Network for Good

Rick Spilsbury is a Western Shoshone, native to Nevada. He lives in Ely and writes a blog called No Shoot Foot that you can check out here: http://noshootfoot.blogspot.com/

By: Rick Spilsbury

Being in Nature is like going back to your soul. You know what I'm talking about; that feeling that you are more complete when you feel you're a part of a natural place.

And you should. No man is an island. We are just a part of life on Earth – and we should relish that. As humans, we crave the feeling of a complete soul. And we are more likely to feel that feeling when we are in Nature. In fact, fresh air actually feels like the breath of life – because it is. This perception makes sense if we think of the life all around us as the rest of our soul. And the life around us is that consciousness which lives on after our body dies.

And if this all makes sense, then destroying nature for money is destroying a part of your soul.

That’s what makes the recent water grab in Nevada all the more shocking.

Have you heard about this boondoggle of a project? The Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) wants to build a 300-mile long pipeline to export more than 40 billion gallons of groundwater from northeastern Nevada into Las Vegas. The most recent estimates have pegged the cost of the pipeline at $15 billion dollars – and probably much more than that, including all of the externalities, interest, and taxpayer-fueled bloat that comes with an engineering project of this magnitude.

Everyone who has ever lived in the desert knows that the most valuable natural resource is water, hands down. It's the only thing you can get a whole community “fightin’ mad” upset over. Nobody ever wants to run out of water.

The fear is so elemental that water shortages may be the ultimate weapon to con a community. We all know that we will pay whatever it costs to have water. When it comes to water, we're no better off than a junkie. And we know there are people salivating over business deals like that. They want to be Southern Nevada's “supplier” – so they can charge city residents any price – for rural Nevada's water.

This plan has developers scheming to steal from the right hand to overcharge the left. Water rates for residents in Las Vegas are expected to triple – TRIPLE – within ten years of the pipeline being built. Ratepayers could see their bill go from $30 to nearly $90. Ouch. I couldn’t afford that kind of increase – can you?

Yes, it's true that I don't want the water grab to happen because I feel that the act of a community stealing the natural wealth of its neighbors to artificially fuel unsustainable growth is just wrong. But I also fear for Las Vegas. Because I see another banking loan scam coming that would ultimately financially ruin Las Vegas. Everyone remembers the housing bubble, fueled by senseless loans that ultimately crashed the world economy. Well, the next scam is to loot a community's money by convincing the public of the “desperate” need for water in Vegas.

The SNWA water grab is not popular. “We the people” wouldn't vote for it. When you look at it that way, the SNWA water grab is in fact an act of usurping the citizens' sovereignty. The water grab is undemocratic. So… is it time to occupy the Mojave Desert?

What's at stake is the future of Las Vegas and Nevada. Both of our economies will be devastated if this robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul water scheme is approved.

Please help us stop the water grab in Nevada! Sign our petition today to help us show the decision-makers in Las Vegas just how many people are paying attention.

This post was adapted from these previous posts on the No Shoot Foot blog here and here. 

Hundreds of people around the U.S. have joined Stiv Wilson's petition on Change.org asking the National Park Service to re-instate its plastic bottle ban in the Grand Canyon. But he's not the only person angered enough to launch a petition. Independently of Stiv, others have come to Change.org to launch their own campaigns and are now coordinating their voices. Here are what the petition creators say: 

Deborah Patterson, Artist and Art Teacher, Baltimore, Maryland (Deborah's petition)

Over the years, I have signed many, many petitions to protect and support the environment, but this is the first one I have ever started. When I read that Coca-Cola had actually threatened to reduce or eliminate their support for the National Park system if the Grand Canyon banned the sale of disposable water bottles, I knew I had to do something.  Our national parks are owned by the citizens of the United States, whose taxes help maintain them.  The corporate world has no right to exercise this kind of coercion, which in schools is called "bullying."  At whatever level and in whatever form it needs to stop, and the only way to stop it is to stand up to it.

Devin Saez, Architect, Los Angeles, California (Devin's petition)

My wife and I love to hike and travel. We have spent time in the Grand Canyon and other national parks and have truly enjoyed our time there. It is truly a natural wonder. We love the idea of being able to share the (trash-free) beauty of the Grand Canyon with are (future) children and grandchildren one day. However, as other Americans, I am concerned that government agencies such as, the National Park Service, are not doing enough to protect the national parks and need to be reminded that the public is watching.

As an architect, I have spent my studies and my professional career focused on environmentally sustainable design and my wife attended law school with the hopes of becoming an environmental attorney, spending her time studying water law and land use issues. As such, we are aware of the environmental issues facing our country and our planet and the role that endless bottled water plays in polluting our land and oceans. The most interesting part of the story to me was that the Grand Canyon had already paid $300,000 to install new water filing stations...perfectly good, clean water that our taxes paid for and trash free! That coupled with the fact that bottled water is 1/3 of the park's trash and the carbon footprint left by bottling, transporting, and recycling the bottles is enormous. I have even heard that a very small fraction of the all bottles get recycled and thus, most end up in the ocean and/or landfills.

I think we would all sleep better at night knowing that the Grand Canyon is protected and also a partner is trying to keep our environment and the park safe for future generations.

Stiv Wilson, plastics activist with research group 5 Gyres, Portland, Oregon (Stiv's petition)

“The National Park Service has a responsibility to keep the park free from litter, not to keep mega-corporations like Coca-Cola happy. The Grand Canyon belongs to all of us, and banning plastic bottles is the single best way to keep plastic waste from polluting the Grand Canyon and our oceans. Hundreds have joined this campaign. We just won’t stand for it.”

You can join Stiv, Deborah and Devin and hundreds of others by signing the petition today.

Hundreds of people around the U.S. have joined Stiv Wilson's petition on Change.org asking the National Park Service to re-instate its plastic bottle ban in the Grand Canyon. Signers are worried about the effects of plastic litter and pollution, and want the National Park Service to protect the beauty and wildlife of the Grand Canyon, one of America's greatest natural treasures. They are also angered that corporate interests, namely Coca-Cola's desire to keep making profits on bottled water, could take precedent over the public's interest in doing what's best for the park. Below is a statement from one petition signer we'd like to highlight. You can see many others by looking at the petition.

Wayne L. Hamilton, PhD. served America's national parks for more than two decades, as a research scientist at Yellowstone National Park and as a ranger at Zion National Park, among other positions. Since retiring from the Park Service in 1996, Wayne has worked as a research scientist in Baja California. His father, Warren F. Hamilton, was a Grand Canyon National Park Ranger between 1933 and 1940, and served as Superintendent of Everglades National Park and Zion National Park, and as the National Park Service's Assistant Regional Director of the Western Regional Office.

Post by Wayne L. Hamilton:

"I was privileged to have grown up in a National Park Service family with full exposure to the natural wonders of several parks. That was at a time when the Director of the Service knew the names of all 'his' Superintendents' children, so I remember a picnic where Horace Albright once said to me 'hello Wayne.'

Considerably later, and after a good start in a university research and teaching career, in 1974, I resigned and went to work for the Park Service because I thought it might be a better venue for reaching out to the public on issues of importance in the natural sciences and to our survival on an overcrowded planet.

In the mid-70s environmental awareness was on the rise and uniformed park naturalists began talking openly with the public about the need to take better care of our Earth. Then, in 1977, the Washington Office of the Service sent out word that this practice was no longer welcome. We were told that people didn't like being 'preached' to. Gosh, we hadn't heard that complaint!

The 1977 reversal may be explained thus. The National Park Service serves two entities in our country: the public and the Congress. Most people admire what the Service does. The role of Congress is to provide appropriations for operation of the parks, and that relationship gives Congress a large say in how the Service conducts its business. It's not commonly known, but Parks are also a major vacation destination for members of Congress and their corporate friends. Only they don't usually take the tours available to the public.

I knew Steve Martin, the Superintendent of Grand Canyon, when I was a research scientist in Yellowstone and he was a ranger there. He made the right decision to ban disposable water bottles at Grand Canyon as had been done earlier at Zion National Park. It seems pretty clear to me that Director Jon Jarvis's reversal of Steve's decision can be traced directly back to ...if not the Coca Cola company directly, at least to Coke's friends in Congress who hold the Service purse strings."

You can join Wayne and hundreds of others by signing Stiv Wilson's petition today.

Hundreds of people around the U.S. have joined Stiv Wilson's petition on Change.org asking the National Park Service to re-instate its plastic bottle ban in the Grand Canyon. Signers are worried about the effects of plastic litter and pollution, and want the National Park Service to protect the beauty and wildlife of the Grand Canyon, one of America's greatest natural treasures. They are also angered that corporate interests, namely Coca-Cola's desire to keep making profits on bottled water, could take precedent over the public's interest in doing what's best for the park. Below is a statement from one petition signer we'd like to highlight. You can find many others by looking at the petition.

Erica Donnelly, Marine Biologist:

"I am a marine scientist in Santa Cruz, California who researches plastic ingestion in birds including Northern Fulmars, Albatrosses, and Shearwaters. We find plastic fragments from a variety of sources (both local and non-local) inside of bird stomachs.  Almost every bird we examine contains internal plastic that can effect the animal directly (internal blockages, abrasions, etc.) or indirectly (chemical toxicity from pollutants that adhere to plastics).

Seabirds are just one example of how are extensive use of disposable plastics is impacting wildlife. Micro-plastic infiltrate our ground water, water ways, and soil creating a national health issue, not just a localized problem on the coast.  We must get to the source of the issue and curtail our dependency on single use, disposable plastics.  Please help make a step in the right direction by banning plastic bottles."

You can join Erica and hundreds of others by signing Stiv Wilson's petition today.

The battle against the environmental impact of single-use plastic bags is a classic David vs. Goliath story: local individuals trying to reduce waste and save the planet are going up against the giants of petro-chemical companies bent on keeping the flow of fossil-fuel laden bags at an all time high. Take, for example, the owner of ChicoBags, a reusable bag company that was recently sued by three of the top US manufacturers of plastic bags—Hilex Poly LLC, Superbag, and Advance Polybag—in an attempt to discredit the reusable bag company's green merits.  (The recent settlement shows the plastic bag company's arguments were as flimsy as their bags).

Then, there are the numerous cities across the state of California that have passed such bans, including San Francisco, Malibu, Palo Alto, and Los Angeles County, but are now threatened with lawsuits by, you guessed it, Hilex Poly. Big time pressure from the industry shut down state-wide ban efforts in California this summer, and thwarted a city ban in Seattle last fall.

Perhaps nowhere is this struggle more evident than in the small town of Hailey, Idaho, where a group of Wood River High School students have waged a successful campaign to get a plastic bag ban listed on the upcoming ballot on November 8th.  Now, as voting day draws near, Hilex Poly has once again flexed its fund muscles and reportedly begun a massive ad campaign espousing (falsely) the health hazards of reusable bags, and the benefits of plastic bags.  Through ads in the local paper, on Facebook, and bulk mailings, residents of Hailey are being bombarded by the plastic bag manufacturing giant—a wave of messaging that the local Wood River High School Environment Club doesn't have funds to compete with. As student advisor, Erika Greenburg, said when we spoke: "These kids are totally dependent on the adults to vote, most of them are not 18. Yet, it's their future, their environment that these plastic bags affect. But how can we compete with mass-scale messaging by Hilex?"

It's a tough battle. But not impossible.

Despite challenges from industry Goliaths, plastic bag bans continue to be proposed and passed across the country.  Come 2012, bans will go into effect in Brownsville, Texas, Maui and Kauai counties in Hawaii, and American Samoa. Just this past Tuesday, the City of Aspen, Colorado passed a ban, and neighboring Basalt passed an ordinance last month to charge fees on both paper and plastic bags. Chicago will vote on legislation next week, while the city of Newport, OR moves forward with legislation to ban distribution of plastic bags.

And, back in California, a review has been scheduled to investigate the pro-plastic bag text inserted into new curricula—a disgraceful attempt by industry to corrupt basic environmental education. (More than 30,000 people have spoken out through Veronica Zaleha's petition on Change.org).

Whether it is pressure on industry or on local city councils, you can make a difference and help turn the tide of plastic bag pollution.  New bag bans are cropping up everyday, targeting city councils, state legislatures or companies, and this movement could use your help.  Search Change.org's website for "plastic bag ban" and/or your city, and see if a petition is up. If not, why not start your own and be a part of the change?

If you start a petition, email environment@change.org, and we'll connect you with some additional resources for support.

Follow Change.org's action hub for environmental and energy justice on Facebook and Twitter.  Photo credit: timparkinson

Last month, North Carolina wildlife agents stormed a Randolph County rehabilitation farm and killed nine tame deer on Wayne Kindley's property. Armed agents claimed to have a warrant authorizing their actions, saying the animals could have Chronic Wasting Disease.

Lab test results, however, were negative—none of the nine deer killed by wildlife officials had the disease.

Surprised? Don't be. CWD has never been found in North Carolina and the closest known case was documented in northern Virginia, hundreds of miles away. In addition, seven of the nine killed deer were fallow deer, a species not susceptible  to CWD.

So why is it the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission's policy to storm a farm and slaughter tame deer, some of which were in rehabilitation?

That's just what more than 20,000 people around the world want to know as they push to change the way game wardens operate within the state. Unfortunately, state officials are either attempting to ignore the issue or outright pushing back, threatening local businesses to take down petitions.

Even before test results showed the deer to be free of disease, local community members rallied against the senseless slaughter. Jo Henderson, who had raised one of the fawns killed on the farm, is currently collecting signatures in town, while thousands more sign the petition on Change.org, demanding an investigation into the killings and protections for tame deer.

The response from community members has been massive, but at a recent public meeting with the commission, discussions of the deer killings was decidedly pushed-aside for "a later time." Even though Henderson was invited by wildlife officials to attend the meeting, the commission closed the meeting without public comment.

But Henderson and others refuse to back down. As officials fled from the quickly adjourned meeting, Henderson shouted "Shame on you" and vowed to continue her fight to change the law. Meanwhile, more killings have taken place. You can help protect deer by signing the petition here.

 Photo credit: ZapTheDingbat

Iraq war veteran Mark Grapin's fight to keep a simple treehouse he built for his two sons in Fairfax County, Virginia has made national news, catching the attention of people across the country disturbed by local officials' orders that he remove the structure due to an obscure zoning technicality.

It certainly caught the attention of fellow Army officer Cameron Dunbar-Yamaguchi,  who saw the news from his hometown in Portland, Oregon.

Cameron came to Change.org to start a petition to the Fairfax County Zoning Board. When I asked him what motivated him to take this action, he said he was especially moved because the treehouse was a promise Grapin made before deploying to Iraq:

----------

I just happened to come across the article on Fox News and, as I listened to the story, I was inspired to post a petition to help this man and his boys. I am a Sergeant in a U.S. Army Reserve hospital unit, and while having not deployed myself, I understood Mr. Grapin's Tree House promise to his boys because it was not simply about the tree house but the true promise was his safe return home.

He, like all soldiers, cannot promise a safe return home from the battlefield. But we can try to make a more tangible pact with our friends and family. A Tree House was such a pact. A way to communicate to his sons that he would be back home and that rather than worry about him, they could set their minds on a project with their father upon his return. -- Cameron Dunbar-Yamaguchi

---------

Grapin is continuing to battle with Fairfax zoning officials, who initially told him -- when he called to county and asked before spending the $1,400 to build the treehouse -- that he did not need a permit, not knowing he lived on a corner lot which requires a variance.

Now, after posting a takedown notice, zoning officials have already denied Grapin's new request for a variance in September.

They did give him one more chance to have an appeal heard on November 30th—and that's why this petition can be helpful in pressuring the zoning board to let him keep the treehouse.

Grapin says he will continue his fight because he made a promise to his boys. He is especially respectful of the public servants involved in the process, and just wants to make sure they do the right thing: "I believe I have played fair with the County, and honestly believe the average public servant simply wants to do a good job...This was simply a crack in the planks that make up that huge machine, and my fear is wondering what happens to people like me who can't afford the time or resources to argue their point to fruition within that machinery," Grapin wrote to me in an email.

That Grapin can't keep this treehouse seems generally foolish, but there are also larger issues at stake for his sons, his sons' friends and the community as a whole. The National Wildlife Federation, a national group headquartered in the county, points out the importance these days of adults doing everything in their power to encourage kids to play outside. The benefits include healthy emotional and creative development and a guard against childhood obesity, and in the age of iPads and iPhones and iEverything, I couldn't agree more.

So if you agree with any of the above, you can sign Cameron's petition to support Mark Grapin in his quest to keep a treehouse for his sons. 

Follow Change.org's action hub for environmental and energy justice on Facebook and Twitter. You can reach Jess Leber, the author of this post, on Twitter at @jessleber or at jess at change dot org.