaution. It embodies respect for nature.
ANWR’s selection as a location for a wildlife refuge isn’t accidental. It’s a unique and biodiverse boreal region. One hundred ninety-five species of birds, 36 species of fish and 36 species of land mammals are found in six ecological regions of ANWR.
Section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act provides for the possibility that 1. 5 million acres of ANWR could be opened for oil production, and that area is, therefore, known as the 1002 Area. A study of the 1002 Area reveals 16 land-cover classes or types of ecological systems. Grasses, sedges, shrubs, willows and other vegetation of riparian zones each offers critical ecological values to porcupine caribou, arctic caribou, muskoxen, grizzly bears, wolves, golden eagles, polar bears and snow geese that use the 1002 Area.
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service has written that the 1002 Area contains “an unusually diverse assemblage of large animals and smaller, less appreciated life forms tied to their physical environments and to each other by natural, undisturbed ecological and evolutionary processes.” Let’s not consider the home of wolves, grizzly bears, polar bears and golden eagles a wasteland.
It is not as though no petroleum exploration is allowed in Alaska under current rules. Twenty-three million acres of Alaskan land are currently in production in the National Petroleum Reserve there, which is located west of ANWR on the North Slope and Arctic Coastal Plain. Current production is about 750, 000 barrels of oil per day from about 300 gas and oil leases.
The most optimistic estimate of oil production from the 1002 Area is 900, 000 barrels per day, about 4 percent of our national demand and 1 percent of global demand. By comparison, we could save a million barrels per day if the efficiency of our national fleet improved by five miles per gallon or 2 million barrels per day if we all simply drove five miles per hour slower on our highways. The Energy Information Administration of the U. S. Department of Energy estimates that addition of ANWR’s oil to existing supplies would reduce the price of oil by 50 cents per barrel. It’s five to 10 years from flowing through pipelines if we started work tomorrow. The extent to which additional oil drilling is a necessary part of our bridge to a sustainable energy future can be debated. But it is clear that ANWR’s boreal ecosystems contain unique ecological values that we should conserve and protect.
—–––––•–––––—Nicholas R. Brown, a native of Helena, is the executive assistant for sustainability at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
BY NICHOLAS R. BROWN SPECIAL TO THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
Posted on Saturday, October 18, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/240588/
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a unique, diverse collection of ecological systems and the home to caribou, muskoxen, sheep, foxes, moose, wolves, black bears, brown bears, polar bears, and over two dozen other species of mammals. It’s one of the largest, most ecologically intact wildlife refuges in the world.
Recently, columnist Bradley R. Gitz described ANWR as an “uninhabited, pestilence-ridden wasteland.” This thoroughly anthropocentric view of the world—that there are no important existing values if they are not of immediate economic benefit to humans—is the very kind of thinking that has led us to a wide range of environmental problems. As Albert Einstein said, we cannot solve our problems with the same type of thinking that created them.
Our planet, whether you think of it as the Creation, Gaia or simply the third rock, is driven by ecological processes that may or may not be observed and valued by our industrial culture. To assume that an ecosystem is “wasteland” just because there’s no perceived economic value is human arrogance of a very dangerous sort. Political and economic decisions should be made with a biocentric view, which serves human interests and conserves ecological values over a long term.
All ecological systems have values that relate to the continuing healthy existence of the planet, whether we understand the importance of those values or not. This is a general statement that may be discomforting to economists and industrial developers, but it’s just a paraphrase of the well-known and well-understood axiom, everything’s connected to everything else. Ecology, which is the study of interactions among species and between species and their environments, inescapably leads us to this conclusion, though as a science it is silent on its meaning and importance.
Ecological thinking dictates that we assume that there are connections of which we are oblivious and that we accordingly manage ecosystems with precaution. It embodies respect for nature.
ANWR’s selection as a location for a wildlife refuge isn’t accidental. It’s a unique and biodiverse boreal region. One hundred ninety-five species of birds, 36 species of fish and 36 species of land mammals are found in six ecological regions of ANWR.
Section 1002 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act provides for the possibility that 1. 5 million acres of ANWR could be opened for oil production, and that area is, therefore, known as the 1002 Area. A study of the 1002 Area reveals 16 land-cover classes or types of ecological systems. Grasses, sedges, shrubs, willows and other vegetation of riparian zones each offers critical ecological values to porcupine caribou, arctic caribou, muskoxen, grizzly bears, wolves, golden eagles, polar bears and snow geese that use the 1002 Area.
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service has written that the 1002 Area contains “an unusually diverse assemblage of large animals and smaller, less appreciated life forms tied to their physical environments and to each other by natural, undisturbed ecological and evolutionary processes.” Let’s not consider the home of wolves, grizzly bears, polar bears and golden eagles a wasteland.
It is not as though no petroleum exploration is allowed in Alaska under current rules. Twenty-three million acres of Alaskan land are currently in production in the National Petroleum Reserve there, which is located west of ANWR on the North Slope and Arctic Coastal Plain. Current production is about 750, 000 barrels of oil per day from about 300 gas and oil leases.
The most optimistic estimate of oil production from the 1002 Area is 900, 000 barrels per day, about 4 percent of our national demand and 1 percent of global demand. By comparison, we could save a million barrels per day if the efficiency of our national fleet improved by five miles per gallon or 2 million barrels per day if we all simply drove five miles per hour slower on our highways. The Energy Information Administration of the U. S. Department of Energy estimates that addition of ANWR’s oil to existing supplies would reduce the price of oil by 50 cents per barrel. It’s five to 10 years from flowing through pipelines if we started work tomorrow. The extent to which additional oil drilling is a necessary part of our bridge to a sustainable energy future can be debated. But it is clear that ANWR’s boreal ecosystems contain unique ecological values that we should conserve and protect.
—–––––•–––––—Nicholas R. Brown, a native of Helena, is the executive assistant for sustainability at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Fayetteville police and firefighters join Sierra Club in urging people to vote for Lioneld Jordan for mayor
Please click on image to ENLARGE Firefighters and Police officers' endorsement of Lioneld Jordan for mayor.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Fayetteville police organization endorses Lioneld Jordan for mayor
Please click on image to ENLARGE for easy reading of the Fayetteville, Arkansas, chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police's endorsement of Lioneld Jordan for mayor.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Firefighters endorse Lioneld Jordan for mayor
Fayetteville Fire Fighters Association endorses Jordan
Northwest Arkansas Times
Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/70088
The Fayetteville Fire Fighters Association IAFF Local 2866 has endorsed Lioneld Jordan for mayor of Fayetteville in the Nov. 4 general election.
Other endorsements by the association:
• Don Conner — Ward 1, Position 2
• Mark Kinion — Ward 2, Position 2
• Craig Honchell — Ward 4, Position 2
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Northwest Arkansas Times
Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/70088
The Fayetteville Fire Fighters Association IAFF Local 2866 has endorsed Lioneld Jordan for mayor of Fayetteville in the Nov. 4 general election.
Other endorsements by the association:
• Don Conner — Ward 1, Position 2
• Mark Kinion — Ward 2, Position 2
• Craig Honchell — Ward 4, Position 2
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Good idea only if using waste material from agriculture and timber production and without decreasing wildlife habitat. Clearing land pollutes air
Summit promotes growing high-energy plants
BY DUSTIN TRACY
Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/69979/
Northwest Arkansas Times Fayetteville’s first ever Sustainability Summit brought more than 300 people to the city’s center to talk about ways organizations can become more environmentally friendly. One way discussed was a switch from conventional diesel fuel to the use of bioenergybased fuel. Jim Wimberly with BioEnergy System LLC in Fayetteville talked about the energy-efficient idea at a small breakout session during the summit. “ Agriculture and energy are so intertwined, ” Wimberly said.
He said the idea is to start promoting the growth of high-energy yielding plants that can be processed and manufactured into a full spectrum of energy projects, including fuel for automobiles.
“ In essence, plants are batteries, ” he said. “ They store energy through photosynthesis. ”
Arkansas provides a large amount of natural resources to make bioenergy manufacturing a reality, Wimberly said, and if the state takes an active interest in the concept, it could cut in half its yearly 1 billion gallons of petroleum used each year.
“ It would take just under a million acres of herbaceous energy crops (crops high in energy ) to displace half of that diesel used, ” he said.
Wimberly said a lot of research is being done on soybeans to create biodiesel, and that it’s a good fuel. However, he said fuel users need to broaden their horizons.
“ We need to quit being worried about planting a future around traditional approaches to biofuel, ” he said.
The state has the forest and farmland to support biofuel operations, which makes it already an attractive location to bioenergy companies, Wimberly said, but Arkansas and its cities need to work towards sealing the deal with the green fuel producers.
“ We are in competition with neighboring states, ” Wimberly said.
Financial incentives as well as getting state landowners and far mers on board with the idea could be the key, Wimberly said.
“ It’s not going to happen unless (farmers ) can make at least as much money as they do growing traditional crops, ” he said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
BY DUSTIN TRACY
Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/69979/
Northwest Arkansas Times Fayetteville’s first ever Sustainability Summit brought more than 300 people to the city’s center to talk about ways organizations can become more environmentally friendly. One way discussed was a switch from conventional diesel fuel to the use of bioenergybased fuel. Jim Wimberly with BioEnergy System LLC in Fayetteville talked about the energy-efficient idea at a small breakout session during the summit. “ Agriculture and energy are so intertwined, ” Wimberly said.
He said the idea is to start promoting the growth of high-energy yielding plants that can be processed and manufactured into a full spectrum of energy projects, including fuel for automobiles.
“ In essence, plants are batteries, ” he said. “ They store energy through photosynthesis. ”
Arkansas provides a large amount of natural resources to make bioenergy manufacturing a reality, Wimberly said, and if the state takes an active interest in the concept, it could cut in half its yearly 1 billion gallons of petroleum used each year.
“ It would take just under a million acres of herbaceous energy crops (crops high in energy ) to displace half of that diesel used, ” he said.
Wimberly said a lot of research is being done on soybeans to create biodiesel, and that it’s a good fuel. However, he said fuel users need to broaden their horizons.
“ We need to quit being worried about planting a future around traditional approaches to biofuel, ” he said.
The state has the forest and farmland to support biofuel operations, which makes it already an attractive location to bioenergy companies, Wimberly said, but Arkansas and its cities need to work towards sealing the deal with the green fuel producers.
“ We are in competition with neighboring states, ” Wimberly said.
Financial incentives as well as getting state landowners and far mers on board with the idea could be the key, Wimberly said.
“ It’s not going to happen unless (farmers ) can make at least as much money as they do growing traditional crops, ” he said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Preview of citizen comments on Southpass plan discussion tonight at Fayetteville City Council meeting
Southpass comments: City Council, Oct. 6, 2008 Barbara Moorman
The city staff says in its recommendation for Southpass approval: .[the project] does not contribute to sprawl. Urban or suburban sprawl is “the spreading of a city and its suburbs over rural land at the fringe of an urban area”. It’s “elimination of rural land by urban development”.
What is the city calling this project if not sprawl? “Greenfield development.” Greenfield development is “urban fabric” replacing rural land on the outskirts of a city. ... In other words, sprawl. The houses may be packed together, but it’s still development taking over rural land and it still means people driving to it and driving from it. It’s not next to downtown, medical facilities, mall, court house, city hall, library, etc.
Even though the 2025 plan was written after the Southpass contract was signed, the 2025 plan claims not to approve of sprawl. So to resolve the contradiction, the city tries to redefine sprawl. Whatever name they put on it, this project will spread urban development over rural land on the outside edge of a city.
What’s wrong with sprawl? It’s not good for the community economically, socially, or environmentally. As for this project in particular....
1) It’s not economically sustainable especially in today’s chaos and uncertainty. It relies on speculation and on mortgage subsidies and lending . Sprawl is always expensive to the taxpayers . ... road costs, costs of police, fire, trash pickup, sewer, water, dealing with more car wrecks because more driving, illness from more pollution haze and more emotional pressure, etc. Do we know year by year or in 5 year increments, how much Southpass and the ballfields will cost? Do we know what each element will cost? Can we know cost estimates are accurate and based on reality? If they’re accurate, are they higher than the city can afford? Are there unforeseen economic problems that ought to be considered? There is no adequate, detailed economic study of the proposal.
2 It’s not environmentally sustainable. How many animals and birds will be driven into smaller and smaller habitats? How many plant communities will slowly disappear because of changes in the bluff and forest ecology? The people doing this project don’t have any notion what lives on those bluffs or in the woods. Animal life isn’t considered but there are many hundreds of species that live there now. How much more air pollution haze will this add (remember it’s a regional tournament venue plus 11,000 new inhabitants)? What temperature rise will result from more pavement. This land should not be zoned for dense development because of springs, shallow ground water, and creeks, and because of the environmental importance of the higher elevations. This is a massive project and will have massive impact but the city isn’t giving us a study of the impact. It should be our right to know.
3. It’s not socially sustainable. Will this subdivision make the city a healthier, tighter-knit community?
Will it further divide the wrong side of the tracks from the parts of town where people are probably breathing a sigh of relief that this thing isn’t going in near them? Whatever your answer is, it can’t be based on a study because there is no study. It can only be based on speculation. Is there a requirement for public transportation adequate to really reduce car traffic? Where’s the mandate for nearby medical facilities? Does the ordinance include demand for school, hospital, city hall and library annexes? There’s talk of police, fire, etc. but no promises, no requirements, no penalties if hopes aren’t fulfilled. How will a dog park, paved trails, and a noisy amphitheater help the stability and quality of life of this part of town ? Aren’t these features to visit but not to live near? How practical is this scheme really? The plan is for a huge athletic complex and a lot of other things that might be considered nuisances if they were on Mount Sequoyah. The “findings” by the staff claim that we rural residents will be adversely impacted by noise, pollution, lights, etc. Absolutely. But so will the 11,000 people they think will move in. Who on earth would move there in the first place or stay long enough to create a real community?
It’s too bad it’s gone this far, but I hope you’ll exercise your right to re-examine this plan now.
The city staff says in its recommendation for Southpass approval: .[the project] does not contribute to sprawl. Urban or suburban sprawl is “the spreading of a city and its suburbs over rural land at the fringe of an urban area”. It’s “elimination of rural land by urban development”.
What is the city calling this project if not sprawl? “Greenfield development.” Greenfield development is “urban fabric” replacing rural land on the outskirts of a city. ... In other words, sprawl. The houses may be packed together, but it’s still development taking over rural land and it still means people driving to it and driving from it. It’s not next to downtown, medical facilities, mall, court house, city hall, library, etc.
Even though the 2025 plan was written after the Southpass contract was signed, the 2025 plan claims not to approve of sprawl. So to resolve the contradiction, the city tries to redefine sprawl. Whatever name they put on it, this project will spread urban development over rural land on the outside edge of a city.
What’s wrong with sprawl? It’s not good for the community economically, socially, or environmentally. As for this project in particular....
1) It’s not economically sustainable especially in today’s chaos and uncertainty. It relies on speculation and on mortgage subsidies and lending . Sprawl is always expensive to the taxpayers . ... road costs, costs of police, fire, trash pickup, sewer, water, dealing with more car wrecks because more driving, illness from more pollution haze and more emotional pressure, etc. Do we know year by year or in 5 year increments, how much Southpass and the ballfields will cost? Do we know what each element will cost? Can we know cost estimates are accurate and based on reality? If they’re accurate, are they higher than the city can afford? Are there unforeseen economic problems that ought to be considered? There is no adequate, detailed economic study of the proposal.
2 It’s not environmentally sustainable. How many animals and birds will be driven into smaller and smaller habitats? How many plant communities will slowly disappear because of changes in the bluff and forest ecology? The people doing this project don’t have any notion what lives on those bluffs or in the woods. Animal life isn’t considered but there are many hundreds of species that live there now. How much more air pollution haze will this add (remember it’s a regional tournament venue plus 11,000 new inhabitants)? What temperature rise will result from more pavement. This land should not be zoned for dense development because of springs, shallow ground water, and creeks, and because of the environmental importance of the higher elevations. This is a massive project and will have massive impact but the city isn’t giving us a study of the impact. It should be our right to know.
3. It’s not socially sustainable. Will this subdivision make the city a healthier, tighter-knit community?
Will it further divide the wrong side of the tracks from the parts of town where people are probably breathing a sigh of relief that this thing isn’t going in near them? Whatever your answer is, it can’t be based on a study because there is no study. It can only be based on speculation. Is there a requirement for public transportation adequate to really reduce car traffic? Where’s the mandate for nearby medical facilities? Does the ordinance include demand for school, hospital, city hall and library annexes? There’s talk of police, fire, etc. but no promises, no requirements, no penalties if hopes aren’t fulfilled. How will a dog park, paved trails, and a noisy amphitheater help the stability and quality of life of this part of town ? Aren’t these features to visit but not to live near? How practical is this scheme really? The plan is for a huge athletic complex and a lot of other things that might be considered nuisances if they were on Mount Sequoyah. The “findings” by the staff claim that we rural residents will be adversely impacted by noise, pollution, lights, etc. Absolutely. But so will the 11,000 people they think will move in. Who on earth would move there in the first place or stay long enough to create a real community?
It’s too bad it’s gone this far, but I hope you’ll exercise your right to re-examine this plan now.
NOBODY has suggested turning the Government Channel into a community-access station. Read the policy document created by the Telecom policy committee
Policy document prepared during a series of meetings in July, August and September 2008 by the Telecom Board's policy committee
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Televised Forums Spark Debate
By Skip Descant
The Morning News
FAYETTEVILLE - It's still not clear if issue and candidate forums will make their way to the Fayetteville Government Channel's prime time.
But after months of study, the topic is expected to be hotly debated at tonight's Fayetteville City Council meeting. The item was briskly yanked from last week's council consent agenda session, when practically every council member pushed the issue to open debate.
Moderated public forums involving candidates and ballot issues would be recorded and broadcast by the government channel, according to the proposed new policy. The moderator must be a nonpartisan group such as the League of Women Voters, "and will be overseen by a public forum committee, responsible for considering the issue representation with regard to participants, content and format."
Nancy Allen, a council member from Ward 2 who is not seeking re-election, raised the question of having the government channel record and broadcast a Ward 2 candidate forum. The request came from a citizen group, Allen said.
The request was denied because the group did not fall under the umbrella of city government. Allen asked last week how this topic differed from some of the more innocuous programming she's seen on the channel.
In the past, Allen has requested that issue forums about the future of Fayetteville High School or the Walton Arts Center be broadcast. Those requests were denied by the city because the discussion was not directly related to the workings of the city.
"How does that differ from showing animals in need of adoption?" Allen said. "Anyone could make an argument that walking around looking at flowers, shaking hands, that's not 'government.'"
Without directly naming him, Allen was referencing news conferences and other events called by Fayetteville Mayor Dan Coody, who has received much criticism alleging he's used the government channel as his own personal publicity agency.
"I see much more reason to debate those issues - Fayetteville High School and Walton Arts Center - than to show video of the mayor walking around the square," wrote Allen in an e-mail. "That borders on propaganda in my view."
Susan Thomas, public information officer for the city, and one of the architects of the proposed policy, has maintained that the channel can only be used by government and for government-related programming.
Thomas said a Fayetteville Council of Neighborhoods mayoral debate aired because the council is comprised of city-appointed members, meets at city hall and has city staff assigned to the group, therefore, it operates under the umbrella of the city.
"Any other organization, they don't get city staff, and they're not covered on a regular basis," Thomas told the council.
Citizen groups like the one Allen mentioned would be better served by Community Access Television, say officials. Allen admitted she had not contacted CAT.
The mayor has said repeatedly that the city council has the discretion to create the government channel in nearly any image it wishes. It only needs to write the appropriate policy and carry it out.
"If you want to turn the government channel into a community access television station, then just do that," Coody told the board last week.
Policy document prepared during a series of meetings in July, August and September 2008 by the Telecom Board's policy committee
MEETING INFORMATION
Fayetteville City Council
When: 6 p.m. today
Where: Room 219, City Hall, 113 W. Mountain St.
Also on the agenda: Urban Design Associates, the Pittsburgh design firm responsible for the conceptual plan for SouthPass, will give a presentation.
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Televised Forums Spark Debate
By Skip Descant
The Morning News
FAYETTEVILLE - It's still not clear if issue and candidate forums will make their way to the Fayetteville Government Channel's prime time.
But after months of study, the topic is expected to be hotly debated at tonight's Fayetteville City Council meeting. The item was briskly yanked from last week's council consent agenda session, when practically every council member pushed the issue to open debate.
Moderated public forums involving candidates and ballot issues would be recorded and broadcast by the government channel, according to the proposed new policy. The moderator must be a nonpartisan group such as the League of Women Voters, "and will be overseen by a public forum committee, responsible for considering the issue representation with regard to participants, content and format."
Nancy Allen, a council member from Ward 2 who is not seeking re-election, raised the question of having the government channel record and broadcast a Ward 2 candidate forum. The request came from a citizen group, Allen said.
The request was denied because the group did not fall under the umbrella of city government. Allen asked last week how this topic differed from some of the more innocuous programming she's seen on the channel.
In the past, Allen has requested that issue forums about the future of Fayetteville High School or the Walton Arts Center be broadcast. Those requests were denied by the city because the discussion was not directly related to the workings of the city.
"How does that differ from showing animals in need of adoption?" Allen said. "Anyone could make an argument that walking around looking at flowers, shaking hands, that's not 'government.'"
Without directly naming him, Allen was referencing news conferences and other events called by Fayetteville Mayor Dan Coody, who has received much criticism alleging he's used the government channel as his own personal publicity agency.
"I see much more reason to debate those issues - Fayetteville High School and Walton Arts Center - than to show video of the mayor walking around the square," wrote Allen in an e-mail. "That borders on propaganda in my view."
Susan Thomas, public information officer for the city, and one of the architects of the proposed policy, has maintained that the channel can only be used by government and for government-related programming.
Thomas said a Fayetteville Council of Neighborhoods mayoral debate aired because the council is comprised of city-appointed members, meets at city hall and has city staff assigned to the group, therefore, it operates under the umbrella of the city.
"Any other organization, they don't get city staff, and they're not covered on a regular basis," Thomas told the council.
Citizen groups like the one Allen mentioned would be better served by Community Access Television, say officials. Allen admitted she had not contacted CAT.
The mayor has said repeatedly that the city council has the discretion to create the government channel in nearly any image it wishes. It only needs to write the appropriate policy and carry it out.
"If you want to turn the government channel into a community access television station, then just do that," Coody told the board last week.
Policy document prepared during a series of meetings in July, August and September 2008 by the Telecom Board's policy committee
MEETING INFORMATION
Fayetteville City Council
When: 6 p.m. today
Where: Room 219, City Hall, 113 W. Mountain St.
Also on the agenda: Urban Design Associates, the Pittsburgh design firm responsible for the conceptual plan for SouthPass, will give a presentation.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Ducks Unlimited dinner at 6 p.m. at Fair Grounds; Green Infrastructure meeting on Mount Sequoyah at 7 p.m. today
Please click on images to ENLARGE.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Pollinators on World Peace Wetland Prairie on September 30, 2008
Please click on images to ENLARGE view of pollinators on World Peace Wetland Prairie on September 30, 2008.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Governor's commission on global warming tentatively says NO to new coal-fired power plants
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Panel Tentatively Endorses Ban On New Plants
By Peggy Harris
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
LITTLE ROCK -- An Arkansas commission studying ways to reduce global warming tentatively endorsed a ban Thursday on new coal-fired power plants, saying a proposed $1.5 billion facility in Hempstead County shouldn't open until at least 2020.
The preliminary proposal would allow the John W. Turk Jr. plant near Fulton to open eight years later than planned, when new "sequestration" technology presumably would be available to capture harmful carbon dioxide emissions and store them in the ground. The plant could open sooner if the technology becomes available.
Under the proposal, the $1.3 billion Plum Point plant being built near Osceola could open as planned in 2010 but operators would have to retrofit the plant with the new anti-pollution technology once it becomes available.
Any other new coal-fired power plants in Arkansas would have to have the new technology when they open.
Currently, sequestration is not in use at any commercial power plant in the country. But the new technology is among the many innovations being discussed nationally and worldwide to reverse global warming.
State Rep. Kathy Webb, who chairs the Governor's Commission on Global Warming, said the draft proposal was one of about 50 the group has analyzed over the last several months with the help of consultants. The panel expects to have its final recommendations in a report to Gov. Mike Beebe by Oct. 31. Legislators could consider the measures when they meet in regular session next year.
Webb, D-Little Rock, said the proposed ban has been among the most controversial of the draft recommendations.
Coal-fired power plants and automobiles are the leading producers of carbon dioxide, the chief culprit of global warming. They also are a primary generator of electricity in the U.S. and considered essential to economic growth.
Commission members from the energy industry Thursday voiced opposition to the proposed ban.
Gary Voight, chief executive of Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, said scrapping plans for new plants would mean using "dirtier" inefficient plants that produce more pollution and fail to meet consumer demand.
He said a ban would effectively make it more difficult for utilities to produce electricity economically and free up more money to invest in energy-efficient technology. In addition, Voight said, the Arkansas Public Service Commission has already imposed conditions on Southwestern Electric Power Co. to address pollution at the planned 600-megawatt plant in Hempstead County.
"This is a bad plan. It's retroactive regulation," said Voight, whose cooperative plans partly own the SWEPCO plant. "The commission has already ruled that SWEPCO must evaluate all carbon sequestration and capture technologies as available in the future so this (proposal) is pointless. It's a waste of time, and we should all vote against it and get it off the table."
Other commissioners spoke of the seriousness of global warming and the need to take strong action.
"This is what Congress is talking about. This is what a lot, a lot of scientists are concerned about. New coal plants, we're talking about moratorium until sequestration," said Art Hobson, a physics professor at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.
Commissioner Kevin Smith, the former state senator from Stuttgart, said without a moratorium Arkansas could become "the new Pittsburgh -- not the Natural State." And commissioner Rob Fisher, executive director of The Ecological Conservation Organization, said the proposal was the most important recommendation the panel could make.
"If we don't pass this option, everything else we do is pointless," he said.
The commission endorsed the recommendation by a vote of 11-10.
Kacee Kirschvink, a spokeswoman for SWEPCO, said the Turk plant would be one of the cleanest coal plants in North America. She said it would use "ultra-supercritical" technology that requires less fuel and produces less carbon dioxide. In addition, she said, the plant could be retrofitted for newer technology once it becomes available.
"It would not be good public policy to change the rules now after much planning and investment has been done to meet the energy needs of SWEPCO's customers," she said.
Shreveport, La.-based SWEPCO wants to open the plant in 2012 and has begun site work, while awaiting an air-quality permit from state environmental regulators. SWEPCO is a part of Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power Co.
David Byford, a spokesman for Plum Point developers Dynegy Inc., said the commission proposal was in the early stages and Dynegy might comment later after further study.
Web Watch:
Arkansas Governors Commission on Global Warming
www.arclimatechange.us
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Panel Tentatively Endorses Ban On New Plants
By Peggy Harris
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
LITTLE ROCK -- An Arkansas commission studying ways to reduce global warming tentatively endorsed a ban Thursday on new coal-fired power plants, saying a proposed $1.5 billion facility in Hempstead County shouldn't open until at least 2020.
The preliminary proposal would allow the John W. Turk Jr. plant near Fulton to open eight years later than planned, when new "sequestration" technology presumably would be available to capture harmful carbon dioxide emissions and store them in the ground. The plant could open sooner if the technology becomes available.
Under the proposal, the $1.3 billion Plum Point plant being built near Osceola could open as planned in 2010 but operators would have to retrofit the plant with the new anti-pollution technology once it becomes available.
Any other new coal-fired power plants in Arkansas would have to have the new technology when they open.
Currently, sequestration is not in use at any commercial power plant in the country. But the new technology is among the many innovations being discussed nationally and worldwide to reverse global warming.
State Rep. Kathy Webb, who chairs the Governor's Commission on Global Warming, said the draft proposal was one of about 50 the group has analyzed over the last several months with the help of consultants. The panel expects to have its final recommendations in a report to Gov. Mike Beebe by Oct. 31. Legislators could consider the measures when they meet in regular session next year.
Webb, D-Little Rock, said the proposed ban has been among the most controversial of the draft recommendations.
Coal-fired power plants and automobiles are the leading producers of carbon dioxide, the chief culprit of global warming. They also are a primary generator of electricity in the U.S. and considered essential to economic growth.
Commission members from the energy industry Thursday voiced opposition to the proposed ban.
Gary Voight, chief executive of Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, said scrapping plans for new plants would mean using "dirtier" inefficient plants that produce more pollution and fail to meet consumer demand.
He said a ban would effectively make it more difficult for utilities to produce electricity economically and free up more money to invest in energy-efficient technology. In addition, Voight said, the Arkansas Public Service Commission has already imposed conditions on Southwestern Electric Power Co. to address pollution at the planned 600-megawatt plant in Hempstead County.
"This is a bad plan. It's retroactive regulation," said Voight, whose cooperative plans partly own the SWEPCO plant. "The commission has already ruled that SWEPCO must evaluate all carbon sequestration and capture technologies as available in the future so this (proposal) is pointless. It's a waste of time, and we should all vote against it and get it off the table."
Other commissioners spoke of the seriousness of global warming and the need to take strong action.
"This is what Congress is talking about. This is what a lot, a lot of scientists are concerned about. New coal plants, we're talking about moratorium until sequestration," said Art Hobson, a physics professor at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.
Commissioner Kevin Smith, the former state senator from Stuttgart, said without a moratorium Arkansas could become "the new Pittsburgh -- not the Natural State." And commissioner Rob Fisher, executive director of The Ecological Conservation Organization, said the proposal was the most important recommendation the panel could make.
"If we don't pass this option, everything else we do is pointless," he said.
The commission endorsed the recommendation by a vote of 11-10.
Kacee Kirschvink, a spokeswoman for SWEPCO, said the Turk plant would be one of the cleanest coal plants in North America. She said it would use "ultra-supercritical" technology that requires less fuel and produces less carbon dioxide. In addition, she said, the plant could be retrofitted for newer technology once it becomes available.
"It would not be good public policy to change the rules now after much planning and investment has been done to meet the energy needs of SWEPCO's customers," she said.
Shreveport, La.-based SWEPCO wants to open the plant in 2012 and has begun site work, while awaiting an air-quality permit from state environmental regulators. SWEPCO is a part of Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power Co.
David Byford, a spokesman for Plum Point developers Dynegy Inc., said the commission proposal was in the early stages and Dynegy might comment later after further study.
Web Watch:
Arkansas Governors Commission on Global Warming
www.arclimatechange.us
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Oil shale production threatens wildlife, human life
Help Stop a Grave New Threat to Wildlife, Public Lands and Water!
From: Dominique Burgunder-Johnson, National Wildlife Federation (alerts@nwf.org)
Sent: Fri 9/19/08 8:15 PM
Reply-to: Dominique Burgunder-Johnson, National Wildlife Federation (alerts@nwf.org)
Stop the Senate from Putting More Wildlife Habitat and
Natural Resources on the Chopping Block
Drilling for oil and natural gas, and mining for coal has already taken a dramatic toll on our country's public lands, wildlife habitat and natural resources.
Now, Congress is considering a proposal to develop a new dangerous energy source--oil shale-- for TWO MILLION acres of America's public lands!
Photo by Chris Evans, The Pembina Institute.
Oil shale extraction will yield impacts similiar to the syncrude oil sands mine in Alberta.
Please urge Congress to extend the moratorium on commercial oil shale development!
Oil shale production is 130% more carbon dioxide intensive than conventional drilling and gasoline production, which means it would continue to fuel global warming—the already single greatest threat to wildlife.
HERE'S WHAT ELSE IS AT STAKE:
OUR WATER: Oil shale production will require upwards of 315 million gallons of water a dayThis is scarce water we already need for drinking, agriculture, livestock and wildlife.
OUR WILDLIFE: Oil shale development would put at risk millions of acres of wildlife habitat, and continue to raise the harmful impacts of global warming pollution for wildlife and their habitats.
OUR WAY OF LIFE: Preserving America's public lands are an important part of our country's conservation tradition. Oil shale development threatens to dramatically change the face of some of our most treasured places.
Congress is moving in the wrong direction to break America's oil addiction.
Please ask your Members of Congress to be the difference that moves America's energy policies in a bold new direction.
Thanks so much for speaking up!
Sincerely,
Dominique Burgunder-Johnson
Online Grassroots Coordinator
National Wildlife Federation
alerts@nwf.org
Inspiring Americans to protect wildlife for our children's future.
© 2008 National Wildlife Federation. All rights reserved.
11100 Wildlife Center Dr., Reston VA 20190 | 1-800-822-9919 | Contact us
From: Dominique Burgunder-Johnson, National Wildlife Federation (alerts@nwf.org)
Sent: Fri 9/19/08 8:15 PM
Reply-to: Dominique Burgunder-Johnson, National Wildlife Federation (alerts@nwf.org)
Stop the Senate from Putting More Wildlife Habitat and
Natural Resources on the Chopping Block
Drilling for oil and natural gas, and mining for coal has already taken a dramatic toll on our country's public lands, wildlife habitat and natural resources.
Now, Congress is considering a proposal to develop a new dangerous energy source--oil shale-- for TWO MILLION acres of America's public lands!
Photo by Chris Evans, The Pembina Institute.
Oil shale extraction will yield impacts similiar to the syncrude oil sands mine in Alberta.
Please urge Congress to extend the moratorium on commercial oil shale development!
Oil shale production is 130% more carbon dioxide intensive than conventional drilling and gasoline production, which means it would continue to fuel global warming—the already single greatest threat to wildlife.
HERE'S WHAT ELSE IS AT STAKE:
OUR WATER: Oil shale production will require upwards of 315 million gallons of water a dayThis is scarce water we already need for drinking, agriculture, livestock and wildlife.
OUR WILDLIFE: Oil shale development would put at risk millions of acres of wildlife habitat, and continue to raise the harmful impacts of global warming pollution for wildlife and their habitats.
OUR WAY OF LIFE: Preserving America's public lands are an important part of our country's conservation tradition. Oil shale development threatens to dramatically change the face of some of our most treasured places.
Congress is moving in the wrong direction to break America's oil addiction.
Please ask your Members of Congress to be the difference that moves America's energy policies in a bold new direction.
Thanks so much for speaking up!
Sincerely,
Dominique Burgunder-Johnson
Online Grassroots Coordinator
National Wildlife Federation
alerts@nwf.org
Inspiring Americans to protect wildlife for our children's future.
© 2008 National Wildlife Federation. All rights reserved.
11100 Wildlife Center Dr., Reston VA 20190 | 1-800-822-9919 | Contact us
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Chance to testify against coal-fired power plant
Hello,
This is James with ECO. I want to thank you for your support with our grassroots campaign to stop the proposed coal-fired power plant in Hempstead County.
If you would like to learn more about this campaign or volunteer please contact me for more information as well as check out our website:
www.cleanairarkansas.org
Next Thursday September 18th at 6pm at the University of Arkansas Community College in Hope there will be a public hearing regarding SWEPCO’s air permit. The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is reviewing the permit to determine if the plant meets the federal rules regarding mercury emissions.
This is a very important hearing and we need people to go down to Hope that evening to speak out against the plant. Even if you do not feel like speaking at the hearing just coming and holding a sign or wearing a NO COAL T-SHIRT will make a huge difference.
We have organized car pools so far in three cities across the state (Little Rock, Conway, and Fayetteville). Here are the contacts for each location if you are able to come or if you have family or friends in other parts of the state who would like to attend.
Little Rock: Conway: Fayetteville:
Departure Time: 2pm Departure Time: 2pm Departure Time: 11am
Joe Sundell Molly McGuire Maggie Bailey
501-416-4640 940-368-7183 479-225-8396
joesundell456@yahoo.com McGuireMF@hendrix.edu mtucker22@yahoo.com
We are planning a press event with all these groups as well as locals from Hempstead County at 5:30pm right before the hearing so it is essential that we get on the road on schedule.
Prior to the hearing we will be sending out talking points for those who are coming but if you are not able to join us you can send in your comments to ADEQ via email as well.
For more information about the status of the plant and the hearing please view this article:
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN1547251720080815
Thanks for your support. Please contact us to find out how you can help with this important event!
James
burke@ecoconservation.org
www.ecoconservation.org
336-455-1065
501-372-7895
"All great questions must be raised by great
voices, and the greatest voice is the voice of
the people - speaking out - in prose, or painting
or poetry or music; speaking out - in homes and
halls, streets and farms, courts and cafes - let
that voice speak and the stillness you hear will
be the gratitude of mankind."
Robert F. Kennedy
This is James with ECO. I want to thank you for your support with our grassroots campaign to stop the proposed coal-fired power plant in Hempstead County.
If you would like to learn more about this campaign or volunteer please contact me for more information as well as check out our website:
www.cleanairarkansas.org
Next Thursday September 18th at 6pm at the University of Arkansas Community College in Hope there will be a public hearing regarding SWEPCO’s air permit. The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is reviewing the permit to determine if the plant meets the federal rules regarding mercury emissions.
This is a very important hearing and we need people to go down to Hope that evening to speak out against the plant. Even if you do not feel like speaking at the hearing just coming and holding a sign or wearing a NO COAL T-SHIRT will make a huge difference.
We have organized car pools so far in three cities across the state (Little Rock, Conway, and Fayetteville). Here are the contacts for each location if you are able to come or if you have family or friends in other parts of the state who would like to attend.
Little Rock: Conway: Fayetteville:
Departure Time: 2pm Departure Time: 2pm Departure Time: 11am
Joe Sundell Molly McGuire Maggie Bailey
501-416-4640 940-368-7183 479-225-8396
joesundell456@yahoo.com McGuireMF@hendrix.edu mtucker22@yahoo.com
We are planning a press event with all these groups as well as locals from Hempstead County at 5:30pm right before the hearing so it is essential that we get on the road on schedule.
Prior to the hearing we will be sending out talking points for those who are coming but if you are not able to join us you can send in your comments to ADEQ via email as well.
For more information about the status of the plant and the hearing please view this article:
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN1547251720080815
Thanks for your support. Please contact us to find out how you can help with this important event!
James
burke@ecoconservation.org
www.ecoconservation.org
336-455-1065
501-372-7895
"All great questions must be raised by great
voices, and the greatest voice is the voice of
the people - speaking out - in prose, or painting
or poetry or music; speaking out - in homes and
halls, streets and farms, courts and cafes - let
that voice speak and the stillness you hear will
be the gratitude of mankind."
Robert F. Kennedy
Friday, September 5, 2008
EPA stops the destruction of wetland in the Yazoo River watershed of Mississippi
September 5, 2008
Outdoorsmen and environmentalists win a major battle. Now, how about some help with the equally bad project in Arkansas that would pump water from the lower White River basin to farms on the Grand Prairie. The late Wayne Hampton of Stuttgart, a former legislator, highway commissioner and Game and Fish Commissoner and a farmer who protected the environment by "keeping the water where it fell" and storing it for irrigation and to flood the hardwoods for waterfowl in tanks or ponds on his own 4,000-acre farm near Lodge Corner. He fought hard all the way to congress to stop that project and another environmentally destructive navigation lock and dam where the White River enters the Mississippi on the north side of Big Island.
For more on the Yazoo drainage project, please see http://www.americanrivers.org
Wayne would have applauded this victory for the wild things and I hope it is now dropped from all planning.
Dear Aubrey,
I am thrilled to report that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a Clean Water Act veto for the Yazoo Pumps, putting an end to this outrageously destructive project once and for all. This historic victory would not have been possible without your help in speaking out against this project.
I hope you will help us again and thank the EPA for its historic and environmentally responsible decision.
The EPA’s decision is a victory for clean water, natural flood protection and taxpayers and it proves that the actions of individuals like you make a difference. The EPA received more than 47,600 emails and comments and more than 99.9 percent urged the EPA to stop the Yazoo Pumps. This outpouring of public support was critical in the face of the tremendous pressure placed on the EPA to approve this wasteful project.
The Yazoo Pumps would have used $220 million of your federal tax dollars to drain and damage up to 200,000 acres of some of the richest wetlands in the nation, an area larger than all 5 boroughs of New York City, that have the capacity to store roughly 200 billion gallons of floodwaters.
Eliminating this free natural flood protection would have been unconscionable, especially when we know that climate change is causing more frequent and intense storms and floods.
Please let the EPA know that you support their decision and appreciate their leadership in protecting these wetlands.
Sincerely,
Rebecca R. Wodder
President
To contact American Rivers, email us at outreach@AmericanRivers.org.
To update your profile or change your preferences click here.
To unsubscribe click here.
American Rivers ©2008
Outdoorsmen and environmentalists win a major battle. Now, how about some help with the equally bad project in Arkansas that would pump water from the lower White River basin to farms on the Grand Prairie. The late Wayne Hampton of Stuttgart, a former legislator, highway commissioner and Game and Fish Commissoner and a farmer who protected the environment by "keeping the water where it fell" and storing it for irrigation and to flood the hardwoods for waterfowl in tanks or ponds on his own 4,000-acre farm near Lodge Corner. He fought hard all the way to congress to stop that project and another environmentally destructive navigation lock and dam where the White River enters the Mississippi on the north side of Big Island.
For more on the Yazoo drainage project, please see http://www.americanrivers.org
Wayne would have applauded this victory for the wild things and I hope it is now dropped from all planning.
Dear Aubrey,
I am thrilled to report that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a Clean Water Act veto for the Yazoo Pumps, putting an end to this outrageously destructive project once and for all. This historic victory would not have been possible without your help in speaking out against this project.
I hope you will help us again and thank the EPA for its historic and environmentally responsible decision.
The EPA’s decision is a victory for clean water, natural flood protection and taxpayers and it proves that the actions of individuals like you make a difference. The EPA received more than 47,600 emails and comments and more than 99.9 percent urged the EPA to stop the Yazoo Pumps. This outpouring of public support was critical in the face of the tremendous pressure placed on the EPA to approve this wasteful project.
The Yazoo Pumps would have used $220 million of your federal tax dollars to drain and damage up to 200,000 acres of some of the richest wetlands in the nation, an area larger than all 5 boroughs of New York City, that have the capacity to store roughly 200 billion gallons of floodwaters.
Eliminating this free natural flood protection would have been unconscionable, especially when we know that climate change is causing more frequent and intense storms and floods.
Please let the EPA know that you support their decision and appreciate their leadership in protecting these wetlands.
Sincerely,
Rebecca R. Wodder
President
To contact American Rivers, email us at outreach@AmericanRivers.org.
To update your profile or change your preferences click here.
To unsubscribe click here.
American Rivers ©2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
Diverse plants and wildlife call World Peace Wetland Prairie home on August 29, 2008
Please click on images to ENLARGE photos of butterflies and flowers and tall grass on August 29, 2008, on World Peace Wetland Prairie.
First and second photos above feature a monarch butterfly nectaring on native thistles on World Peace Wetland Prairie. Native thistles are NOT outlawed and are exceptionally valuable to butterflies, bees and numerous species of birds.
The following two photos (below) feature Centaurea Americana, the American basketflower, surrounded by Demaree's gaura or Gaura demareei, and Dematree's gaura is seen up close in the fifth photo.
Gaura demareei above.
A small, pale butterfly rests on tall grass in the sixth photo (below).
Florida lettuce above (Latuca floridana) above.
First and second photos above feature a monarch butterfly nectaring on native thistles on World Peace Wetland Prairie. Native thistles are NOT outlawed and are exceptionally valuable to butterflies, bees and numerous species of birds.
The following two photos (below) feature Centaurea Americana, the American basketflower, surrounded by Demaree's gaura or Gaura demareei, and Dematree's gaura is seen up close in the fifth photo.
Gaura demareei above.
A small, pale butterfly rests on tall grass in the sixth photo (below).
Florida lettuce above (Latuca floridana) above.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Benton County Quorum Court votes FOR watershed protection
The Morning News
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Quorum Court Approves Curtis
By Scarlet Sims
THE MORNING NEWS
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/08/28/news/082908bzqurmcrt.txt
BENTONVILLE -- The Benton County Quorum Court appointed environmentalist Mark Curtis to the Planning Board on Thursday night over the objection of property-rights advocates.
Curtis, 57, of Rogers will begin serving next month.
"I'm very happy," said Planning Board member Bill Kneebone. "He's going to be a good addition."
The Quorum Court rejected County Judge Gary Black's recommendation last month 6-5. Black decided to ask the Quorum Court to reconsider Curtis after receiving calls from supporters.
Several residents spoke for and against appointing Curtis on Thursday.
Black picked Curtis from about 19 applicants who submitted resumes last year after a board member resigned. Curtis works in public and private finance, according to his resume. He has a degree from University of Minnesota in urban geography. He studied city and regional planning at Memphis State University from 1977 to 1979, according to his resume.
Curtis is the Association for Beaver Lake Environment treasurer. The group is dedicated to preserving the lake's quality.
Curtis supported a watershed ordinance about two years ago opponents say would have greatly restricted property owners' ability to use their land. He also sued Benton County after the county approved 15-story condominiums to be built on the lake.
Curtis said Thursday the watershed ordinance is a tool to protect the lake. As the county grows, the county must plan to protect agriculture, residents and resources, he said. Planning may mean more regulations or changing current regulations, Curtis said.
He said he had opinions but would change his mind if his opinion is proven wrong. Other planning board members have opinions, Curtis said. He said he stood by his past decisions.
Beaver Lake association members said wanting to protect Beaver Lake should be an asset, not a drawback, to the Planning Board.
"How is it that someone who is interested in protecting the environment should be disqualified when Planning Board regulations promote protecting Beaver Lake?" asked Doug Timmons, Beaver Lake association president.
Opponents worried Curtis has an agenda to increase regulations around the lake and push the association's issues.
"We do not need a man as polarized as Mr. Curtis on the Planning Board," said Bob Kossieck, a property-rights member.
Whether to appoint Curtis to a board that may influence land use ideas that go before the Quorum Court is at the heart of the issue. In the days leading up the Quorum Court meeting, property rights advocates pressured justices of the peace to vote against Curtis, while environmentalists pressed justices of the peace to vote for him.
Justice of the Peace Frank Winscott, R-southeastern Benton County, said whether to approve Curtis is a "lightning rod issue." The nuisance abatement ordinance is the only other issue that provoked so much response among constituents, he said.
Winscott voted against Curtis both times. He made a motion to table the vote early in the meeting but the motion failed.
"My concern was: Can he be objective on the board due to his past with land-use issues?" Winscott said. "I want him to be objective."
Justice of the Peace Debbie Hobbs, R-Rogers, voted against Curtis in July but changed her vote to support Curtis on Thursday. She said she is still concerned about potential bias on the board but pointed out developers can appeal the board's decision. Curtis is only one of seven on the planning board, Hobbs said.
Justice of the Peace Bobby Hubbard, R-northwestern Benton County, and Justice of the Peace James Wozniak, R-Bella Vista, left the meeting shortly after the Quorum Court approved Curtis. Hubbard said the Quorum Court made a mistake in approving Curtis.
Curtis supported the watershed ordinance that included fees for homeowners and would have hurt farming communities by not allowing farmers to move dirt on their property, Hubbard said. What a committee or board recommends to the Quorum Court is usually approved, which could mean more or increased building or planning fees, he said.
"This county is taking a step backward in helping agriculture in this county -- especially on the western side," Hubbard said. "(Curtis) is an extremist, I don't care what anybody says."
How They Voted
The Benton County Quorum Court voted Thursday to appoint Mark Curtis to the Planning Board. Justices of the peace Frank Harrison, R-Rogers, David Hill, R-Bentonville, Debbie Hobbs, R-Rogers, Kurt Moore, R-southwestern Benton County, Bob Stephenson, R-southwestern Benton County, Beverly Williams, D-Bella Vista, Tim Summers, R-Bentonville, and James Wozniak, R-Bella Vista, approved Curtis. Justices of the peace Bobby Hubbard, R-northwestern Benton County, Craig Brown, R-Rogers, Chris Glass, R-northeastern Benton County, and Frank Winscott, R-southeastern Benton County, voted against Curtis. Justice of the Peace Marge Wolf, R-Rogers, was absent.
Local News for Northwest Arkansas
Quorum Court Approves Curtis
By Scarlet Sims
THE MORNING NEWS
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/08/28/news/082908bzqurmcrt.txt
BENTONVILLE -- The Benton County Quorum Court appointed environmentalist Mark Curtis to the Planning Board on Thursday night over the objection of property-rights advocates.
Curtis, 57, of Rogers will begin serving next month.
"I'm very happy," said Planning Board member Bill Kneebone. "He's going to be a good addition."
The Quorum Court rejected County Judge Gary Black's recommendation last month 6-5. Black decided to ask the Quorum Court to reconsider Curtis after receiving calls from supporters.
Several residents spoke for and against appointing Curtis on Thursday.
Black picked Curtis from about 19 applicants who submitted resumes last year after a board member resigned. Curtis works in public and private finance, according to his resume. He has a degree from University of Minnesota in urban geography. He studied city and regional planning at Memphis State University from 1977 to 1979, according to his resume.
Curtis is the Association for Beaver Lake Environment treasurer. The group is dedicated to preserving the lake's quality.
Curtis supported a watershed ordinance about two years ago opponents say would have greatly restricted property owners' ability to use their land. He also sued Benton County after the county approved 15-story condominiums to be built on the lake.
Curtis said Thursday the watershed ordinance is a tool to protect the lake. As the county grows, the county must plan to protect agriculture, residents and resources, he said. Planning may mean more regulations or changing current regulations, Curtis said.
He said he had opinions but would change his mind if his opinion is proven wrong. Other planning board members have opinions, Curtis said. He said he stood by his past decisions.
Beaver Lake association members said wanting to protect Beaver Lake should be an asset, not a drawback, to the Planning Board.
"How is it that someone who is interested in protecting the environment should be disqualified when Planning Board regulations promote protecting Beaver Lake?" asked Doug Timmons, Beaver Lake association president.
Opponents worried Curtis has an agenda to increase regulations around the lake and push the association's issues.
"We do not need a man as polarized as Mr. Curtis on the Planning Board," said Bob Kossieck, a property-rights member.
Whether to appoint Curtis to a board that may influence land use ideas that go before the Quorum Court is at the heart of the issue. In the days leading up the Quorum Court meeting, property rights advocates pressured justices of the peace to vote against Curtis, while environmentalists pressed justices of the peace to vote for him.
Justice of the Peace Frank Winscott, R-southeastern Benton County, said whether to approve Curtis is a "lightning rod issue." The nuisance abatement ordinance is the only other issue that provoked so much response among constituents, he said.
Winscott voted against Curtis both times. He made a motion to table the vote early in the meeting but the motion failed.
"My concern was: Can he be objective on the board due to his past with land-use issues?" Winscott said. "I want him to be objective."
Justice of the Peace Debbie Hobbs, R-Rogers, voted against Curtis in July but changed her vote to support Curtis on Thursday. She said she is still concerned about potential bias on the board but pointed out developers can appeal the board's decision. Curtis is only one of seven on the planning board, Hobbs said.
Justice of the Peace Bobby Hubbard, R-northwestern Benton County, and Justice of the Peace James Wozniak, R-Bella Vista, left the meeting shortly after the Quorum Court approved Curtis. Hubbard said the Quorum Court made a mistake in approving Curtis.
Curtis supported the watershed ordinance that included fees for homeowners and would have hurt farming communities by not allowing farmers to move dirt on their property, Hubbard said. What a committee or board recommends to the Quorum Court is usually approved, which could mean more or increased building or planning fees, he said.
"This county is taking a step backward in helping agriculture in this county -- especially on the western side," Hubbard said. "(Curtis) is an extremist, I don't care what anybody says."
How They Voted
The Benton County Quorum Court voted Thursday to appoint Mark Curtis to the Planning Board. Justices of the peace Frank Harrison, R-Rogers, David Hill, R-Bentonville, Debbie Hobbs, R-Rogers, Kurt Moore, R-southwestern Benton County, Bob Stephenson, R-southwestern Benton County, Beverly Williams, D-Bella Vista, Tim Summers, R-Bentonville, and James Wozniak, R-Bella Vista, approved Curtis. Justices of the peace Bobby Hubbard, R-northwestern Benton County, Craig Brown, R-Rogers, Chris Glass, R-northeastern Benton County, and Frank Winscott, R-southeastern Benton County, voted against Curtis. Justice of the Peace Marge Wolf, R-Rogers, was absent.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
A new proposal by the Bush/Cheney Administration would gut the law that protects polar bears, wolves and other endangered species
CREDO Action from Working Assets is proud to bring you an urgent alert from our friends at Defenders of Wildlife.
The Bush administration has announced a new proposal that would gut the Endangered Species Act — one of America's most important environmental laws. Now Defenders of Wildlife needs our help to preserve the vital checks and balances that protect our polar bears, wolves and other imperiled animals.
I urge you to read the message below from Defenders of Wildlife's president, Rodger Schlickeisen, and take action today to save our endangered species.
Michael Kieschnick
President, CREDO Mobile
Emergency Action
A new proposal by the Bush/Cheney Administration would gut the law that protects polar bears, wolves and other endangered species.
Urge your Representative and Senators to help stop the Bush/Cheney plan to gut the Endangered Species Act.
Dear Wildlife Supporter,
With less than 160 days left in power, the Bush/Cheney Administration has launched an unprecedented backdoor assault on America's endangered species!
Don't let them get away with it. Urge your Representative and Senators to do everything in their power to stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's eleventh-hour assault on America's wildlife.
For more than 30 years, the Endangered Species Act has protected wildlife at risk of extinction. Now the Bush/Cheney Administration wants to eliminate vital checks and balances that are crucial to protect our polar bears, wolves and other imperiled wildlife.
Please help protect endangered animals from the Bush/Cheney Administration's attack. Take action now.
Announced earlier this week, the Bush/Cheney proposal would severely limit scientific review by the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service of projects that could harm imperiled wildlife. And it would explicitly limit the ability of these expert agencies to consider how greenhouse gas emissions from such projects could impact polar bears, wolverines and other wildlife that may go extinct due to global warming.
Instead, agencies proposing projects such as highways, dams, mines, oil or gas drilling and virtually any other activity would be allowed to decide for themselves whether a project is likely to impact any of the nearly 1,400 species currently protected by the Endangered Species Act — without the crucial independent review now provided by scientific experts at the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Many of these agencies do not even have biologists or other qualified staff to make such a determination.
Even worse, the new regulations would impose a brief 60-day review period for agencies, making it even less likely that anyone involved in the process will have the time or expertise to fully evaluate the potential harmful effects of a given project on sensitive wildlife or the habitat it needs to survive.
Help stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's assault on protections for our endangered species. Please take action now.
There are less than 160 days left in the Bush/Cheney Administration — and even less time for your Members of Congress to act. Please take action now to help stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's last-minute attempt to eliminate effective protections for the wildlife that you and I love.
Sincerely,
Rodger Schlickeisen
President
Defenders of Wildlife
P.S. Two years ago, Defenders of Wildlife led the fight that stopped Congressional legislation that would have gutted the Endangered Species Act. Now we need your help to stop the Bush Administration from trying to do the same thing. Please take action now!
The Bush administration has announced a new proposal that would gut the Endangered Species Act — one of America's most important environmental laws. Now Defenders of Wildlife needs our help to preserve the vital checks and balances that protect our polar bears, wolves and other imperiled animals.
I urge you to read the message below from Defenders of Wildlife's president, Rodger Schlickeisen, and take action today to save our endangered species.
Michael Kieschnick
President, CREDO Mobile
Emergency Action
A new proposal by the Bush/Cheney Administration would gut the law that protects polar bears, wolves and other endangered species.
Urge your Representative and Senators to help stop the Bush/Cheney plan to gut the Endangered Species Act.
Dear Wildlife Supporter,
With less than 160 days left in power, the Bush/Cheney Administration has launched an unprecedented backdoor assault on America's endangered species!
Don't let them get away with it. Urge your Representative and Senators to do everything in their power to stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's eleventh-hour assault on America's wildlife.
For more than 30 years, the Endangered Species Act has protected wildlife at risk of extinction. Now the Bush/Cheney Administration wants to eliminate vital checks and balances that are crucial to protect our polar bears, wolves and other imperiled wildlife.
Please help protect endangered animals from the Bush/Cheney Administration's attack. Take action now.
Announced earlier this week, the Bush/Cheney proposal would severely limit scientific review by the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service of projects that could harm imperiled wildlife. And it would explicitly limit the ability of these expert agencies to consider how greenhouse gas emissions from such projects could impact polar bears, wolverines and other wildlife that may go extinct due to global warming.
Instead, agencies proposing projects such as highways, dams, mines, oil or gas drilling and virtually any other activity would be allowed to decide for themselves whether a project is likely to impact any of the nearly 1,400 species currently protected by the Endangered Species Act — without the crucial independent review now provided by scientific experts at the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Many of these agencies do not even have biologists or other qualified staff to make such a determination.
Even worse, the new regulations would impose a brief 60-day review period for agencies, making it even less likely that anyone involved in the process will have the time or expertise to fully evaluate the potential harmful effects of a given project on sensitive wildlife or the habitat it needs to survive.
Help stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's assault on protections for our endangered species. Please take action now.
There are less than 160 days left in the Bush/Cheney Administration — and even less time for your Members of Congress to act. Please take action now to help stop the Bush/Cheney Administration's last-minute attempt to eliminate effective protections for the wildlife that you and I love.
Sincerely,
Rodger Schlickeisen
President
Defenders of Wildlife
P.S. Two years ago, Defenders of Wildlife led the fight that stopped Congressional legislation that would have gutted the Endangered Species Act. Now we need your help to stop the Bush Administration from trying to do the same thing. Please take action now!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Secchi Day at Beaver Lake has activities for whole family
Rain Barrel Workshops, Fun for Kids, Boat Rides, Lunch at Beaver Lake on Saturday
Learn to build a rain barrel, take a pontoon boat ride, enjoy lunch, and bring your kids to enjoy activities during Secchi Day on Beaver Lake from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Saturday at the Grand Shelter at Prairie Creek on Beaver Lake. Boat rides are at 9:30, 10:30 and 11:30 a.m. and Rain Barrel Workshops will be held at 10, 11, and noon. The KIDS TENT will be open from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Secchi Day is sponsored by Beaver Water District, Audubon Arkansas and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Beaver Lake. For information and directions, visit www.bwdh2o.org or call 717-3807.
Amy L. Wilson, Director of Public Affairs
Beaver Water District, P.O. Box 400, Lowell, AR 72745
awilson@bwdh2o.org; 479-756-3651
Learn to build a rain barrel, take a pontoon boat ride, enjoy lunch, and bring your kids to enjoy activities during Secchi Day on Beaver Lake from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Saturday at the Grand Shelter at Prairie Creek on Beaver Lake. Boat rides are at 9:30, 10:30 and 11:30 a.m. and Rain Barrel Workshops will be held at 10, 11, and noon. The KIDS TENT will be open from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Secchi Day is sponsored by Beaver Water District, Audubon Arkansas and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Beaver Lake. For information and directions, visit www.bwdh2o.org or call 717-3807.
Amy L. Wilson, Director of Public Affairs
Beaver Water District, P.O. Box 400, Lowell, AR 72745
awilson@bwdh2o.org; 479-756-3651
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Oil-drilling madness continues to dominate political thinking
The Drill of It All
Did you know that oil companies are already sitting on 68 million acres of leases that they aren't even drilling? Which kind of makes you wonder: Why are Big Oil and its allies suddenly desperate to get their hands on the last few places that are still protected -- our natural treasures, wildlife refuges, and pristine coastlines? They wouldn't use the concerns caused by high gas prices as an excuse to grab it ALL, would they?
Check out our map showing how much of our country Big Oil has already got and spread the word by forwarding it to friends who agree: Enough is enough.
So far, one woman has stood up to Big Oil. Let's thank Speaker Pelosi for keeping a cool head and holding out for real solutions.
| Discuss |
Make Your Travel Matter
Sierra Club founder John Muir believed deeply that conservation begins with experiencing nature's grandeur firsthand, and that's still the guiding principle of Sierra Club Outings. Sure, you could spend another vacation in a high-rise at an overcrowded beach. Or, you could study retreating glaciers from your kayak in remote eastern Greenland, maintain hiking trails in Puerto Rico, or support grassroots environmental efforts in Costa Rica.
Travel with us, and you'll have much more than a vacation. We've just launched our 2009 lineup of international trips, plus a few select domestic itineraries.
Our most popular trips fill up quickly, so have a look now and discover your next life-changing experience.
| Discuss |
The Thirty Percent Solution
Homes and other buildings are America's largest consumers of energy and a major contributor to global warming. That's why the Sierra Club's Cool Cities Campaign is joining with local governments, businesses, and energy-efficiency advocates to support a bold new proposal to adopt "green" building codes for new homes: the Thirty Percent Solution.
Next month, building-code officials from around the country will meet in Minneapolis to vote on whether to strengthen building-code energy-efficiency standards in new homes by 30 percent. By 2030, that would save an estimated 8 quadrillion BTUs of energy and $88 billion in energy costs; reduce CO2 by 464 million metric tons; and create new clean-energy construction and service jobs in the building trades and energy-efficiency product industries.
Make sure your community will be represented at the meeting -- contact your mayor or county leader today.
| Discuss |
Winds of Change in West Virginia
The residents of the Coal River Valley of West Virginia, with the support of the Sierra Club and other environmental groups, are proposing the development of a 440-megawatt wind farm as an economically viable alternative to a planned mountaintop-removal coal-mining operation. If the mountaintop-removal coal-mining proceeds as planned, it will destroy ten square miles of the mountain, pollute waterways, devastate the surrounding communities, and eliminate the vast wind potential the mountain now holds.
Add your signature to the petition asking West Virginia Governor Manchin to protect Coal River Mountain and bring clean energy and green jobs to West Virginia!
EXPLORE
Stand Up to Skeptics
The Sierra Club has joined forces with the Natural Resources Defense Council in smacking down global-warming skeptics at a new website called OpposingViews.com.
Take a look at all sides of the argument, recommend your favorite ones, and post comments.
"Staring Down Doomsday"
From Sierra Magazine: High school students from the Bronx hit the Appalachian Trail and face their fears.
PROTECT
Support the No Child Left Inside Act
Tell your Representative to support the No Child Left Inside Act to provide students with quality environmental education.
If we act now, we can ensure more American children become adults ready to face the environmental challenges that lie ahead.
Sierra Club
85 Second St.
San Francisco, CA 94109
insider@sierraclub.org
http://www.sierraclub.org/
Did you know that oil companies are already sitting on 68 million acres of leases that they aren't even drilling? Which kind of makes you wonder: Why are Big Oil and its allies suddenly desperate to get their hands on the last few places that are still protected -- our natural treasures, wildlife refuges, and pristine coastlines? They wouldn't use the concerns caused by high gas prices as an excuse to grab it ALL, would they?
Check out our map showing how much of our country Big Oil has already got and spread the word by forwarding it to friends who agree: Enough is enough.
So far, one woman has stood up to Big Oil. Let's thank Speaker Pelosi for keeping a cool head and holding out for real solutions.
| Discuss |
Make Your Travel Matter
Sierra Club founder John Muir believed deeply that conservation begins with experiencing nature's grandeur firsthand, and that's still the guiding principle of Sierra Club Outings. Sure, you could spend another vacation in a high-rise at an overcrowded beach. Or, you could study retreating glaciers from your kayak in remote eastern Greenland, maintain hiking trails in Puerto Rico, or support grassroots environmental efforts in Costa Rica.
Travel with us, and you'll have much more than a vacation. We've just launched our 2009 lineup of international trips, plus a few select domestic itineraries.
Our most popular trips fill up quickly, so have a look now and discover your next life-changing experience.
| Discuss |
The Thirty Percent Solution
Homes and other buildings are America's largest consumers of energy and a major contributor to global warming. That's why the Sierra Club's Cool Cities Campaign is joining with local governments, businesses, and energy-efficiency advocates to support a bold new proposal to adopt "green" building codes for new homes: the Thirty Percent Solution.
Next month, building-code officials from around the country will meet in Minneapolis to vote on whether to strengthen building-code energy-efficiency standards in new homes by 30 percent. By 2030, that would save an estimated 8 quadrillion BTUs of energy and $88 billion in energy costs; reduce CO2 by 464 million metric tons; and create new clean-energy construction and service jobs in the building trades and energy-efficiency product industries.
Make sure your community will be represented at the meeting -- contact your mayor or county leader today.
| Discuss |
Winds of Change in West Virginia
The residents of the Coal River Valley of West Virginia, with the support of the Sierra Club and other environmental groups, are proposing the development of a 440-megawatt wind farm as an economically viable alternative to a planned mountaintop-removal coal-mining operation. If the mountaintop-removal coal-mining proceeds as planned, it will destroy ten square miles of the mountain, pollute waterways, devastate the surrounding communities, and eliminate the vast wind potential the mountain now holds.
Add your signature to the petition asking West Virginia Governor Manchin to protect Coal River Mountain and bring clean energy and green jobs to West Virginia!
EXPLORE
Stand Up to Skeptics
The Sierra Club has joined forces with the Natural Resources Defense Council in smacking down global-warming skeptics at a new website called OpposingViews.com.
Take a look at all sides of the argument, recommend your favorite ones, and post comments.
"Staring Down Doomsday"
From Sierra Magazine: High school students from the Bronx hit the Appalachian Trail and face their fears.
PROTECT
Support the No Child Left Inside Act
Tell your Representative to support the No Child Left Inside Act to provide students with quality environmental education.
If we act now, we can ensure more American children become adults ready to face the environmental challenges that lie ahead.
Sierra Club
85 Second St.
San Francisco, CA 94109
insider@sierraclub.org
http://www.sierraclub.org/
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Firewood taken to camp sites can infect local timber with insects and other problems
GREENTIPS - Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood (8/08)
From: Greentips - Union of Concerned Scientists (greentips@ucsaction.org)
Sent: Tue 8/19/08 10:28 AM
Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood
August 2008
Read this issue of Greentips online
Did you know that by transporting firewood you may unintentionally spread invasive insects and diseases that can destroy trees and reshape entire forests? State and federal quarantines attempt to prevent such damage by prohibiting firewood transport into or out of certain areas, or limiting transport to a specified radius.
Examples of invasive species that can travel in firewood include:
The emerald ash borer, a beetle from Asia that kills American ash trees within one to four years of infestation. It is spreading throughout the Midwest and some southern and mid-Atlantic states, but has also shown up at campgrounds outside of these regions.
The Asian longhorned beetle, whose larvae kill mature trees by feeding on the heartwood and inhibiting the trees’ vascular system. It has been found in Illinois, New Jersey, and New York, and poses a tremendous threat if it spreads.
Sirex noctilio, a wood-boring wasp that can kill trees (mainly pine) in a matter of months by injecting a fungus into the wood to feed its larvae. An adult wasp can carry the fungus as far as 100 miles. It has been found in Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
Sudden oak death, a forest disease caused by the fungus Phytophthora ramorum, which has affected several tree species in California and Oregon.
While each of these infestations is currently limited to specific regions, this is a national problem. Therefore, in addition to following whatever quarantines or regulations are in place, be sure to adopt the practices listed below when using firewood. Because the pests described here can survive cold temperatures, these tips apply throughout the year:
Purchase locally harvested firewood at your destination rather than bringing any with you. This has the added benefits of saving you money through increased fuel economy and reducing the amount of pollution generated in delivering firewood to retail outlets.
If you must transport firewood look for a U.S. Department of Agriculture label that certifies the wood is safe to move.
Lumber that has been processed for building material (“two-by-fours,” for example) is safe to move and burn because the bark has been removed and the wood has been dried. Lumber that has been stored outside, however, or wooden packing materials such as pallets, skids, or crates may harbor pests and should not be transported. Pressure-treated wood and particleboard should also be avoided because they can release harmful fumes when burned.
If you have already transported firewood that does not meet these criteria, burn it as soon as possible.
Let others know about this issue and encourage them to sign our pledge to avoid transporting firewood (see the related links).
Related Links
Don’t Move Firewood Campaign
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources—Firewood Facts, Rules & Advice
Continental Dialogue on Non-Native Forest Insects and Diseases
Union of Concerned Scientists—Firewood Pledge
From: Greentips - Union of Concerned Scientists (greentips@ucsaction.org)
Sent: Tue 8/19/08 10:28 AM
Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood
August 2008
Read this issue of Greentips online
Did you know that by transporting firewood you may unintentionally spread invasive insects and diseases that can destroy trees and reshape entire forests? State and federal quarantines attempt to prevent such damage by prohibiting firewood transport into or out of certain areas, or limiting transport to a specified radius.
Examples of invasive species that can travel in firewood include:
The emerald ash borer, a beetle from Asia that kills American ash trees within one to four years of infestation. It is spreading throughout the Midwest and some southern and mid-Atlantic states, but has also shown up at campgrounds outside of these regions.
The Asian longhorned beetle, whose larvae kill mature trees by feeding on the heartwood and inhibiting the trees’ vascular system. It has been found in Illinois, New Jersey, and New York, and poses a tremendous threat if it spreads.
Sirex noctilio, a wood-boring wasp that can kill trees (mainly pine) in a matter of months by injecting a fungus into the wood to feed its larvae. An adult wasp can carry the fungus as far as 100 miles. It has been found in Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
Sudden oak death, a forest disease caused by the fungus Phytophthora ramorum, which has affected several tree species in California and Oregon.
While each of these infestations is currently limited to specific regions, this is a national problem. Therefore, in addition to following whatever quarantines or regulations are in place, be sure to adopt the practices listed below when using firewood. Because the pests described here can survive cold temperatures, these tips apply throughout the year:
Purchase locally harvested firewood at your destination rather than bringing any with you. This has the added benefits of saving you money through increased fuel economy and reducing the amount of pollution generated in delivering firewood to retail outlets.
If you must transport firewood look for a U.S. Department of Agriculture label that certifies the wood is safe to move.
Lumber that has been processed for building material (“two-by-fours,” for example) is safe to move and burn because the bark has been removed and the wood has been dried. Lumber that has been stored outside, however, or wooden packing materials such as pallets, skids, or crates may harbor pests and should not be transported. Pressure-treated wood and particleboard should also be avoided because they can release harmful fumes when burned.
If you have already transported firewood that does not meet these criteria, burn it as soon as possible.
Let others know about this issue and encourage them to sign our pledge to avoid transporting firewood (see the related links).
Related Links
Don’t Move Firewood Campaign
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources—Firewood Facts, Rules & Advice
Continental Dialogue on Non-Native Forest Insects and Diseases
Union of Concerned Scientists—Firewood Pledge
Firewood taken to camp sites can infect local timber with insects and other problems
GREENTIPS - Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood (8/08)
From: Greentips - Union of Concerned Scientists (greentips@ucsaction.org)
Sent: Tue 8/19/08 10:28 AM
Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood
August 2008
Read this issue of Greentips online
Did you know that by transporting firewood you may unintentionally spread invasive insects and diseases that can destroy trees and reshape entire forests? State and federal quarantines attempt to prevent such damage by prohibiting firewood transport into or out of certain areas, or limiting transport to a specified radius.
Examples of invasive species that can travel in firewood include:
The emerald ash borer, a beetle from Asia that kills American ash trees within one to four years of infestation. It is spreading throughout the Midwest and some southern and mid-Atlantic states, but has also shown up at campgrounds outside of these regions.
The Asian longhorned beetle, whose larvae kill mature trees by feeding on the heartwood and inhibiting the trees’ vascular system. It has been found in Illinois, New Jersey, and New York, and poses a tremendous threat if it spreads.
Sirex noctilio, a wood-boring wasp that can kill trees (mainly pine) in a matter of months by injecting a fungus into the wood to feed its larvae. An adult wasp can carry the fungus as far as 100 miles. It has been found in Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
Sudden oak death, a forest disease caused by the fungus Phytophthora ramorum, which has affected several tree species in California and Oregon.
While each of these infestations is currently limited to specific regions, this is a national problem. Therefore, in addition to following whatever quarantines or regulations are in place, be sure to adopt the practices listed below when using firewood. Because the pests described here can survive cold temperatures, these tips apply throughout the year:
Purchase locally harvested firewood at your destination rather than bringing any with you. This has the added benefits of saving you money through increased fuel economy and reducing the amount of pollution generated in delivering firewood to retail outlets.
If you must transport firewood look for a U.S. Department of Agriculture label that certifies the wood is safe to move.
Lumber that has been processed for building material (“two-by-fours,” for example) is safe to move and burn because the bark has been removed and the wood has been dried. Lumber that has been stored outside, however, or wooden packing materials such as pallets, skids, or crates may harbor pests and should not be transported. Pressure-treated wood and particleboard should also be avoided because they can release harmful fumes when burned.
If you have already transported firewood that does not meet these criteria, burn it as soon as possible.
Let others know about this issue and encourage them to sign our pledge to avoid transporting firewood (see the related links).
Related Links
Don’t Move Firewood Campaign
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources—Firewood Facts, Rules & Advice
Continental Dialogue on Non-Native Forest Insects and Diseases
Union of Concerned Scientists—Firewood Pledge
From: Greentips - Union of Concerned Scientists (greentips@ucsaction.org)
Sent: Tue 8/19/08 10:28 AM
Going Camping? Don't Bring Firewood
August 2008
Read this issue of Greentips online
Did you know that by transporting firewood you may unintentionally spread invasive insects and diseases that can destroy trees and reshape entire forests? State and federal quarantines attempt to prevent such damage by prohibiting firewood transport into or out of certain areas, or limiting transport to a specified radius.
Examples of invasive species that can travel in firewood include:
The emerald ash borer, a beetle from Asia that kills American ash trees within one to four years of infestation. It is spreading throughout the Midwest and some southern and mid-Atlantic states, but has also shown up at campgrounds outside of these regions.
The Asian longhorned beetle, whose larvae kill mature trees by feeding on the heartwood and inhibiting the trees’ vascular system. It has been found in Illinois, New Jersey, and New York, and poses a tremendous threat if it spreads.
Sirex noctilio, a wood-boring wasp that can kill trees (mainly pine) in a matter of months by injecting a fungus into the wood to feed its larvae. An adult wasp can carry the fungus as far as 100 miles. It has been found in Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.
Sudden oak death, a forest disease caused by the fungus Phytophthora ramorum, which has affected several tree species in California and Oregon.
While each of these infestations is currently limited to specific regions, this is a national problem. Therefore, in addition to following whatever quarantines or regulations are in place, be sure to adopt the practices listed below when using firewood. Because the pests described here can survive cold temperatures, these tips apply throughout the year:
Purchase locally harvested firewood at your destination rather than bringing any with you. This has the added benefits of saving you money through increased fuel economy and reducing the amount of pollution generated in delivering firewood to retail outlets.
If you must transport firewood look for a U.S. Department of Agriculture label that certifies the wood is safe to move.
Lumber that has been processed for building material (“two-by-fours,” for example) is safe to move and burn because the bark has been removed and the wood has been dried. Lumber that has been stored outside, however, or wooden packing materials such as pallets, skids, or crates may harbor pests and should not be transported. Pressure-treated wood and particleboard should also be avoided because they can release harmful fumes when burned.
If you have already transported firewood that does not meet these criteria, burn it as soon as possible.
Let others know about this issue and encourage them to sign our pledge to avoid transporting firewood (see the related links).
Related Links
Don’t Move Firewood Campaign
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources—Firewood Facts, Rules & Advice
Continental Dialogue on Non-Native Forest Insects and Diseases
Union of Concerned Scientists—Firewood Pledge
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
NO COAL meeting Wednesday August 13th 7pm
Molly Rawn
OHG Sierra Club, Chair
(479) 879-1620
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Burke
Date: Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Subject: Important NO COAL meeting Wednesday August 13th 7pm
To: burke@ecoconservation.org
Hi everyone,
We had a successful tour traveling the state last week showing the documentary "Fighting Goliath" and talking with community groups about forming a no new coal coalition. Check out these links for an update:
http://arkansasmatters.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=96901
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/08/04/news/080508fzlibmov.txt
So far we have set up 'Clean Air Arkansas' groups in Fayetteville, Little Rock, Conway, and Hope to oppose the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
This Wednesday August 13th at 7pm we will meet in Fayetteville to discuss in more detail our campaign and delegate roles to people who are committed to this effort. Please join us and invite your friends and family. Time is running out and we need to come together to stop these coal plants
Here is the address for the meeting this Wednesday:
United Campus Ministry
Omni Center
902 W Maple St
Fayetteville, AR
Also, Maggie Bailey, a volunteer in Fayetteville has asked to coordinate events while I am in Little Rock so you can email either her or me for more questions about our campaign. Here is Maggie's email: mtucker22@yahoo.com
Hope to see you at the meeting. Thanks for your support.
James
burke@ecoconservation.org
www.ecoconservation.org
336-455-1065
OHG Sierra Club, Chair
(479) 879-1620
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Burke
Date: Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Subject: Important NO COAL meeting Wednesday August 13th 7pm
To: burke@ecoconservation.org
Hi everyone,
We had a successful tour traveling the state last week showing the documentary "Fighting Goliath" and talking with community groups about forming a no new coal coalition. Check out these links for an update:
http://arkansasmatters.com/content/fulltext/news/?cid=96901
http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/08/04/news/080508fzlibmov.txt
So far we have set up 'Clean Air Arkansas' groups in Fayetteville, Little Rock, Conway, and Hope to oppose the construction of new coal-fired power plants.
This Wednesday August 13th at 7pm we will meet in Fayetteville to discuss in more detail our campaign and delegate roles to people who are committed to this effort. Please join us and invite your friends and family. Time is running out and we need to come together to stop these coal plants
Here is the address for the meeting this Wednesday:
United Campus Ministry
Omni Center
902 W Maple St
Fayetteville, AR
Also, Maggie Bailey, a volunteer in Fayetteville has asked to coordinate events while I am in Little Rock so you can email either her or me for more questions about our campaign. Here is Maggie's email: mtucker22@yahoo.com
Hope to see you at the meeting. Thanks for your support.
James
burke@ecoconservation.org
www.ecoconservation.org
336-455-1065
Monday, August 11, 2008
Fran Alexander's Northwest Arkansas Times column urges governor to persuade commission to use gas money for habitat preservation, restoration
CROSS CURRENTS : Frack II
Fran Alexander frana@nwarktimes.com
Posted on Monday, August 11, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/Editorial/68004
“Anyone who can solve the problems of water will be worthy of two Nobel prizes — one for peace and one for science.” — John F. Kennedy If you read my July 28 article “Frack, rattle, and roll,” about the Fayetteville Shale gas drilling, you know that all that glitters is not necessarily pure gold. In the case of natural gas being released from “fracked” shale strata under several counties in central Arkansas, the big money being made there is awash with serious costs as well. Politicians blinded by the prospect of billions glutting the state economy have generally ignored these costs. So far, none of the money to be garnered from a severance tax on the gas bonanza or from leases has been specifically earmarked for environmental protection costs.
We often read about green issues with a lulled feeling of security that the network of laws and regulations in our country will protect us individually and collectively from dire ecological and financial consequences. It’s time to burst that bubble. Federal oil and gas production exemptions abound to the point that one is left feeling we are living on a wild, lawless frontier where random bullets of enviro horrors whiz by our heads daily. (See: www. earthworksaction. org / pubs / PetroleumExemptions 1 c. pdf ) Most citizens are also on their own financially when dealing with leases, taxes and the complicated jungle of resource prospectors. It seems even the state is not too sure what is in its best interests in regard to resources like oil, gas, bromide, coal or money, and is being especially slow in comprehending what is happening to its water, truly our most valuable resource.
Since my last article, a whole new wrinkle about gas drilling has slithered into the news. Neither the general public nor most of the state’s major environmental organizations (Audubon, Arkansas Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club ) were asked for any input before the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission signed two gas leases. One lease covers 7, 579 mineral acres and 15, 500 surface acres in the Petit Jean River Wildlife Management Area near Ola, in Yell County; the other for 3, 949 mineral acres and 11, 683 surface acres in the Gulf Mountain Wildlife Management Area in Van Buren County. Chesapeake Energy Corp. is parting with $ 29. 5 million and a 20 percent royalty interest to get to drill in these public lands.
Keep in mind that land surface (and therefore, habitat) is severely affected where cleared drilling pads, which range from one to five acres in size, are located, and by many miles of roads needing to be improved, expanded, or built for the hundreds of truck trips servicing drilling sites. Compressors hum loudly day and night, so noise can be a problem for humans and animals. And major impacts from pipeline rights of way, which can vary from 20 to 50 feet in width, occur because their pathways denude vast swaths of land. Many people do not realize that mineral leasing confers dominant use of the surface for extraction of underground minerals, no matter who owns the surface or whether they want drilling on their land or not. But on public lands the public should at least have been asked.
“What are we thinking?” is pretty much the question that environmentalists, snugly wrapped in our straitjackets, mutter to ourselves as we rock back and forth banging our heads into walls. I ended my last article asking, “Will we do anything about this situation?” meaning will we find a way to get at least some of the tax revenue from this gas production directed into preventing and repairing the environmental harm that will affect Arkansas’ land, air, water and human health? The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission’s leasing has provided a whole new pot o’ gold for grasping, and the commission and the governor are having somewhat of a standoff over who gets to decide how this wealth will be spent.
The commission says the money is theirs to direct to wildlife. Sounds good unless that “wildlife” includes trucks, salaries, buildings, game wardens, hunting programs, equipment, etc. for humans. It needs to be directed to habitat protection and repair, the essence of what could be harmed by drilling activities. The money could also go a long way in establishing methods to protect watersheds with conservation easements, thereby expanding preservation all over the state, not just within boundaries of management areas. Obviously, those borders have just been proven not to be sacrosanct when money rides into town.
The League of Women Voters has done extensive study on the Fayetteville Shale Play, taken tours to the drilling sites and in January co-hosted a forum on the issue with the Sierra Club. Mary Alice Serafini, state president of the League, said they have developed Consensus Positions, which they hope the state Legislature will adopt.
Position 1 is the recommendation that a single water authority be established to coordinate the use and regulation of the state’s public waters.
Position 2 recommends funding for oversight and inspection so that problems can be addressed before damage occurs instead of being only complaint driven.
Position 3 provides greater protection of landowners’ surface rights and of waterways.
Position 4 provides full disclosure of chemical additives being used in drilling and production activities that might infiltrate groundwater or pollute the air. (This is a “right-to-know” issue for anyone who otherwise might be exposed to harmful contaminants.)
Position 5 promotes the establishment of a fund for infrastructure changes and damages in areas affected by gas drilling.
So the League has been willing to do something. I hope you will too by contacting our legislators to tell them to support environmental protection and positions such as the League has taken. Immediately, however, we need to contact Gov. Mike Beebe and let him know we consider resource revenue the property of the citizens of Arkansas, and that the public’s money should go toward protecting our state for all of us, not just those with gas.
Fran Alexander is a local resident and an active environmentalist.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Waste Management to Dedicate Arkansasʼ First Landfill-Gas-to-Energy Plant
WASTE MANAGEMENT NEWS RELEASE
Waste Management to Dedicate Arkansasʼ First Landfill Gas to Energy Plant and
Announce New Partnership with Audubon Arkansas
Senator Blanche Lincoln, Governor Mike Beebe and Congressman Vic Snyder Scheduled to Attend Event
State and local leaders will join Waste Management executives on Tuesday, August 12, 9:30 am at the Two Pine Landfill to officially dedicate Arkansasʼ first and only landfill gas-to-energy plant. This plant is part of Waste Managementʼs sustainable commitment to Arkansas as well as North America, unveiled this past October as part of Waste Managementʼs 2020 plan.
Additionally, Waste Management officials will announce a new first-of-its-kind partnership with Audubon Arkansas.
What: Landfill Gas to Energy Plant Dedication and Announcement of New Partnership with Audubon Arkansas
When: Tuesday, August 12 at 9:30 am
Where: Two Pine Landfill
100 Two Pine Drive
North Little Rock, AR 72117
Who: Senator Blanche Lincoln
Governor Mike Beebe
Congressman Vic Snyder
Waste Management Executives
Arkansas Audubon Director Ken Smith
The Two Pine Landfill gas-to-energy plant is a 4.8 megawatt facility, providing power for approximately 4,500 homes in North Little Rock. Consisting of six large engines, it was constructed in 2006 and recently achieved full generation. The engines are powered by methane gas, which forms in the landfill as a result of the decomposition of waste.
Approximately two years ago, Waste Management and Audubon Arkansas began discussions regarding the development of a wildlife management plan for the Two Pine Landfill. This first-of-its-kind program between Waste Management and Audubon Arkansas has the potential to expand to other Waste Management landfills. At Tuesdayʼs event, Waste Management officials and leaders from Audubon Arkansas will unveil the vision for Two Pine Landfill.
This past April, Waste Management received the stateʼs approval to expand the Two Pine Landfill. In the coming years, Waste Management plans to build an additional landfill gas-to-energy plant in the expanded landfill area.
These two projects are part of the companyʼs environmental sustainability initiative. Waste Management has committed to the following actions by 2020: doubling its waste based energy generation from the equivalent of generating enough energy for one million to two million homes, quadrupling the number of its sites certified by the Wildlife Habitat Council to 100 as well as set aside 25,000 acres for conservation, nearly tripling the amount of recyclables it manages to 20 million tons; and reducing its vehicle fleet emissions by 15 percent and increasing fuel efficiency by 15 percent.
Waste Management, based in Houston, Texas, is the leading provider of comprehensive waste management services in North America. Our subsidiaries provide collection, transfer, recycling and resource recovery, and disposal services. We are also a leading developer, operator and owner of waste-to-energy and landfill gas-to-energy facilities in the United States. Our customers include residential, commercial, industrial, and municipal customers throughout North America.
For more information, visit www.wm.com or www.thinkgreen.com
Waste Management to Dedicate Arkansasʼ First Landfill Gas to Energy Plant and
Announce New Partnership with Audubon Arkansas
Senator Blanche Lincoln, Governor Mike Beebe and Congressman Vic Snyder Scheduled to Attend Event
State and local leaders will join Waste Management executives on Tuesday, August 12, 9:30 am at the Two Pine Landfill to officially dedicate Arkansasʼ first and only landfill gas-to-energy plant. This plant is part of Waste Managementʼs sustainable commitment to Arkansas as well as North America, unveiled this past October as part of Waste Managementʼs 2020 plan.
Additionally, Waste Management officials will announce a new first-of-its-kind partnership with Audubon Arkansas.
What: Landfill Gas to Energy Plant Dedication and Announcement of New Partnership with Audubon Arkansas
When: Tuesday, August 12 at 9:30 am
Where: Two Pine Landfill
100 Two Pine Drive
North Little Rock, AR 72117
Who: Senator Blanche Lincoln
Governor Mike Beebe
Congressman Vic Snyder
Waste Management Executives
Arkansas Audubon Director Ken Smith
The Two Pine Landfill gas-to-energy plant is a 4.8 megawatt facility, providing power for approximately 4,500 homes in North Little Rock. Consisting of six large engines, it was constructed in 2006 and recently achieved full generation. The engines are powered by methane gas, which forms in the landfill as a result of the decomposition of waste.
Approximately two years ago, Waste Management and Audubon Arkansas began discussions regarding the development of a wildlife management plan for the Two Pine Landfill. This first-of-its-kind program between Waste Management and Audubon Arkansas has the potential to expand to other Waste Management landfills. At Tuesdayʼs event, Waste Management officials and leaders from Audubon Arkansas will unveil the vision for Two Pine Landfill.
This past April, Waste Management received the stateʼs approval to expand the Two Pine Landfill. In the coming years, Waste Management plans to build an additional landfill gas-to-energy plant in the expanded landfill area.
These two projects are part of the companyʼs environmental sustainability initiative. Waste Management has committed to the following actions by 2020: doubling its waste based energy generation from the equivalent of generating enough energy for one million to two million homes, quadrupling the number of its sites certified by the Wildlife Habitat Council to 100 as well as set aside 25,000 acres for conservation, nearly tripling the amount of recyclables it manages to 20 million tons; and reducing its vehicle fleet emissions by 15 percent and increasing fuel efficiency by 15 percent.
Waste Management, based in Houston, Texas, is the leading provider of comprehensive waste management services in North America. Our subsidiaries provide collection, transfer, recycling and resource recovery, and disposal services. We are also a leading developer, operator and owner of waste-to-energy and landfill gas-to-energy facilities in the United States. Our customers include residential, commercial, industrial, and municipal customers throughout North America.
For more information, visit www.wm.com or www.thinkgreen.com
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Monarch butterflies visit World Peace Wetland Prairie to lay eggs on milkweed so that caterpillars can eat and grow.
Please click on image to ENLARGE photo of viceroy butterfly August 10, 2008, on World Peace Wetland Prairie. Viceroys may nectar on milkweed inflorescences but lay their eggs where their caterpillers will be able to feed on willow trees and relatives of willow trees, which allow are plentiful on World Peace Wetland Prairie. Despite the similarity of the two types of butterflies, their caterpillers are extremely different and do not eat milkweed vegetation.
Please click on link to ENLARGE tall-green milkweed, Asclepias hirtella, at World Peace Wetland Prairie on August 10, 2008.
Please click on link to ENLARGE tall-green milkweed, Asclepias hirtella, at World Peace Wetland Prairie on August 10, 2008.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Boys find relief from near 100-degree heat in city stream
Please click on link to Enlarge photos of boys enjoying city stream about 200 yards south of Sixth Street, the Martin Luther King Boulevard, which is adjacent to the University of Arkansas campus in Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Why doesn't Washington County top this list? Developers rule and they want to burn off the trees they bulldoze
19 counties issue bans on burning
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Why doesn't Washington County top this list? Developers rule and they want to burn off the trees they bulldoze
19 counties issue bans on burning
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Why doesn't Washington County top this list? Developers rule and they want to burn off the trees they bulldoze
19 counties issue bans on burning
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Why doesn't Washington County top this list? Developers rule and they want to burn off the trees they bulldoze
19 counties issue bans on burning
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS
Posted on Saturday, August 2, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/233061/
Nineteen counties across Arkansas, including Pulaski County, have declared bans on outdoor burning.
Hot, dry conditions that are keeping temperatures well above the 90-degree mark prompted Pulaski County Judge Buddy Villines issue an outdoor burning ban Friday.
Other counties that have issued burn bans are Clark, Cleveland, Columbia, Crawford, Dallas, Faulkner, Garland, Hempstead, Jefferson, Johnson, Lafayette, Lincoln, Miller, Nevada, Ouachita, Polk, Saline and Sebastian. In addition, the city of Malvern has issued a burn ban.
The ban means that all open burning of trash, grass, brush or other materials is prohibited until the burn ban is lifted, said Kathy Botsford, director of the Pulaski County Department of Emergency Management.
“Due to the extreme heat and the rapidly drying conditions and lack of precipitation... it has become necessary to issue a burn ban,” Botsford said.
The ban will last until the hot, dry conditions end, she said.
The Arkansas Forestry Commission reported four of the state’s nine fire districts are facing high fire danger, while three others are facing moderate fire danger.
The commission reported 168 fires in July. For the year, 537 fires have burned 6, 246 acres.
“With little significant rainfall in sight, Arkansas residents living in forested areas should begin taking measures to protect their homes from wildfire,” the commission said in a news release Friday.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
