No word on Smokey bear’s new duties yet, but maybe they’ll make him do a new public service pitch, maybe something like this:
Above: a parody image, see WUWT story on Ursus Bogus
Forest Service Shifts Strategy to Address Changing Climate
The Forest Service has issued a national road map for responding to climate change, along with a performance scorecard to measure how well each individual forest implements the strategy.
The new blueprint outlines a series of short-term initiatives and longer-term projects for field units to address climate impacts on the country’s forests and grasslands.
“A changing global climate brings increased uncertainties to the conservation of our natural resources,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement. “The new roadmap and scorecard system will help the Forest Service play a leadership role in responding to a changing climate and ensure that our national forests and grasslands continue to provide a wide range of benefits to all Americans.”
The national road map focuses on three types of actions Forest Service managers must take. They include assessing risks, vulnerabilities, policies and knowledge gaps; engaging employees and external partners; and management actions, including adaptation and mitigation.
Climate change impacts likely will vary greatly in different places, the strategy notes. “There will never be enough financial or other resources to address all of these risks,” it says. “The first step in addressing climate change is to carefully assess the associated risks and vulnerabilities for natural and human communities alike.”
Immediate assessment actions include providing basic and applied science to help managers respond to climate change, conducting workshops, utilizing national monitoring networks, furnishing more predictive information, developing vulnerability assessments, tailoring monitoring and aligning service policy and direction.
Longer-term assessment will focus on expanding the agency’s capacity for assessing the social impacts of climate change, implementing a genetic resources conservation strategy and fortifying internal climate change partnerships.
The plan’s second component aims to help the Forest Service develop partnerships with other organizations to avoid duplication and build on complementary assets. It calls for public education and outreach and coordination with other agencies, communities and interested groups.
And the roadmap calls for on-the-ground management responses including adaptation to climate change effects, mitigation to reduce the sources or enhance sinks of greenhouse gases, and sustainable consumption.
…
Full story here at the New York Times
h/t to Charles the moderator
Looks like an extension of the House Resolution 25.
The following is from the Clinton era: (The 25×25 Initiative is sponsored by the Energy Future Coalition, a project of the UN Foundation)
“House Concurrent Resolution 25
“The official title of the resolution [H. Con. Res. 25] as introduced is: “Expressing the sense of Congress that it is the goal of the United States that, not later than January 1, 2025, the agricultural, forestry, and working land of the United States should provide from renewable resources not less than 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States and continue to produce safe, abundant, and affordable food, feed, and fiber.”
WHY 25X25 IS GOOD FOR YOU”
“American’s farms, ranches and forests – our working lands – are well positioned to make significant contributions to the development and implementation of new energy solutions. Long known and respected for their contributions to providing the nation’s food and fiber, an emerging opportunity exists for crop, livestock and grass and horticultural producers, as well as forest land owners, to become major producers of another essential commodity – energy.”
And yes the “working land” this is talking about is private property. This is why the USDA has tried to shove Premises ID down the throats of US farmers for the last several years.
Originally written to prevent government from trespassing on the people’s right to contract, the Constitution states in Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, that
“No state shall … pass any … law impairing the obligation of contracts, …” It is this constitutional provision that allows the Federal government to implement Federal programs by using so-called “Cooperative Agreements” (basically, a certain type of contract) in lieu of legislation. Commencing in the late-1950s, the Federal government began to contract with other jurisdictions to implement Federal programs where Congress does not have legislative authority.
In 1976, the U.S. government signed a UN document that declared:
Land … cannot be treated as an ordinary asset controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice;
D-1. Government must control the use of land to achieve equitable distribution of resources;
D-2. Control land use through zoning and land-use planning;
D-3. Excessive profits from land use must be recaptured by government;
D-4. Public ownership of land should be used to exercise urban and rural land reform;
D-5. Owner rights should be separated from development rights, which should be held by a public authority.
This document was signed on behalf of the U.S. by Carla A. Hills, then secretary of housing and urban development, and William K. Reilly, then head of the Conservation Fund, who later became the administrator of the EPA.
Land-use controls found their way into the 1987 report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, “Our Common Future,” which first defined the term “sustainable development.” The meaning of sustainable development here defined was codified in another U.N. document called “Agenda 21,” which was signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1992. This document recommended that every nation create a national sustainable development initiative.
“On June 8, 2007, Under-Secretary of Agriculture Bruce Knight, speaking at the World Pork Expo in Des Moines, Iowa, said, “We have to live by the same international rules we’re expecting other people to do.” He is referring to the International Criminal Court.
” The ICC is in part modeled on the Vienna Diplomatic Relations Conventions text where [premises] is defined globally and with a global use intended with no recognition afforded to the rights of private individuals, national laws or protections, or the rights or recognition to private property ownership.” http://nonais.org/2009/01/16/bulletin-board-200901/
This is why farmers who have educated themselves are very angry.
And finally President Clinton took the UN NGOs a step further. By Presidential Executive Order the USA was divided into ten regions. These regions are governed by an unholy mix of unelected government bureaucrats and NGOs. The regions were set up by President Nixon but implementing “regional governance began in earnest with the Clinton-Gore administration. “On the heels of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development , came the President’s Community Empowerment Board, chaired by Vice President Al Gore,” http://www.rense.com/general63/ree.htm
Smokey the Marmot, maybe? “Only you can prevent Mammoth Marmots.”
Or how’s about “Snowy the Bear,” the Polar version, of course. Claim the copyrights for your blog, so they don’t use it to scare the kids with sad stories of Snowy.
One obvious payoff for the active and publicaly announced “interventions” by governments in all spheres of human activity is that when NOTHING untoward happens, they can proudly proclaim to their follower sheep that it was their brilliant, unprecedented (that word again) forward thinking initiatives that saved mankind from the unthinkable horrors that surely would have pushed all life to the edge and beyond.
Some sensible ideas, overlaid with a thick veneer of box-ticking & beaurocracy?
I am a great fan of Gail Combs who always has interesting points to add. I went to a party last night where there were several members of the British House of Lords. I am sorry to report that they would probably have approved of the US Forest Service taking account of Climate Change. I was too cowardly to address their ignorance, which was held with the usual polite and well mannered religious zeal, and they are, after all, the power in the land, are they not? I understood what the brave Lord Lawson is up against. I feel sure that Gail Combs would have taken them on, but folks, I have to confess that faced with all that power and certainty I let the side down.
Job ch12v24,25 is almost prophetic:
He takes away the understanding of the leaders of the people of the Earth, and makes them wander in a pathless wilderness. They grope in the dark without light …..
(once they close all the coal burning power stations)
They whom the God’s intend to destroy, They first make mad.
According to Dr David Viner (in 2000), a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Last year many councils in the UK ran out of grit for the roads and with many thousands of additional people dying due to the cold it was clear that government in general had seen preparing for cold weather as something that no need to be done due to the likes of the CRU.
Even if it happened 99.99..% of people have no idea what a 0.02C/year rise in temperature means and totally overestimate the impact on the climate. All they see is “warming” and down come the reality shutters over their brain.
They include assessing risks, vulnerabilities, policies and knowledge gaps…
The biggest “knowledge gap” in the Agriculture Department is between Tom Vilsap’s ears. No matter how great the distance, there’s no conclusion too far for him to leap to..
As this department is officially tied to the government…what would you expect them to report?
OT & apologies:-
And then there’s this little gem!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10715787
Not one ruddy mention that sea-levels have risen without the aid of CO2 3000 years ago!!!! Why is it that it’s Climate Change when a Damsel fly returns to Britain, & the Netherlands so it would appear, after 50-60 years of absence, but not when they find a monkey skeleton under water? Nothing, zilch, nada, rien!
I wonder how many billions this will cost us?
They whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad. They then put them in charge of the asylum. Noting the cooling in the GISTEMP record and the David Archerbald prediction of a lazy SC24 your National Parks (National Sparks and Wildfires here in Oz) won’t be doing much mitigation so they should save heaps to spend on adaptation; snowploughs and the like.
The Greens here have teamed up with the Labor Party,ridiculously left and obscenely left respectively to win the federal election next month. The Greens want to stop mining and exports, establish national parks on farmlands, prevent new power stations other than solar and wind and generally wish to stuff our economy. The sad thing is there are enough idiots out there to vote them in. Sometimes I think we have left it too late to restore balance and common sense.
My advice to my American friends; don’t let the warm and fuzzy watermelon greens ( green on the outside, red on the inside) ruin your country as well. We are doomed, the EU is screwed. You are really the last bastion of individual rights. Don’t let them go.
Imho, this is Obama’s Administration Plan B on carbon. It appears a carbon bill under whatever name may not pass the Senate this year. You can bet the USDA farm subsidies that one won’t pass in the next Congress. And given some latest polls where “any Republican” noses out Obama if the 2012 election were held today makes if very iffy for an Obama second term.
This, one needs to review this latest publication in the context of Obama’s policies and his political thinking. Click on the “roadmap” pdf and then the link to the USDA link to their five year plan. The term “climate change” throughout government includes, as noted in the USDA plan, just about everything the Sierra Club. USDA even calls out international markets climate change markets on page 9 (i.e., cap and trade) under the heading of Facilitate Access to International Markets. Page 12 even accepts international agreements regarding climate change. The USDA plan scatters “pollution” throughout their document. Now turn to the EPA which defines pollution as CO2 and you’re completing the picture. What’s remarkable is the Forestry Roadmap doesn’t use the term “pollution” but it’s virtually assured to be included in a detailed five year plan when it’s published.
All of which explains the larger picture of how Obama views the Congressional order of implementing his agenda. First big spending bills (call it vote buying), opportunistic actions with the auto industry, the huge push for health care and now financial regulations. Climate change, energy and carbon control have been on the back burner because he doesn’t need a bill given the power SCOTUS gave the EPA along with prior delegations by the Congress. As you read, he’s effectively shut down oil, he’s ramping up tighter (read out-of-business) control over refineries, ditto on the coal industry and just this week the EPA is opening up a process which will shut down natural gas production – first in PA then nationwide.
And this is not a conspiracy theory. It’s just the implementation of Obama’s policies using the tools he has and the oh so willing Administration heads and czar’s. You don’t need a chapter heading to understand the details.
@ Gail Combs says:
July 22, 2010 at 12:18 am
Gail, you may be interested in this: Forest Products Lab; “Wood Handbook”
http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/products/publications/several_pubs.php?grouping_id=100&header_id=p .
Up until this edition, which came out this year, it had been a purely technical (and valuable) reference for those in the wood industry, but this year they added an entire chapter (Chapter One ), given over to purely political commentary on Climate Change and their role in it. It’s still a valuable technical reference, but the addition of the above tells me that there is considerable political pressure being applied to toe the party line across the board.
The unconstitutional government attack on private property rights, or rather the revolking of the injustices from Gail Combs comment #1 would make an excellent plank for the Tea Party platform.
President Bush senior wiped his backside with the constitution quite often. The acid rain and ozone hole scams come to mind.
Chris L says:
July 22, 2010 at 12:49 am
Smokey the Marmot, maybe? “Only you can prevent Mammoth Marmots.”
Chris L says:
July 22, 2010 at 12:54 am
Or how’s about “Snowy the Bear,” the Polar version, of course. Claim the copyrights for your blog, so they don’t use it to scare the kids with sad stories of Snowy.
—————————————————-
How about “Snowy the Marmot?
I would like to see somebody quantify the costs of all this to the forestry service versus documented benefits, or any benefits. Given year on year variations versus tenths of a degree changes in global temperature I don’t think they will be able to quantify any benefits at all … at least none that would survive scrutiny.
The “national road map” reads like a compendium of all of the climate change myths, disinformation, and pseudo-scientific spin, written in the usual display of governmental bafflegab, all of which has been thoroughly debunked, of course. They continually confuse and conflate naturally-occurring events, and even some man-caused environmental concerns, such as pollution with the manmade climate change myth. I could only wade partway through that pile of total, unmitigated equine excrement before giving up in disgust. Governmental psyience. What a waste.
Only you can adapt to climate change.
Let the idiots stand in the way of a freight train with fistfuls of their own money.
This comes from the same government that just last year commissioned a report telling us snow in the U.S. would be a thing of the past and temperatures and that temperatures would rise ad infinium. Then we’re told in a new study, “climate change” will cause more snow and cold not only in the U.S., but Europe.
It doesn’t really matter what happens, it’s OUR fault.
Anthony,
What a funny cartoon. Do you have a comic graphic to illustrate the Department of Defense attitude about climate change. Those greens in the military will stop at nothing to convince the taxpayers!
In its recently released Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the DoD states, “Climate change and energy are two key issues that will play a significant role in shaping the future security environment.” No debate. According to the U.S. security apparatus, these are issues that the U.S. security apparatus will have to deal with.
The QDR states two “broad” ways in which climate change will affect U.S. security. Global warming will “shape the operating environment, roles, and missions that we undertake”, and DoD will be forced to deal with “the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities.”
The QDR doesn’t blink:
The U.S. Global Change Research Program, composed of 13 federal agencies, reported in 2009 that climate-related changes are already being observed in every region of the world, including the United States and its coastal waters. Among these physical changes are increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the oceans and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows.
What effects does this have on American national defense? The QDR continues:
Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration. While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world. In addition, extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster response both within the United States and overseas.
Note the certainty. Climate change “will” cause resource scarcity and “will” cause the spread of disease. For the DoD, these changes have a two-pronged effect, as an “accelerant” of instability and conflict, as well as an increased burden on the military to engage in humanitarian assistance, limiting its ability to focus solely on defense.
So much for campfires.
“There will never be enough financial or other resources to address all of these risks”
translated…
Send more taxpayer money so we can spend it on useless projects, hire more people, and give ourselves raises and pats on the back regardless of the outcome.
Hokey the Bear says: Only YOU can prevent ‘*fireball-earth’!
(*rising sea levels, falling sea levels, high temps, low temps, rain, floods, drought, hurricanes, tornados, plagues of locusts, malaria, eye strain, lower back pain, psoriasis, plaque, gingivitis, tennis elbow, late pizzas, exploding butterflies, sad penguins, lost carkeys, premature ejacuwhatzit, and/or anything else that is or is-soon-to-be linked to fossil fuel usage by undoubtedly rigorous
incomprehensibleincontrovertible peer-revieved study)I was more than annoyed when I discovered that the Ontario government had added several pages on climate change to their Driver’s Handbook.
mariwarcwm says:
July 22, 2010 at 1:16 am
I am a great fan of Gail Combs……
________________________________________________________
Actually the information I have access to is from a group of farmers who have been researching the subject for a good ten years. We are irate about the clear attempt to monopolize the world food supply at the cost of the pain, anguish and death of millions of people. Politicians like Clinton that do a mia cupoa without fixing the problem cut no ice. Why aren’t Clinton and his buddy Al Gore speaking out on the problem NOW as Markey tries to get the UN/WTO bill passed in the USA?
“Today’s global food crisis shows we all blew it, including me when I was president, by treating food crops as commodities instead of as a vital right of the world’s poor” Bill Clinton has told a UN gathering.” (in 2008) http://www.agmates.com/blog/bill-clinton-admits-global-free-trade-policy-has-forced-millions-of-people-into-poverty/
Clinton’s mia culpa is too little too late and about as false as it can get. He it is again two years later.
“I Feel Their Paaaaaiiiiiiiinnnnnn!” Bill Clinton Makes His Apology for the Neoliberalization of Haiti as He Gears Up to Do It Again.
“About a month ago Bill Clinton sat in congress and admitted that he played a vital part in the willful destruction of the agricultural base of Haiti in order to “relieve them of the burden of producing their own food so they could leap right into the industrial revolution“. Not only does he try to pass off their neoliberalization scheme as a “mistake” but he admits it was really only good for ”some of my farmers (subsidized rice farmers) in Arkansas“….
“Since 1981, until about a year or so ago we started rethinking it, we thought that we rich countries that produce a lot of food should sell it to poor countries and relieve them of the burden of producing their own food so that, thank goodness, they can leap right into the industrial era. It has not worked. It may have been good for some of my farmers in Arkansas but it has not worked. It was a mistake. It was a mistake that I was a party to, I am not pointing the finger at anybody, I did that. I have to live everyday with the consequences of the lost capacity to produce their rice crop in Haiti to feed those people.” Bill Clinton, March 2010” http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/38564
If he was in Congress why did he not speak out against ALL the idiotic UN- WTO farming manipulation, from the Biodiversity Treaty that steals third world plant genetics for patenting to the international HACCP regs that assist the transnational corporations in poisoning us?
Once Proud organization goes further down the Crapper. So, do we let burn? do we cut
overcrowded forests? Or, is it “When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and
shout!” When Boreal winter hits, and we in the west are smacked with a 60’d/70’s
type winter storm, blowdown, mass killing of areas of too close trees, then it will
be prime fuel for the next summer, let it burn, blame global warming….
I can see another Big Burn era coming…..
#
#
Bill Tuttle says:
July 22, 2010 at 1:48 am
They include assessing risks, vulnerabilities, policies and knowledge gaps…
The biggest “knowledge gap” in the Agriculture Department is between Tom Vilsap’s ears. No matter how great the distance, there’s no conclusion too far for him to leap to..
_______________________________________________________
Bill, Vilsack is a Monsanto Drone. Farmers hate Monsanto because they ride roughshod over us. See any thing by Vandana Shiva such as: http://current.com/green/89016683_dr-vandana-shiva-now-monsanto-is-after-our-water.htm
“….Using the transition team’s advice, Obama appointed Tom Vilsack to head the USDA, overriding 20,000 opposing “grassroots” emails. The objection to Vilsack? His deep Monsanto connections. http://www.organicconsumers.org/article…5573.cfm
Hillary Clinton’s connections to Monsanto go way back the Rose Law Firm where she worked. Rose represents Monsanto, Tyson, and Walmart – the world leaders in genetic engineering, animal production and industrialized food. She received favors there, as did Bill. In office, Bill’s USDA immediately and significantly weakened chicken waste and contamination standards, easing Tyson’s poultry-factory expansion, http://www.financialsense.com/ editorials/engdahl/2006/0828.html, and his USDA head, Espy, was indicted for bribes, money laundering, and much more, with Tyson was the largest corporate offender.
What happened specifically with Monsanto?
Bill appointed Michael Taylor head of the FDA and put other Monsanto employees in as US Agricultural Trade Representatives, onto International Biotechnology Consultive Forums, and more … http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/072600-03.htm or http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9904…santofda.html or http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Revolving-Door.htm.
Bill’s Monsanto FDA gave Monsanto permission to market rBGH – the first GMO product every approved. Despite bovine illness and deaths, and despite medical warnings of increased breast cancer risk in humans,
http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers…l/milk.htm source: http://gmfoodwatch.tribe.net/thread/78999f60-b0a6-4f52-957d-74d0bf240d96
H.R. says:
July 22, 2010 at 4:34 am
Chris L says:
July 22, 2010 at 12:49 am
Smokey the Marmot, maybe? “Only you can prevent Mammoth Marmots.”
Chris L says:
July 22, 2010 at 12:54 am
Or how’s about “Snowy the Bear,” the Polar version, of course. Claim the copyrights for your blog, so they don’t use it to scare the kids with sad stories of Snowy.
—————————————————-
How about “Snowy the Marmot?
_________________________________________
How about ” Snowy the Arctic Fox” here to guard our hen house?
http://www.anwr.org/gallery/pages/08-Arctic%20Fox.htm
He would even be very easy to photo shop…
Which is why every state’s voters need to kick out all such politicians and vote in state’s rights advocates. Then they should apply the principle of eminent domain (something that Utah is considering now). If all states successfully demand a return of land to state and local control we could shrink the federal government as it will have less need for federal employees.
“A changing global climate brings increased uncertainties to the conservation of our natural resources,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement
Don’t worry!….he’ll apologize. 🙂
The Forest Service should be scrambling for funds to pay for replanting the several million acres of cut over land. The reforestation costs had been paid for out with timber sale receipts that they spent for other purposes. FYI, by law every sale must be for a base rate or more that includes the costs of replanting the area to be harvested.
This is just another example of malpractice by a federal agency. These millions of acres of scraggly lands cannot store carbon nearly as well as vibrant well stocked forests. Ah but the Forest Service emulates Congress who spends “trust” funds from Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid like drug addicts.
Jim Brobeck says:
July 22, 2010 at 6:26 am
In its recently released Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the DoD states, “Climate change and energy are two key issues that will play a significant role in shaping the future security environment.”
…. DoD will be forced to deal with “the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities.”
What effects does this have on American national defense? The QDR continues:
Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration. While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world. In addition, extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster response both within the United States and overseas….
___________________________________________________________
Oh they know what they are talking about alright. Think about what what the current Government wants to put in place:
Cap and Trade: – forces energy prices sky high and jobs overseas – mass unemployment.
Farm Control Regulation:</b. – Removes the right of the common folks to grow their own food.
Already in place:
Homeland Security Act – places control of food & farmland into the hands of the military. It also is against the law to “hoard food” so those who are prepared get their food stores stripped away.
When they speak of “Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration. While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world.” you can substitute “Climate change LAWS” for “Climate change” and everything becomes a whole heck of a lot clearer.
If that does not scare the $h!T out of you, perhaps this will:
U.S. Northern Command, Canada Command establish new bilateral Civil Assistance Plan
“This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation’s requests for military support of civil authorities,” Renuart said. “Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack, in order to save lives, prevent human suffering and mitigate damage to property, is of the highest importance, and we need to be able to have forces that are flexible and adaptive to support rapid decision-making in a collaborative environment.” …
U.S. Northern Command was established on Oct. 1, 2002, to anticipate and conduct homeland defense and civil support operations within the assigned area of responsibility to defend, protect, and secure the United States and its interests.
Similarly, Canada Command was established on Feb. 1, 2006, to focus on domestic operations and to offer a single point of contact for all domestic and continental defense and security partners….
The two domestic commands established strong bilateral ties well before the signing of the Civil Assistance Plan. The two commanders and their staffs meet regularly, collaborate on contingency planning and participate in related annual exercises.”
http://www.northcom.mil/news/2008/021408.html
So the plans are in place to call in foreign military aid to quell “civil unrest”
The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act banned the military engaging in domestic law enforcement. The head of homeland security, Tom Ridge, recommend a repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act as a first measure toward fighting the war on terrorism. Vice President Biden initiated a bill to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act in 1995 that did not pass. however Bush did succeed in repealing Posse Comitatus in 2007.
“Public Law 109-364, or the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007” (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a “public emergency” and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to “suppress public disorder.”
President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another….” http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” — Wendell Phillips,
Douglas DC says:
July 22, 2010 at 8:25 am
Oh, no, you cannot cut any trees because there have been too many fires.
No, you cannot salvage the dead trees after the fires, rot is natural, and the judge will grant the greenies an injunction.
No, you cannot clear the dead fuel from around the trees that didn’t burn, the judge will slap the site with an EIR study.
No, you cannot put the dead tree and underbrush fires out, it’s natural to let it burn, and blame it all on climate change.
Pamela Gray says:July 22, 2010 at 8:48 am
Which is why every state’s voters need to kick out all such politicians and vote in state’s rights advocates. Then they should apply the principle of eminent domain (something that Utah is considering now). If all states successfully demand a return of land to state and local control we could shrink the federal government as it will have less need for federal employees.
Well good luck Pamela, you’ve got some of the worst up there. ;~D
Pamela Gray says:
July 22, 2010 at 8:48 am
Which is why every state’s voters need to kick out all such politicians and vote in state’s rights advocates. Then they should apply the principle of eminent domain (something that Utah is considering now). If all states successfully demand a return of land to state and local control we could shrink the federal government as it will have less need for federal employees.
____________________________________________________
I am with you on that one. This coming election is critical. Everyone who is an American needs to make sure the Diebold “let me fix the vote for you” machines are not used in the coming elections and try to get out and educate people.
The food safety and Banking stuff is neutral so you do not ruffle feathers. The bank bailouts really had people upset so that is my starting place. Cap and trade is a heck of a lot easier to fix later than the permanent loss of our family farms so that has been my focus.
As I just showed in another post we could be pushed into martial law using the Markey’s “food safety bill” if it passes. It was there that Dr. John Weimers told me personally that he would drive every back road to find every backyard flock and tag each chicken. There have already been clashes between the USDA and farmers and I think this is the place you might see rebellion start if we do not kill this beast NOW.
Farmers who are fifty something years old, ultra independent, war veterans, armed to the teeth are not something I think this nation wants to poke a sharp stick at. That is probably why “they” got the Posse Comitatus Act repealed first and now have an agreement to bring in the Canadian military as needed.
I sure hope I am just imagining things…..
rbateman said No, you cannot salvage the dead trees after the fires, rot is natural, and the judge will grant the greenies an injunction.
Another thing that would make a nice plank in the Tea Party.
The court problems could be cured by reserving the power to bring suit regarding environmental protections to the city, county, or local state government exclusively.
No NGO would have standing.
This would end the scorge of eco guilt industry; the Greenpeas, NRDC, WWF, all of them would be put out of business
A large deficit and budget cuts around the corner. Every government department will try to protect itself from cuts. What better way than to pander to the politicians (specially those in power) core beliefs?
You are losing. The Fascist state marches ever onward. Get out there and vote or you will be relying on ‘trust in God and keep the ammunition dry’. Good Luck!
Freudian slip?
I don’t want to prevent climate change. It’s not possible.
People forget elections have consequences. When a new administration moves in they get to put in place their people to head all these departments. If the POTUS has a strong belief in something (AGW) guess what kind of people he will pick to head up these departments. It should come as not suprise to anyone who listened to Obama campaign what he believes. Here in Oregon at one stop he told us to turn down our thermostats and stop driving SUV’s because of climate change.
It seems to me the main goal of the Forest Service ‘going green®’ is to get to our children…
“Adopt-a-School: The Forest Service Focuses on Environmental Education”
http://www.watershed.org/?q=node/123
Ha! That’s like saying, “only you can stop plate tectonics.” The earth’s climate has always changed and there’s not a damn thing Smokey can do about it.
Yes, here we go: BRING ALL the propaganda forces into play in order to fool all the fools whom are willing to be fooled.
Before the invention of the thermometer (I’m sure this is just a coincidence) people got out of the way of forest fires and let them have there way within the woods of the world. Since then we have less and less forest fires and hotter and hotter climate. I’ve put together a letter to the UN and Fat Albert (the Hanky Panky Buggleboy from Tennessee) and I’m suggesting that we need to STOP preventing and extinguishing Forest Fires. It’s our only hope to prevent Global Warming and bring back the cycle of beautiful little Ice Ages we used to have. (I think the same can be said of California Grass Fires too!) The secret is in the fine little particles of ash that rise high into the sky. The more we have of these fine little particles, the more precipitation we have, and the cooler everything gets.
Perhaps they should have a new mascot, a polar bear, “Snowy the Bear”.
“… will help the Forest Service play a leadership role in responding to a changing climate …”
Excuse me, but, why does the Forest Service need to take a leadership role ?
and what does that mean anyway?
The Forest Service announced a vague and unambitious policy to address climate change. This “roadmap” fails to even suggest that carbon-rich old growth forests be protected.
This concluding paragraph in the mitigation section gives them the ability to continue business as usual (“multiple use” including lots of logging). I guess actual leadership on climate change is just too much to ask of this slow moving agency.
“Taking any tradeoffs into account, the Forest Service will work with partners to sustain or increase carbon sequestration and storage in forest and grassland ecosystems and to generate forest products that reduce and replace fossil fuel use. The Forest Service will balance its mitigation goals against all other benefits that Americans get from healthy, resilient forests and grasslands, such as wildlife habitat, wood fiber, water quantity and quality, and opportunities for outdoor recreation.”
The FS’ goal is to “assess and manage carbon” And this seems to mean “sequester carbon and store it more safely while furnishing woody materials to help offset fossil fuel use.” and “storing carbon in overly dense forests increases the risk of losing the carbon through smoke and decomposition of fire-killed trees following large wildfires.” It’s really worse than business as usual because the FS is giving themselves new excuses to log: to increase resilience and offset fossil fuels. Gag!
Here is a slide show clarifying many misconceptions about forests, logging, and carbon:
http://www.slideshare.net/dougoh/forest-carbon-climate-myths-presentation/
(For full effect click “full” in the lower right.)
Here is a more detailed foot-noted report on forests, carbon and climate change:
http://tinyurl.com/2n96m5
I REALLY wish that I hadn’t just finished a read of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. This whole story freaks me out. But… who is John Galt?
I would think the Forest Service has a pretty easy task of combating anthopogenic
global warmingclimate change, since they are responsible for a huge CO2 sink. I suppose they could tie their own hands and prevent themselves from doing prescribed burns that promote the healthy growth of the forest.