Posted on 09/04/2001 11:31:59 PM PDT by Bump in the night
Why is it necessary for me to pour over all the legal documents, learn all the EO's and find the secret answer to all our problems. That is the job of our elected officials who are getting paid to do so. They need to be hounded about these problems and we need to demand that we have fairer laws.
There should be no provision in place that allows any foreign entity to come in by one of our created Acts and usurp the power of American citizen rights and the constitution.
Self-government. Our representatives will either respond to a demand or, knowing that the request is ignoring the law, ignore the request. In either case, it is better to understand the law and the system. At least you should not spin your wheels inciting others to chase the wrong lead. In this case, such treaties are the source of nearly ALL environmental laws. In addition to that minor influence on your life, perhaps you might also realize that the UN is the source of the curriculum for your kids in school, "harmonized" rules of commerce (ever tried to export a product?), you pay a UN tax on airline tickets...
It ALL arises from treaties. Perhaps then it might be worth your valuable time to learn how it works. Other than that, I can't think of a reason for you to bother.
Also something else to consider is that as long as the USFWS is spending $506,288.11 as of August 31st (I don't know what the total budget figure is) that is money that could be spent preventing other communities from getting water. So maybe dragging out the stand at the headgates will deplete the enviro's researves and bring more attention to the ACT. You never know. Andy and Wendell's little hit and run is getting expensive.
I'll check back later.
Sean
URGENT ALERT: LAST CHANCE FOR ADEQUATE ESA FUNDING!
Both the House and Senate have passed their versions of the Interior Appropriations bill providing money to the USFWS for implementing the Endangered Species Act. The spending bill now awaits a House-Senate conference where the differences will be worked out and the final bill sent back to both chambers for final approval. The Senate has appointed its conferees but the House has delayed and it now looks like the Interior conference will not occur until September. This is a critical time for endangered species and our last best chance to get adequate funding for ESA programs.
Because of chronic underfunding of federal endangered species programs, 39 plant and animal species have already become extinct while waiting to be protected under the ESA. Unless we get significantly more money for these programs, more species will be lost forever.
Congress has so far failed to appropriate adequate funding for Endangered Species programs. The House bill currently allocates only $8.5 million to endangered species listing and critical habitat programs and the Senate bill increased that amount to $9 million. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says that it needs at least $24 million per year for the next five years to adequately protect imperiled species.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
If your Senator or Representative is on the Conference Committee (see list below) it is extremely important that they hear from you. You may even want to request a meeting with them over the month of August when they will be back home.
If your Rep. or Senators is not on the conference committee, they can still help by contacting the conferees by writing a letter. Please contact your Rep. and Senators who are not listed below (particularly if they are friendly) and ask them to write a letter to the conferees.
Your calls, faxes and letters to your legislators are needed to help maintain a strong ESA to secure the future of America's natural heritage. Thanks so much for your time and energy!
These next few weeks may be our last chance to get the increased funding desperately needed to list new species. Calls into your members of Congress and particularly key appropriators can be crucial in determining whether the USFWS receives the money needed to list the over 300 species desperately waiting for the Act's protection.
Calls 202-224-3121 and letters (see sample below) into any of these legislators urging them to increase funding for the USFWS listing and critical habitat line item to at least $24 million are desperately needed. The House-Senate conferees are likely to be:
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) and Rep. Joe Skeen (R-NM), chairs;
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT); Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC); Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV); Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA); Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA); Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND); Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT); Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS); Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK); Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM); Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT); Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH); Sen. Ben Campbell (R-CO).
Rep. David Obey (D-WI) ranking D; Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA); Rep. John Murtha (D-PA); Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA); Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY); Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN); Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH); Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ); Rep. Charles Taylor (R-NC); Rep. George Nethercutt (R-WA); Rep. Zack Wamp (R-TN); Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA); Rep. John Peterson (R-PA);.
If your Senator or Representative is on the list of potential conferees, please consider calling their office and asking for a meeting with them over August recess when they will be back at home in district. If you would like help doing this, please contact your regional organizer. http://www.stopextinction.org/org/staff.html
MESSAGE: Please support adequate funding for ESA listing and critical habitat programs at $24 million. Please oppose any efforts in conference to attach the Bush Administration's proposed "extinction rider" that prevents citizen enforcement of the Endangered Species Act and makes listing new species voluntary.
CONGRESSIONAL CONTACT INFORMATION:
You can contact any Congressperson through the Congressional Switchboard at: (202) 224-3121. Just ask for their office.
Contacting the Senate: http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm
Contacting the House: http://www.house.gov/Welcome.html
Link to members websites: http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html
Don't know who your Representative is? Find out at
Direct phone numbers, fax, and district office numbers:
http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/index.html
You can write your Congressperson at:
The Honorable _______________
U.S. House of Representatives or U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20515 or Washington, DC 20510
SAMPLE LETTER
Senator _____
U.S. Senate
Washington D.C. 20515
Dear Senator _____ :
I am writing to urge you to support a major funding increases for programs in support of endangered and threatened species, particularly $24 million for the USFWS line item for listing new species and designating critical habitat. At a time of the greatest surpluses in our history, the administration is proposing a budget which maintains chronic under-funding for the Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing program - - our nation's primary safeguard against extinction.
Today, we are in the midst of an unprecedented extinction crisis, where the Nature Conservancy estimates that one-third of the nation's wildlife is imperiled and may need protection under the ESA. Currently some 319 species (235 candidate species, 37 listing proposals, plus 47 active listing petitions) continue to desperately wait protection. Decades of chronic under-funding have already resulted in the extinction of 39 ESA candidate species since the 1980s. Because of a lack of money and resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has stopped listing new species entirely, except under court order.
At recent Senate hearings, scientists and even the USFWS admitted that $120 million is needed just to begin dealing with the backlog of critically imperiled species which are being denied the Act's protection. Unfortunately, President Bush's budget asked for and the House Interior Appropriations Committee approved only $8.47 million, an amount that will do virtually nothing to effectively address the backlog. This current trend of under funding ESA implementation has forced concerned citizens to file suit against the FWS to ensure imperiled species get protection under the ESA - - a situation that will only get worse unless the Senate acts to solve the problem.
We, as a nation, have reached "rock bottom" in our commitment and funding for endangered species programs. A fully functioning, fully funded, and fully enforced Endangered Species Act is absolutely crucial to stop the pending extinction of our nation's unique and threatened plants and animals. Please oppose any efforts to include anti-environmental riders, especially the administration's proposed rider to impair citizen enforcement and give the Interior Secretary discretion over new listings. We strongly urge you to increase funding for the listing line item in the USFWS budget to at least $24 million for the next five years, the minimum necessary to get our most critically imperiled species ESA protection before they go extinct.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Your City
Your Phone Number
BACKGROUND
The Endangered Species Act (ESA), passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in 1973, has been our nation's most important and powerful tool to ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy the rich wildlife and biological heritage that we now cherish. Unfortunately, it lacks the funding to adequately protect and recover our nation's critically imperiled plant and animal species and the habitat they depend upon.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is so chronically underfunded that it recently announced a one year moratorium on the listing of endangered species and the designation of critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act. If upheld, hundreds of critically imperiled plant and animal species and millions of acres of forests, wetlands, grasslands, mountains and deserts will be denied desperately needed protection.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's own estimates say they need $24 million each year for the next five years to eliminate the backlog of species awaiting the Act's protections and prevent them from sliding further towards extinction. However, the Bush Administration proposes only $8.47 million.
To appease the timber, mining and livestock industries that have consistently objected to protecting species under the ESA, the Bush Administration is also seeking in its budget to prevent the government from spending any money to comply with court orders to protect imperiled species and their critical habitat under the ESA. President Bush also wants to give Interior Secretary Gale Norton, who has argued that the ESA is unconstitutional, sole authority to determine which species will receive the protections of the law and which will fade into the blackness of extinction. By seeking to drastically slash an already underfunded endangered species protection program and hand its implementation to one of its most vocal opponents, the Bush Administration has laid out a plan for extinction.
The Endangered Species Coalition, in conjunction with Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity recently released a report called Conservation in Action: Safeguarding Citizen Rights Under the Endangered Species Act, that details the need for increased ESA funding by highlighting the extent of the extinction crisis in the United States. The report is available at http://www.stopextinction.org
No itemized list?
/skeptically raised eyebrow
Unfortunately, salmon do travel in the oceans beyond state jurisdiction, between states and in "waters of the United States" - even legitimate ones where interstate commercial navigation takes place. A win by PLF might knock down the law a BIG peg, but they would still have their hooks in us concerning salmon.
From Thomas.loc.gov (search bin's don't save over time so no links available. You can see context of these by going to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and entering in the number you wish. I hope this helps.
1 . Compensation for Klamath Basin Government-Caused Disaster Act (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2389.IH]
2 . Klamath Basin Emergency Operation and Maintenance Refund Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2828.IH]
3 . Klamath Basin Economic Disaster Relief Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2827.IH]
4 . Chiloquin Dam Fish Passage Feasibility Study Act of 2001 (Introduced in the House)[H.R.2585.IH]
5 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Engrossed in House )[H.R.427.EH]
6 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Enrolled Bill)[H.R.427.ENR]
7 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Introduced in the Senate)[S.254.IS]
8 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Placed on the Calendar in the Senate)[H.R.427.PCS]
9 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Introduced in the House)[H.R.427.IH]
10 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Reported in the Senate)[S.254.RS]
11 . To provide further protections for the watershed of the Little Sandy River as part of the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, Oregon, and for other purposes. (Reported in the House)[H.R.427.RH]
12 . Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (Engrossed Senate Amendment)[H.R.2216.EAS]
13 . Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (Enrolled Bill)[H.R.2216.ENR]
14 . 2001 Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Print)[H.R.2216.PP]
http://www.onrc.org/programs/klamath/ejldletter.html
May 17, 2001
Gale Norton
Secretary of the Interior
Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20240
Re: Management of the Klamath Project: Failure to Provide Water For The Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges As Required by Endangered Species Act and National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act.
Dear Secretary Norton:
I write on behalf of the Institute of Fisheries Resources, Klamath Forest Alliance, Northcoast Environmental Center, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, WaterWatch of Oregon and Golden Gate Audubon Society (collectively, "Coalition for the Klamath Basin") regarding the operation of the Klamath Project by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ("BOR"). Although this letter concerns what we believe to be a serious violation of the law, this letter is not intended as a statutorily mandated notice of intent to sue under the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), 16 U.S.C. § 1540(g). Rather, we hope that the matter may be resolved without the need for litigation.
BOR's management of the Klamath Project has been the subject of extensive litigation in recent years. In early April of this year, in a lawsuit brought by the organizations comprising the Coalition for the Klamath Basin, U.S. District Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong concluded that BOR violated the ESA by failing to initiate and complete ESA consultation on the impacts of the Klamath Project to ESA-listed coho salmon. Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations v. Bureau of Reclamation, Civ. No. 00-01955 SBA, 2001 WL 360146 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2001). Judge Armstrong enjoined the project from making any irrigation deliveries when flows were inadequate to ensure the protection of the coho, pending the completion of the consultation process and the adoption by BOR of a management plan that would satisfy the ESA's requirements. That injunction was lifted May 3, 2001. At nearly the same time, a coalition of irrigators sued the United States over BOR's management plan for the 2001 water year, seeking an injunction to restore historic irrigation levels. Kandra et al. v. United States, Civ. No. 01-6124 AA (D. Or.). Coalition for the Klamath Basin member organizations intervened as defendants in that lawsuit. On April 30, 2001, Judge Aiken denied the irrigators' request for the injunction.
At the Kandra hearing, and in her written opinion, Judge Aiken urged the parties to seek consensus on the thorny issues surrounding Klamath Project management and basin water allocation in lieu of renewed litigation. We write this letter in the spirit of Judge Aiken's remarks.
The Coalition recognizes that 2001 has been a year of unprecedented change at the Klamath Project. BOR has limited irrigation water deliveries to a large percentage of the basin's irrigators, a decision that was required by law but nonetheless highly unpopular with some of the basin's residents. However, notwithstanding the worst drought in the history of the project, BOR has made the decision to provide approximately 70,000 acre-feet of water from Clear Lake and Gerber Reservoirs for the Horsefly and Langell Valley irrigation districts. At the same time, BOR has refused to allocate any water to Lower Klamath NWR. Failure to deliver any water to Lower Klamath NWR, even though water is available elsewhere in the system and irrigation is ongoing, is a serious violation of law.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") has determined that delivery of 32,255 acre-feet of water to Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge is mandatory under the ESA. According to the FWS' 2001 Biological Opinion governing Klamath Project Operations, as many as 1,100 threatened bald eagles migrate into the Klamath Basin during fall and winter, one of the largest populations of the species anywhere in the lower 48 states. See Biological/Conference Opinion Regarding the Effects of Operation of the BOR's Klamath Project on Two Species of Suckers and Bald Eagles (FWS, April, 2001) ("FWS BiOp") at Sec. III, Pt. 1, p. 5. These eagles rely heavily on the abundant waterfowl that use Lower Klamath NWR, which in turn requires water provided by BOR. Id. at iii, 3, 8. In the BiOp, FWS extensively discussed the water needed in Lower Klamath NWR to sustain bald eagle populations. See BiOp, Sec. III, Pt. 1, p.23. Using the best available information on the relationship between water levels and waterfowl use of the refuges, as well as prey relationships between eagles and waterfowl, FWS determined that the amount of water necessary to sustain eagles would be 32,255 acre-feet of water delivered to Lower Klamath NWR. Id. According to FWS, anything less than this amount would result in substantial levels of "take" of these birds*1. Id. at 32.
In the BiOp, FWS concluded that Project operations would harm, but would not jeopardize, the eagles. Id. at 30-31. However, FWS imposed a requirement that BOR provide at least 32,255 acre-feet to Lower Klamath NWR. Id. at 31-34. This strategy "would avoid adverse effects on wintering bald eagles by providing habitat sufficient for the waterfowl threshold number . . ." Id. at 25. These water delivery requirements are mandatory "terms and conditions" of FWS's authorization of incidental take of eagles associated with Project operations. 16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(B); 50 C.F.R. § 402.14(i) (FWS may authorize incidental take of listed species via an incidental take statement, but such authorization is only operative when the agency complies with the terms and conditions of the statement).
In adopting the 2001 Operations Plan, and in public statements, BOR has indicated that it has no intention to comply with the requirement that it deliver the required 32,255 acre-feet to Lower Klamath NWR. BOR's failure to deliver water to the NWR in accordance with the terms and conditions of the incidental take statement when water is available means that: a) BOR is or will be "taking" bald eagles, see FWS BiOp, Sec. III, pt. 1, p.32; and b) that the BiOps' incidental take statement does not cover BOR's proposed operations. 50 C.F.R. § 402.14(i). In other words, BOR is, or will be, violating the ESA's prohibition on take of listed bald eagles. The amount and extent of anticipated and unpermitted take associated with the shut-off of water to the refuges is significant. "Given the historical range of the numbers of eagles that winter on Lower Klamath NWR, the Service anticipates up to 950 eagles could be incidentally taken, mainly through reduced access to food, per year as a result of the proposed action when water delivery from all sources to the Lower Klamath NWR is below 32,255 acre-feet." FWS BiOp at Sec. III, pt. 1, p. 32 (emphasis added).
Water for the refuges is important not just for the imperiled bald eagle but for myriad other species as well as the health and vitality of the entire ecosystem. Migratory birds gathering in refuge wetlands represents one of the largest gatherings of migratory birds in the Pacific Flyway, if not in all of North America. In the absence of water, the refuges will be unable to sustain most of these birds, resulting in premature migration southward, overcrowding, outbreaks of disease, and substantial reduction in numbers.
Interior's failure to provide water for Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge (as well as the basin's other federal refuges) not only violates the ESA, it ignores a key provision of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, 16 U.S.C. § 668dd et seq., which states that the Secretary of the Interior "shall . . . assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the System and the purposes of each refuge." There is no doubt that the purpose of the Klamath wildlife refuges generally, and Lower Klamath NWR in particular, is to provide habitat for migratory waterfowl. See 16 U.S.C. § 695k(a) (Kuchel Act) (policy of the United States is "to preserve intact the necessary existing habitat for migratory waterfowl in this vital area of the Pacific flyway.") BOR's failure to provide water to the refuges, when water is available, will undermine the central purpose of the refuges in violation of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act.
From what we've come to understand through the Court-ordered mediation in the Kandra lawsuit, as well as our discussions with federal officials, finding the requisite 32,000 acre-feet to bring BOR into compliance with the ESA should not be difficult, and need not work a hardship on irrigators receiving water at this time. BOR has purchased groundwater supplies, and the State of Oregon believes that additional groundwater sources can be developed. (Oregon is struggling with the funding for groundwater development, an area where federal assistance would be valuable.) Moreover, we understand there is approximately 25,000 acre feet of storage in Clear Lake and Gerber Reservoirs over minimum levels required for endangered suckers. Water from these and other sources is available and must be used to provide the minimum 32,255 acre-feet in order to be consistent with the ESA, the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act and other governing law. *2
We hope that we can work together with BOR, FWS and other officials within your department to craft a solution that finds water for the Klamath Basin's wildlife refuges - among the crown jewels of the nation's refuge system - without causing more disruption to the irrigation community. While we will consider all options if there is no action on these matters, we hope for a resolution of these issues without further litigation, and remain committed to the effort to find a longer term solution. Thank you for your consideration of this important matter. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Jan E. Hasselman
Attorney for the Coalition for the Klamath Basin
*1 (back) Under the ESA, it is unlawful for any person, including a government agency, to "take" a listed species without authorization from FWS or NMFS. "Take" is defined by the ESA to encompass killing, injuring, harming, or harassing a listed species. 16 U.S.C. § 1532(19). FWS has further defined "harm" within this statutory definition as "an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering." 15 C.F.R. § 17.3; Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, 115 S. Ct. 2407, 2412-14 (1995).
*2 (back) It should be noted that 32,225 acre-feet is an absolute minimum, and will by no means provide for anything like full fall flood-up on Lower Klamath Refuge. Nonetheless, the 32,225 acre feet will avoid an ecological crisis for eagles and waterfowl, and will probably make some duck hunting on the refuges this fall a possibility.
Statement on eParka.com News
Earthjustice Statement on Decision not to Empanel Endangered Species Committee in Klamath Basin.
July 13th, 2001
Contact Info: John McManus, Earthjustice, 415-627-6720 ex 230
Zeke Grader, PCFFA, 415-561-5080
Patti Goldman, Earthjustice, 206-343-7340 ex 30
Susan Holmes, Earthjustice, 202-667-4500 ex 204
Print-Friendly Version
San Francisco, CA-- Earthjustice today agreed with the decision of the Interior Department rejecting a petition calling for the convening of the Endangered Species Committee, commonly known as the God Squad, to review Klamath Basin issues. The God Squad has the authority to allow the killing of otherwise protected species thus risking their extinction when certain conditions are met. That thresh hold has clearly not been met in this case. The Interior department decision came a day after the U.S. Senate defeated an amendment by Senator Gordon Smith R-OR that would have effectively suspended the Endangered Species Act in the Klamath Basin.
Earthjustice Executive Director Buck Parker said, “There are many ways to solve the problems in the Klamath Basin. If there’s one thing Americans are for, it’s reasonable compromise and balance. There is no doubt we need to move forward to adjust the balance of how water is shared in the Klamath Basin so that coastal fishing communities, tribes, farmers and fish and wildlife, all get a fair share of the water they need.”
“The God Squad was never intended to be the first resort… it was intended to be the last resort,” said Earthjustice attorney Patti Goldman. “Rejection of this petition recognizes that droughts happen and it’s inappropriate to rollback the ESA and push a few more species into extinction every time we have a drought.”
There are strong indications coming from the region that some farmers are willing to sell their land and water rights, which will help solve the problem of over allocation of the Klamath Basin’s waters.
“Irrigated agriculture contributes far less than many people believe to the Klamath area’s economy,” said Dr. Ed Whitelaw, an Oregon economist and expert on natural resource economics. “The farm sector represents under 10 percent of Klamath County’s total employment and under 1 percent of the county’s total personal income. The sad fact is that agriculture in the Klamath basin has been on a long steady slide for many years, for reasons that have nothing to do with the ESA.” Dr. Whitelaw added, “Rather than prolong the inevitable, it’s time to help these folks make the transition to an ecologically sustainable and economically sound future.”
By rejecting this petition, for the first time, the needs of coastal fishing families and Indian tribes are finally being recognized as being as important as the needs of farming families. Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s associations said, “ This decision means not only that coho salmon in the Klamath will be spared from extinction but valuable king salmon that support tribal, commercial and sport fisheries won’t be wiped out.
American Land Conservancy
A national, non-profit organization founded in 1990, ALC works in close parntership with communities, private landowners, local land trusts, public lands agencies, and elected officials to create effective conservation solutions for threatened land and water resources."
Council
Edward J. Blakely(Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles), Dean of the Milano Graduate School and Professor of Urban Policy. Dr. Blakely was most recently Dean and Lusk Professor of Planning and Development at the School of Urban Planning and Development of the University of Southern California. Dr. Blakely is an internationally recognized scholar in urban community development, and has also been a successful practitioner in strategic planning, financing, real estate development and project management. He serves on the National Academy of Sciences Panel on Urban Development and Transportation. He also serves as an advisor to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and to state governments in the United States, Australia, Sweden, and Japan. His books include Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States (1997), Separate Societies: Poverty and Inequality in U.S. Cities (1992, co-authored with William Goldsmith), Planning Local Economic Development (1989), Taking Development Initiatives: Local Government’s Role in Economic Development (1986), and Rural Communities in Advanced Industrial Society (1980). Dr. Blakely generally teaches Public Policy and the City (Ph.D.), Managerial Economics, and Management and Organizational Behavior. School of Urban and Regional Planning Administration Edward J. Blakely, Dean
David R. Brower founded Earth Island Institute in 1982, an umbrella organization supporting and incubating innovative environmental projects around the world. Earth Island Institute, based in San Francisco, is the home of the Brower Fund and the Brower Youth Awards...died on Sunday afternoon, November 5th, at his home in Berkeley, CA, surrounded by his family. Brower was 88 years old, and died from complications related to cancer
*Harriet Burgess BLM State Director Ed Hastey and California State Department of Parks and Recreation Director Patricia Meganson both commended Harriet Burgess of ALC for her support at a key time in the acquisition process.
"Without Harriet's help, the final protection of Bodie's 140-year history could not have been achieved. After six years of intense, cooperative effort, title to the last private holdings in the area are now in public ownership," Hastey said...Ms. Burgess, using private personal funds, paid the remaining $2 million to the company in 1997 while federal funding was sought. ...Appropriations were unanimously supported by the Clinton administration, Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, Governor Pete Wilson, Rep. John Doolittle, the Mono County Board of Supervisors and numerous private interests.
Brock Evans Present Endangered Species Coalition Endangered Species Coalition:Executive Director
Private Practice of Law, Seattle Washington 1963 - 1967 Northwest Representative, Sierra Club and 1967 - 1973 Federation of Western Outdoors Clubs, Seattle Associate Executive Director and Director, 1973 - 1981 Sierra Club, Washington D.C. Office Attorney at Law, Smith, Brucker, Winn and 1984 Ehlert, Seattle, Washington Candidate for U.S. Congress (Democrat), 1984 First Congressional District (Seattle suburbs), Washington State. Recieved 110, 000 votes out of 230, 000 cast. Visiting Fellow, Harvard (Kennedy School of Fall, 1990 Government), teaching course on "Politics of the Environment"
B.A. History (cum laude), Princeton University 1959 J.D., Ll.B., University of Michigan Law School 1963
Washington D.C. Representative: two large (650, 000 member and 600, 000 member) environmental organizations. Testified over 100 times before about 20 Congressional committees and subcommittees; was leader/organizer, or major strategist in the following national legislative efforts (among others): Alaska Lands Act (1980); Ancient Forest protection legislation (1986 - present); Montana Wilderness legislation (1987 - 94); many Appropriations bills (1979 - 95); Arizona Wilderness Act (1990); Grazing Reform legislation (1985); Mining Law Reform legislation (1990 - 1994); California Desert Protection Act (1988 - 94); Natural Gas Transportation Act (1977); Clean Air Act Amendments (1977, 1991); Energy Mobilization Board (1979); National Timber Supply Act (1970); Forest Management Act (1976); Omnibus Public Works Act (1973 - 81); National Land Use Act (1974); Strip Mine Control Act (1977); Eastern Wilderness Act (1975); Expansion of Redwoods and Grand Canyon National Parks (1968, 78); National Trails Act, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (1968); Reauthorization Endangered Species Trails Act (1978); Barrier Islands legislation (1982); Timber Relief legislation (1984); Wilderness and Park legislation (1967 - present);. In Washington state was one of the leaders in securing successful passage of Washington State Shorelines Act, Washington trails legislation, State Environmental Quality Act, North Cascades National Park, Alpine Lakes Wilderness, and Mt. St. Helens National Monument, among others. Named one of the top lobbyists in Washington, D.C., U.S. News and World Report, 1977, Fortune magazine, 1982. Bringing diverse interests together: have initiated and/or participated in extensive dialogues with forest products industry (Areas of Agreement Committee); electric utility industry; National Association of Homebuilders; Labour Unions; member of Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Advisory Board (bringing development and environmental interests together); Department of Defense Biodiversity Initiative; Golf and Environment Steering Committee. Mt. St. Helens legislation, which passed as a result of a coalition of forest products industry and environmentalists, was a result of such efforts.
*Joseph R. Fink, Ph.D.
Unable to locate info at this time
W.E. Garrett
nothing found at this time
Robert Glenn Ketchum
Co-Chair West Coast Council, Aperture Foundation, 1998 to present
Board of Trustees, Alaska Conservation Foundation, Anchorage, AK, 1994 to present Chairman: Communications Committee. ACF is the largest grantmaking foundation in the state. Programs focus on conservation and habitat protection.
Board of Councilors, American Land Conservancy, San Francisco, CA, 1993 to present Board of Trustees: Bruce Babbitt, David R. Brower, Brock Evans, W.E. Garrett, L.W. Lane, Jr., Martin Litton, Helen McCloskey, Pete McCloskey, Margaret W. Owings, Robert Stephens, Stewart Udall.
Curator of Photography, National Park Foundation, Washington, DC, 1980 to 1996 Oversight of photography used in publications; development of book ideas; curator of traveling photography exhibition, "American Photographers and the National Parks", coordinating all aspects of design, scheduling, publicity, and publication production. Co-authored with Robert Cahn, book and catalog by the same name (Viking Press, Inc., NY).
L.W. Lane, Jr. The former publisher of SUNSET Magazine, books and films, and former ambassador to Australia and Nauru, L.W. "Bill" Lane, Jr...Lane became a national leader in the development of conservation policies affecting national parks, deserts, oceans and the atmosphere by serving on national and regional committees. He served as an adviser to the Secretary of the Interior on issues relating to national parks through the Nixon, Ford, Carter and Reagan administrations. He chaired the Presidential Commission on the Centennial of the National Parks in 1972 and received an environmental award from the National Parks Foundation in 1994. Lane advocates developing responsible environmental priorities for the travel industry...served as U. S. Ambassador to Australia and Nauru in the Reagan and Bush administrations and as Ambassador-at-large and Commissioner General in Japan during the Ford administration...
*Martin Litton
Since 1950 he has fought in the biggest conservation battles that have helped shape today's West. He was a major force in saving the free-flowing Colorado River in Dinosaur National Monument and the Grand Canyon. Through personal lobbying and his role as travel editor at Sunset magazine, he was a key player in establishing the Redwood National Park in 1968.
Floyd J. Marita
Helen McCloskey
Pete McCloskey, Jr.
E. Lewis Reid
Galen Rowell
*Robert Stephens, Ph.D.
Stewart Udall
Colburn S. Wilbur
* Executive Committee
Staff
Harriet Burgess, President
Chris Jehle, Vice President of Finance
Glen Williams, Vice President of Acquisitions
Jacques Etchegoyhen, Project Manager
Jenny Frazier, Project Manager
Donald Hanson, Mid-West Consultant
John Killion, Mid-West Consultant
Nanette Leuschel, Consultant
Floyd J. Marita, Consultant
Kerry O'Toole, Project Associate
Pamela Rey, Project Assistant
Jeff Stump, Project Manager
Beth Van Valkenburgh, Project Assistant
Lauren Ward, Consultant
A partial list of completed and continuing projects.
Klamath River Basin (1,541 acres)
Through an innovative partnership with community leaders, local ranchers, and the Bureau of Land Management, efforts are under way to restore fresh-water marshlands along the north shore of Upper Klamath Lake. ALC acquired and conveyed agricultural land to BLM for restoration to wetlands. These wetlands serve as natural filters, and improve degraded water quality in the Upper Klamath Lake Basin.
ALC Memberships, Partnerships & Affiliations
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.