Archive for the ‘Environment’ Category

“Do It for the Kids”
By Ramblin’ Rose

That statement alone triggers such emotional reactions that sensible people often lose all sense of reason, especially in the current panic and mania of youth worldwide. This world is full of conservationists (or “good stewards” in Biblical terms), but their statements are not heard because they do not label themselves environmentalists.

Hundreds of thousands of youth around the world left classes to protest “climate change” on September 20, 2019, and activists, including their acclaimed leader Greta Thunberg from Sweden. Thunberg and some 700 youth activists continued the protest at the United Nations on Saturday, complete with demands for financial commitments and threats against the leaders if their agenda is not met. Komal Karishma Kumar from Fuji told UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, “we will hold you accountable, and if you do not, remember we will mobilize to vote you out.” (Intimidation strategy from indoctrination—learned from adults or inherent in human DNA?)

Let’s try to follow this historically and logically.

First, what is the difference between weather and climate? According to the NASA:
“The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere “behaves” over relatively long periods of time.
“Weather is basically the way the atmosphere is behaving, mainly with respect to its effects upon life and human activities. The difference between weather and climate is that weather consists of the short-term (minutes to months) changes in the atmosphere. Most people think of weather in terms of temperature, humidity, precipitation, cloudiness, brightness, visibility, wind, and atmospheric pressure, as in high and low pressure.
“In short, climate is the description of the long-term pattern of weather in a particular area.” [Editorial question: If climate relates to a long-term pattern of weather in a particular area, how can the environmentalists call it global?]
“Some scientists define climate as the average weather for a particular region and time period, usually taken over 30-years. It’s really an average pattern of weather for a particular region.” [Another question: Did the study of climate change only begin in 1989?]

NO!! NASA attributes interest in the topic to Thomas Jefferson in the late 1700s.

In mid-September, Breitbart published a chronology of the sensational predictions about ice ages, global warming, climate change. Please remember the definitions above—a particular area for a period of 30 years:

  1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975.
  2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear in a Cloud of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
  3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
  4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
  5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
  6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
  7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
  8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
  9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
  10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
  11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes
  12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
  13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
  14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
  15. 1988: Maldives Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
  16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels Will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
  17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
  18. 2000: Children Won’t Know What Snow Is
  19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
  20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
  21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
  22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
  23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
  24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet from Catastrophe’
  25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
  26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
  27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
  28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
  29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
  30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
  31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
  32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil Will Peak in 90s
  33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
  34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
  35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
  36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
  37. 2005: Manhattan Underwater by 2015
  38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
  39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
  40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
  41. 1970s: Killer Bees!”

It appears that the dates listed cover more than 30 years and no particular area is listed in all 41 articles. Hmmm.

This link provides photocopies of many of the predictions when published, all filled with doom and gloom and not a single prediction came to fruition. There is certainly a divide between the environmentalists and the skeptics. Both sides agree that it is probably driven by financial greed and politicians seeking fame, fortune and power at a global level. However, the guilty parties are distinct for each side.

On the “green” side, we read: “Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, or IPBES, which contends nature “is declining globally at rates unprecedented in human history and the rate of species extinctions is accelerating, with grave impacts on people around the world now likely.”

While on the other side that notes the lengthy list of failed predictions, we read:

“Scientist Art Robinson’s The Petition Project gathered the signatures of 31,487 scientists who agree that there is ‘no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.'”

Al Gore still maintains that 99%+ of the scientists agree with him about the urgency of dealing with “an ice age,” and later it was “global warming” that transformed itself into “climate change.” [the power of linguists to transform scientific issues to fit the current set of selected data]

Many of the 2020 presidential candidates on the extreme left have embraced some very radical solutions to addressing this issue: having no children (and the birth rate is drastically lower across the world—and then abortion lowers the numbers even more), cannibalism, elimination of all fossil fuels. How do those politicians expect to travel or transport goods? Or will they have an exemption for personal travel in private jets? How will the environmentalists deal with the toxic/hazardous wastes in solar panels as they fail/break/deteriorate/age? How can the environmentalists justify solar panels that create 300 times more waste per energy unit than nuclear energy?

After the recent hurricane Dorian and the massive devastation that it caused, how did it rank among the deadliest hurricanes in US history?
These are the five deadliest hurricanes in American history:

  1. The Great Galveston Storm (1900) The deadliest storm in American history, the Galveston hurricane killed 8,000 to 12,000 people.
  2. Hurricane Maria (2017)
  3. The Okeechobee Hurricane (1928)
  4. Hurricane Katrina (2005)
  5. The Chenière Caminada Hurricane (1893)

Dorian did not make the list. Notice that only two occurred within the last 30 years. That magic 30-year window for climate change was not met with historical data and the scientific guidelines. However, the media acted as if Dorian was the ultimate proof positive of climate change caused by humans, portending the apocalypse of the world. Hurricanes have ravaged the USA long before fossil fuels were ever used for transportation or industry.

A similar claim could be made to refute the alarms and panic about the eruptions of volcanoes. They are not a novelty after the globalists claims of the last 60 years. What about some of the startling predictions?

In early May of this year, an IPBES from the UN predicted the potential loss of 1 million species since the extinction rate has accelerated in the last 10 million years. This is not the first prediction for the loss of species. In fact, in 1970, S. Dillon Ripley of the Smithsonian Institution predicted a loss of 75%-80% of all animal species before 1995. It did not happen. In 1979, Norman Myers, a biologist at Oxford University, predicted a loss of 25% of all species by 2000. It did not happen.

Some people are holding funerals for the glaciers that are disappearing. Swiss dressed in mourning black held a funeral complete with speeches and a wreath-laying ceremony for The Pizol in the Glarus Alps of northeastern Switzerland. Ironically, according to Matthias Huss, a glaciologist, since 1850, more than 500 glaciers have disappeared in Switzerland. Iceland also held a funeral for a lost glacier in August, 2019.

But, in 2016, a NASA study reported that 90% of the world’s glaciers are growing. The Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) reported that since 2010, the sea ice areas of the Arctic have been growing. Despite the evidence of greater ice masses, since 2017, at least six polar research ships have had to abandon their expeditions at both poles due to thick ice impeding their travel. Some call this stupidity—repeating the same practice with different results expected. Others would call it Karma.

Apparently, the data have not been able to provide a definitive answer for scientists and glaciologists. Lunacy does seem to be an apropos term to describe the manifestations of 21st century alarmists. Let’s concern a couple of examples.

In mid-September of this year, an allegedly Christian seminary, the Union Theological Seminary, held a chapel service for Christians to confess their climate sins to plants. The hysteria of paganism and syncretism has entered religious institutions, calling traditional Christian theology “deplorable.” Even Pope Francis instructed the masses to “obey the United Nations.” The UN’s adherence to the climate change agenda is celebrated in late September in New York.

At Creation, God (Genesis 1:28) directed mankind to dominate the world and all that He created. “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Good stewards believe that God created everything for good and as elements for mankind to employ in daily life. That would also include fossil fuels. Recently, the alarmists held a protest in Washington, D.C. While the protestors may consider their event successful, just consider how ridiculous it was to cause gridlock and increased carbon emissions.

Another progressive environmentalist solution is to “Don’t eat cows; Eat the Rich!” Yes, cannibalism is part of the green deal’s remedy for climate change. Yet, at the Iowa Polk County Steak Fry in mid-September, 17 Democrat presidential candidates grilled 10,500 steaks/burgers and 1000 vegan burgers.

At the UN, Greta Thunberg and 15 kids filed a lawsuit against 5 countries (Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, and Turkey) for excessive carbon emissions. They did not include China in the lawsuit even though China is responsible for approximately a third of the carbon emissions in the world. These young people are telling the world leaders that they are more informed than scientists and world leaders and that they will hold the world leaders accountable for their future. It is more likely that they have been indoctrinated more than educated about nature.

I agree. “Instead of frightening young people with alarmist hyperbole that the world is ending, it would be better to offer them something truly constructive, such as an education.” If their interest in the future is genuine, then an informed mentor and classroom teacher could provide the accurate information—even from both extremes—and allow these kids to study and investigate and search for a real answer for becoming good stewards of the world instead of making unfounded claims and outrageous threats for actions that do not fit into their prescription for curing all the ills of the world through taxation and restriction of thought.

If the concerns were really about climate change and pollution, the countries under attack would be China, Mongolia, Botswana, Russia, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, India, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, and the UAE because they are the nations that are producing the man-made pollution. However, the activists are attacking the USA. The goal is to destroy this civilization and turn all control over to the globalists. The real story is about politics, power, control, social engineering, lies and deceit.

God help us all!

God help the young to learn and to not fall as innocent victims to the lies of those who seek to destroy those who seek to follow God’s commands to care for His Creation and know that they will be accountable to Him alone at the End of Time.

Saying that Moderate Joe Biden isn’t moderate is understatement. Frankly, when AOC said that she wasn’t interested in some middle-of-the-road green energy plan that Biden was likely to propose, she certainly didn’t do her research. Then again, that’s her habit. This article highlights how destructive Biden’s plan would be.

What’s most frightening is that Joe Biden’s plan is relatively moderate amongst Democrat presidential candidates’ plans. That being said, it’s impossible to see Biden’s plan gaining traction in parts of the Rust Belt that he needs to flip back to have a chance to win back the White House.

Let’s get started with the meat of this critique, starting with Mr. Driessen writing “[b]efore we destroy our energy and economic system, we need to be presented solid, irrefutable proof that we face an actual climate crisis – and be able to debate and cross examine those who make such claims.”

That won’t happen anytime soon. The Democrats’ idea of debating an issue is hurling invectives at those that disagree with them. There’s no sign that Democrats will stop that anytime soon. (When I say soon, I mean in the next 50 years.) Driessen continues:

Third, there’s nothing clean, green, renewable or sustainable about wind, solar or battery power. Those technologies require enormous amounts of land, concrete, steel and other raw materials – and many of their most critical materials are extracted and processed using child labor, at near-slave wages for adults, with few or no workplace safety rules, and with horrific effects on land, air and water quality.

I’m reminded of the story from a DFL state convention a few years ago. For the benefit of non-Minnesotans, DFL is Minnesotan for crazy liberals.

Some Iron Range Democrats wanted a plank in the DFL platform that said that the DFL supported mining. Twenty years ago, that wouldn’t have been controversial. That year, it was as controversial as saying that the Pope’s grandkids were offended. But I digress. The environmentalists started organizing against the motion by communicating with iPads and iPhones.

DFL Sen. Dave Tomassoni noted this in ridiculing environmentalists opposing the platform prank:

Tomassoni held up his cell phone, noting that virtually everyone at the convention, including the most ardent environmentalists, had one. “There are 39 minerals in this little baby,” Tomassoni said. “It may surprise some of the people here that these minerals don’t just drop out of the sky. They’re mined. What, is it okay if the mining is done by some 12-year-old in a third world country, but it’s wrong if we [Rangers] do it?”

Biden’s strategy is stupid. First, he’s essentially telling blue collar workers that he’d implement the same policies as President Obama did that drove blue collar workers into President Trump’s arms.

Next, Biden is then attempting to tell those blue collar workers, whose jobs he wants to eliminate, that he’ll fight for them. Right. The guy that just sold those hard hats out now wants them to trust him? Seriously? There’s a better chance that I’ll vote for the Democrat in the general election in 2020 than there is for these hard hats to trust Biden. Here’s what Biden said in October of 2015 on the subject of climate change:

Then again, considering what he’s said about the Hyde Amendment in the past vs. what he’s saying now that he’s running for president, it isn’t like you can trust him or any other Democrat on the subject.

Sen. Karin Housley issued this statement urging Congress to “delist the gray wolf as an endangered species.” In the statement, Sen. Housley states “I am pleased the U.S. House of Representatives included an amendment in one of its recently-passed spending bills to bypass the courts and delist the gray wolf as an endangered species. By nearly every metric, the gray wolf’s recovery goals have been exceeded and this language would return management responsibility where it belongs: with the states. Farmers and landowners are prevented from protecting their livestock against wolf attacks because of this burdensome regulation. Instead of siding with far-left environmentalists, Tina Smith should put her brand of radical, left-wing partisanship aside and support this effort in the U.S. Senate.”

By all objective measures, the timber wolf, aka the grey wolf, is no longer an endangered species. Further, it shouldn’t be listed as a threatened species, either. According to this government definition, the definitions of an endangered species and a threatened species are spelled out in simple, easy-to-understand wording. An endangered species “are at the brink of extinction now.” Meanwhile, threatened “species are likely to be at the brink in the near future.” This is important information, too:

Threatened status benefits species and people in two situations: (1) it provides Federal protection before a species reaches the brink of extinction; and (2) in the case of species that were initially listed as endangered, threatened status also allows scaling back Federal protection as they recover and no longer need the maximum protections of the Act.

State natural resource management agencies designated by the Service may “take” (kill, wound, trap, or move as defined by the Act) individuals of a threatened species in pursuit of conservation programs for the species. In contrast, those agencies are prohibited from “taking” an endangered species if the action might kill or permanently disable the specimen, move it to another state, move it beyond its historical range, or keep it in captivity for longer than 45 days.

The environmental activists to which Sen. Housley refers have argued, literally, that species that’ve been put on the endangered species list are forever at risk of extinction. In their mind, the ESA, aka Endangered Species Act, should protect endangered and threatened species alike with equal ferocity.

The thing about environmental activists is that they’re never willing to accept the fact that the ESA worked. If they did, they’d be much less rabid and much more moderate and tolerable.

When the Minnesota Senate passed SF2983, it did the right thing. Sen. John Marty is upset with the bill’s passage but it’s the right thing to do.

After the bill passed, Sen. Marty said “Declaring the science something you don’t like does not mean it is bad science. We’re basically saying as a Legislature that we don’t like the results you came up with so we’re going to declare it bad science.” Actually, Justin Eichorn’s bill is rock-solid on multiple fronts. Most importantly, a U of M study, which I wrote about in this post, said that “rice growth was stunted except when there was a high concentration of iron in the water. The study found that iron mitigated the damage sulfur caused to the rice.”

Therefore, Sen. Eichorn voted for the bill that’s been verified by multiple scientific studies:

In 2013 the state hired the University of Minnesota to do a scientific study of the effects of sulfates on wild rice and to determine what the standard should be. Also the Minnesota chamber hired an independent laboratory to do the same. Both studies agree that sulfate is not toxic to wild rice. The studies also found that if sulfates turn to sulfides it does slow the growth of wild rice. However if there is iron present in the water, iron combines with the sulfides and doesn’t allow the sulfides to affect the wild rice.

Sen. Marty is the politician who is fighting verified scientific findings.

Sen. Justin Eichorn, R-Grand Rapids, said he’s willing to work with the agency on a compromise but finds its current route untenable. Bill supporters argue that tougher discharge standards could prove costly for local communities, which could be forced to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities with expensive technology. They also say it would stifle industry, particularly mining companies.

“This bill will put a stop to what’s going on now, take a pause and go back to the drawing board,” Eichorn said, “and make sure if we are going to do something that everybody is on board and everybody gets a seat at the table, including industry, including municipalities, including environmental groups and government.”

The Trump administration is considering a rule change to something called “the blanket rule.” According to the article, it’s “probably an esoteric issue to most Americans, but to landowners and businesses, primarily in the Western U.S., the ‘blanket’ extension of ESA protections to “threatened” species has punished them for decades. A ‘take’ of a protected species can bring massive civil and criminal penalties. ‘Private property owners’ incentives are key because most endangered species depend on private land for most of their habitat,’ Wood said. ‘This reform will improve those incentives and make it easier for states, property owners, and environmentalists to work together on innovative conservation plans.’ The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service extended “take” protections to species listed as ‘threatened’ under the ESA, despite Congress wanting federal agents to regulate “threatened” species different from those classified as ‘endangered.'”

When the ESA was enacted, Congress’s intent was to protect endangered species, which is defined as “any species in danger of extinction.” Meanwhile, threatened species are defined as “on the brink of becoming endangered.”

Its provisions give the Interior Department the power to determine what species are endangered and then to list them publicly. It makes it illegal to capture, kill, transport, sell, buy, possess, import or export any of the listed plants or animals. There is a separate category for “threatened” species, those organisms that are on the brink of becoming endangered. They are equally protected, except that scientists may take specimens when necessary for vital research.

In the United States the Office of Endangered Species currently lists 51 plants and 143 animals as endangered and 7 plants and 38 animals as threatened. To prevent the import or trade of endangered species native to foreign countries, the office lists 402 foreign animals as endangered and 16 animals and a plant as threatened.

The goal of the ESA is to properly manage plant and animal species so they’re no longer endangered or threatened.

Here in Minnesota, the ESA was critical in turning around the timber wolf population. At one point (the late 1960s and early 1970s), only a few families of timber wolves existed in Minnesota. After proper management, the timber wolf population, through cautious management, was rejuvenated to the point where there were open hunting seasons on the great grey wolf. That’s a legitimate success story. That should be the goal of management policies for all endangered or threatened species.

Instead, the ESA has been used as a weapon against developers. It’s time to de-weaponized the ESA and return sanity to development projects. That will be a difficult task. Environmental activist organizations like the Sierra Club, Conservation Minnesota and others have used the ESA to throttle projects. They won’t give up without a lengthy court fight.

Rejecting the blanket rule won’t fix the law but it’s a positive first step.

This is a breaking news report, an exclusive to LFR:

Furloughed Moose Stream Back Into National Park After Government Re-opens
International Falls, MN
January 23, 2018
All 46 moose have returned safely to Voyageurs National Park after being evacuated at midnight Friday, January 19 when congressional negotiations broke down, closing the federal government.

Since partisan politics began triggering government shutdowns in 1976, the moose in Voyageurs have been asked to vacate 19 times. The standard protocol is for the moose to make their way to Duluth where cargo aircraft fly them to China for care and feeding until the government re-opens.

In an agreement facilitated by the Congressman Hon. James Oberstar, China won a competitive bid for the occasional hosting of the park ruminates during shut-downs. China cares for the moose in Sichuan province at the giant panda reserve. According to China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying, “the moose eat neither bamboo nor pandas so the two unlikely occupants of the reserve get along well.” She added that, “the lack of wolves in the panda preserve seem to give the moose a relaxing environment—sort of a vacation.” Even though the shutdown ended before the moose actually arrived in China this time, many environmentalists feel assured by the arrangement to care for the moose.

Each step of the moose herd’s progress was monitored by satellite using the radio collar that fashions each unit of flora and fauna in the park. No moose were harmed in the evacuation exercise.

Since receiving this breaking news story, LFR has confirmed that this is the shortest stay in China for the moose. LFR hasn’t confirmed whether the moose suffer jet lag from their trip.

When the American Mining Rights Association, aka AMRA, tried planning an event near Barstow, Calif., the BLM posted Route Closed signs on the trail event participants were scheduled to take. When “AMRA President Shannon Poe caught wind of the BLM scheme”, he called “the BLM office in Barstow and spoke to a guy by the name of Jeff Childers. And Childers, while he presented himself as the manager of the BLM office, was not … but he told me that they put the signs in the roads there and that the roads were now closed as part of the WEMO Plan.”

Unfortunately for Mr. Childers, a multitude of laws were against him. For instance, “the Mining Law of 1872 as amended” makes “blocking access to an active mining claim … illegal.” That isn’t the only statute that the BLM ignored. When Poe spoke with Childers, Poe “explained to Mr. Childers in a rather lengthy—probably a 45-minute call—that they cannot lock and block mining claim owners for a variety of reasons, the first being the Americans with Disabilities Act. Making a 70-year-old man with a fake knee and a fake hip pack in and walk two miles through the Mojave Desert to access his mining claim isn’t just immoral; it is illegal under the ADA as well as under the RS 2477 or Revised Statue 2477 law which states that all roads prior to 1976 must remain open.”

The night before the event, Katrina Symons, the “field manager of the Barstow District Office” of the BLM, met with Mr. Poe:

Symons agreed to meet Poe at his campsite at the Slash X Ranch on Friday, Oct. 13, preceding the outing. When Symons arrived about 5:30 p.m., she met with Poe and two senior members of the AMRA board of directors, Jere and Connie Clements, at a picnic table. “She had Jeff Childers with her and we talked for about 15 minutes about the desert tortoise and how we could protect them — just common sense stuff, and she had a big stack of pamphlets,” Poe said. According to Poe, Symons said the BLM would go a step further and check the roads the miners planned to use for tortoises on the Saturday morning of the outing. “I said, ‘Great. We’ll be out there at 9 o’clock. That’s fantastic! We’ll wait until you guys clear the road, and then we’ll go in.’”

Problem solved. Or, so he thought.

Then, in a shocking turn of events according to Poe, Symons threatened Poe with criminal prosecution, adding she would take photos of his vehicle and license plate once he had driven past the BLM road closure signs.
Poe then asked Symons to explain her sudden about-face change in position, he said. “She said: ‘I’m going to take picture of your truck, fill out an affidavit and send it to our law enforcement division for criminal prosecution,'” Poe said. “So, I said: ‘Last night, Katrina, you told me on the phone—and I have a witness—that you were going to give us unrestricted access,'” Poe said.

Predictably, Symons insists that there’s been a misunderstanding:

Federal misdirection?

“Well, I believe that Mr. Poe misunderstood,” said Symons. “Because, as I understand it, Mr. Poe had sent Mr. Childers a Utah Supreme Court ruling. Mr. Childers had informed him that it was basically a state ruling; it’s not federal—and that BLM will and does comply with the 1872 Mining Law and the associated mining regulations. So, I think that was more of a miscommunication or misunderstanding.” In a follow-up interview Dec. 1, Poe responded that the Utah case involving RS 2477 laws on rights-of-way and the Hicks case are two separate cases, and that the United States v. Steve A. Hicks case is obviously federal.

AMRA appears to know its rights based on federal law. It’s difficult to believe that they’d highlight a tangential state court ruling as the centerpiece of their argument. A state court case might or might not be applicable. The U.S. v. Steve Hicks isn’t just important. It’s on point, too.

Based on AMRA’s detailed understanding of the laws applicable to their mining claims, it’s difficult to believe the BLM’s statements. I’m inclined to believe AMRA’s statements because the BLM’s statements seem to be federal misdirection.

Late in 2016, President Obama officially created the Bears Ears National Monument on December 28, 2016. One of the first executive orders President Trump signed was to instruct the Interior Secretary to look into recently created national monuments. Last week, Secretary Zinke sent a report to President that included his findings and recommendations.

In this article published by the Navajo Times, it reports that “Pro-monument advocates are ‘deeply disappointed and aggrieved’ over reports that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has recommended to President Donald Trump to redraw the Bears Ears National Monument in southeastern Utah. ‘(Native American) grass roots in Utah and beyond are deeply disappointed,’ leaders of Utah Diné Bikéyah – a grassroots tribal group that began developing the Bears Ears conservation initiative in 2010 – wrote in a statement, ‘and aggrieved that (Zinke) appears to have recommended reducing Bears Ears National Monument.'”

The key part of the article comes when it says “Leaders of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition – composed of members from Diné, Kiis’áanii, Ute, Ute Mountain and Zuni, also expressed “outrage,” criticizing Zinke’s reported recommendation that Trump shrink the size of the 1.35-million acre Bears Ears (Shash Jaa’) monument declared late last year by President Barack Obama.”

That part is important because it says President Obama created the monument through executive order. Had he created it through an act of Congress, then Interior Secretary couldn’t reduce the size of it through executive recommendation. Instead, President Obama decided he’d do whatever he wanted to do. He created Bears Ears National Monument with the stroke of his pen.

It’s one thing to create a national monument. It’s quite another to set aside 1,350,000 acres. (FYI- that’s 2,100+ square miles.) I like what President Trump is doing because it’s relatively respectful of President Obama. After all, President Trump could’ve gotten rid of that designation. Instead, he’s simply reducing its footprint.

In a session that saw tons of weird things happen, finding out that Sen. John Marty and other Twin Cities DFL senators tried ousting Sen. Bakk as majority leader ranks right up there:

ST. PAUL — How successful of a job did Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk of Cook do for the Iron Range while also being a key player in making split government in Minnesota work? Well, some disgruntled DFL liberal legislators from the Twin Cities area tried to unseat him in caucus as leader of the majority party in the Senate.

Their attempted DFL coup in the early morning hours of the Saturday finale of the 2015 legislative special session fizzled like a bad fuse on an unexploded firecracker. Bakk’s support within the caucus was unwavering.

The Senate majority leader told the Mesabi Daily News Saturday afternoon that while he preferred not to comment directly about the caucus dust-up, he was pleased with the intra-Senate DFL backing he received and also his role in a session that relied for success on bipartisan partnerships with the GOP House majority.

By now, saying that the DFL is fractured isn’t news. That’s been established for at least a month. In fact, we’ve known that the split is essentially a geographic split.

It isn’t hyperbole to say that the Metro DFL, in their minds, have put up with Range DFLers on environmental views because they needed the Range delegation’s votes on their economic policies. This feud was obvious during the DFL’s 2014 State Convention. That’s when the Twin Cities activists, led by DFL State Chairman Ken Martin, fought off a resolution saying that the DFL supports mining. When that was deemed too controversial, it was clear that a fight was brewing.

It looks like the special session was when the fuse reached the explosive.

This should make for an interesting session in 2016. Sen. Bakk doesn’t strike me as someone who forgets these things quickly.

UPDATE: Briana Bierschbach’s post says that the DFL caucus discussion about whether Sen. Bakk should continue happened after the special session had adjourned:

ST. PAUL — The Minnesota House and Senate had adjourned their one-day special session to finish passing the state budget and most lawmakers had gone home, but at 3 a.m. Saturday Senate Democrats were just getting started.

I was originally told that it happened after the Agriculture/Environment Bill had been defeated. This explanation makes more sense. Consider this my correction to my original post.

Technorati: , , , ,

This special session wouldn’t play out true to form if there wasn’t a major fight on the Ag/Environment bill. This session hasn’t run smoothly since Sen. Bakk ambushed Gov. Dayton on the commissioners’ pay raise. Since then, the signs of a slow-motion DFL meltdown have been quite visible. Don’t expect that to change.

First, the Metrocrats defeated the Ag/Environment bill. There was much rejoicing amongst the Metrocrats. Now they’re getting worried because the arm-twisting has started to get one of the 32 senators who voted against the bill to a) call for reconsideration of the bill and b) to switch his/her vote against the bill initially to being for the bill this time.

This tweet says it all:


Apparently, DFL legislators and special interests don’t like having to deal with people who don’t agree with them. They think that opposition needs to be squashed immediately and permanently. This is their way of saying that it isn’t fun when they don’t get their way because uppity peasants (that’s us) highlight the foolishness of their policies.

Time after time this session, the DFL fought for policies that the people rejected. First, a plethora of organizations fought against Gov. Dayton’s universal pre-K initiative because it was expensive, filled with unfunded mandate and was unsustainable. Other than that, people liked it. Next, it was Gov. Dayton fighting to repeal a bill he’d already signed. That’s becoming a trend with him. (See repealing B2B sales taxes, though this time, he called for it sooner. LOL)

This year’s biggest difference is that the fighting has been DFL vs. DFL for the most part. Rural DFL is getting more and more upset with Metrocrats by the day. This Ag/Environment bill is just the highest profile example of this fight.

Whatever the outcome today, things won’t end up well for the DFL in November, 2016.