| |
|
In the recent months, many environmental issues have risen to the forefront
of both local and national debates. The Chattooga Conservancy works to keep
abreast of this news, and below we present brief summaries of a few clippings
that caught our eyes. Even though it’s mostly bad news, we remain optimists.
It is time to act for positive reform!
|
Creative Loafing
April 18, 2001 “Chainsaws in the Chattahoochee Forest,” by Scott Henry. This
article explores the possibility of a return to heavy-handed forest management
under the Bush Administration. A quote from newly installed Chattahoochee National
Forest Supervisor Clara Johnson gives us a clue: We’re looking forward to
continuing scientifically sound ecosystem management with strong public involvement.
But if the President states he wants us to cut a certain number of board feet
and move more trees out of the national forest, then we will. Ecosystem
management and timber targets? Sounds like an oxymoron!
Atlanta Constitution
May 18, 2001 “ Energy Plan Called Dirty, Dangerous,” by Charles Seabrook. Charles
writes: The President’s plan calls for constructing 1,300 to 1,900 electrical
power plants...not only coal…or gas-fired, but also nuclear…the nation would
need 263,000 miles of new power lines. This is particularly bad news for
Georgia, since the state has some of the weakest laws in the U.S. for siting
of power plants and power lines.
The Highlander
June 5, 2001 “ With Dirty Past, Coal Tainted as Energy Savior,” by Rick Eodes.
This article tells the story of a slurry pond that ruptured at a coal mine in
Martin County, Kentucky. 250 million gallons of coal by-product was spilled,
which devastated 75 miles of Appalachian streams. The article states: the
lawyer for Mossey Energy promptly proclaimed this disaster ‘an act of God.’
Sacramento Bee
The Sacramento Bee published a series of articles by Tom Knudson on
April 22nd through the 26th, which analyzed the environmental movement. Some
highlights of this controversial series underscore the bloated bureaucracy that
much of the “mainstream” environmental movement has become. Knudson writes:
Salaries for the environmental leaders have never been higher. In 1999—the
most recent year for which comparable figures are available—chief executives
at nine of the nation’s ten largest environmental groups earned $200,000 and
up, and one topped $300,000. In 1997, one group fired its president and awarded
him a severance payment of $760,335. Six national environmental groups spend
so much on fund raising and overhead they don’t have enough left to meet minimum
benchmark for environmental spending—60 percent of annual expenses— recommended
by charity watchdog organizations.
New York Times
“Panel Tells Bush Global Warming is Getting Worse,” by Katherine Q. Steelye
and Andrew C. Revkin. The authors write: In a much-anticipated report from the
National Academy of Sciences, two leading atmospheric scientists, including
previous skeptics about global warming, reaffirmed the main stream scientific
view that the Earth’s atmosphere was getting warmer and that human activities
were largely responsible.
Back to the Top
|
|