-Caveat Lector- [HardGreenHerald] # 3 "Unless someone like you cares a whole lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not." --Dr. Seuss, 'The Lorax' --A RadTimes production-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contents: --------------- --Attack of the Killer Pesticides --Pollution may save whales from Norwegian hunters --Zero-Cut initiative splits Sierra Club --Why we should let wolves be --Human Testing Strikes Controversy --Judge rules reporter does not have to name confidential source --International Cloning Ban Signed --Suits Against Hog Farms Prompted by Federal Inadequacies --ELF Spikes Trees Near Eugene (OR, USA) =================================================================== Attack of the Killer Pesticides <http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0103&L=sanet-mg&F=&S=&P=529> Eco-War Dispatches from The Doctors' Prescription for Healthy Living, February 2001, Volume-5, Number-2, www.freedompressonline.com , by David W. Steinman, Publisher. I've been reviewing the latest Total Diet Study results for September 2000 compiled by the Food and Drug Administration. The total Diet Study is the government's own monitoring data for pesticide and industrial chemical residues detected in foods as found on grocers' shelves and on dinner tables. The data I've seen are so incriminating, there is possibly no better evidence of the need for reducing our pesticide dependency and for consumers, more than ever, to turn to organically grown foods. I've been a consumer cop for a long time. Nothing about these results lends me any hope that things are getting better when it comes to curtailing use of cancer-causing pesticides or those that may pose risks for damage to the nervous, immune and reproductive systems. I'm looking at the results for non-organic apples. There were 26 samples of apples taken. In these samples, 244 pesticide and industrial chemical residues were found. That means, on average, each bite of an apple contains more than nine different pesticide or industrial chemical residues. These include carcinogens such as azinphos-methyl, benomyl, benzene, captan, dicofol, dimethoate, methy1-parathion, and propargite. The 26 samples of raw peaches contained 195 pesticide and industrial chemical residues. Meahwhile, the same number of samples of fresh or frozen boiled spinach contained 196 pesticide and industrial chemical residues, including cancer-causing pesticides such as acephate, chlordane, DDE, dieldrin, dimethoate, nonachlor, permethrin and toxaphene. Fresh or frozen boiled collard greens contained 198 such residues with especially high levels of DDE, dieldrin and endosulfan (an endocrine disrupting chemical). Raw celery (same number of samples) contained 179 residues with particularly high levels of the cancer-causing pesticides acephate and permethrin. Peanut butter was the king of pesticide contamination, however, with 259 pesticide and industrial chemical residues detected, including benzene hexachloride, dieldrin, and hexachlorobenzene. The Organic Alternative We don't live in the Garden of Eden, and organically grown crops are likely to occasionally have minor pesticide contamination, especially in cases where residues of persistent pesticides contaminate the soil. But much of the contamination in the food supply today is the result of current applications. Based on my review of data on organic foods, they are significantly lower in pesticide contamination. In my book, "Diet for a Poisoned Planet," and "The Safe Shopper's Bible" and in past issues of "The Doctors' Prescription for Healthy Living," I have documented the many experimental and human studies that incriminate everyday pesticide and industrial chemical exposures as a cause of childhood and adult cancer. Anyone who tells you that the pesticides in the food supply to which consumers are exposed are trivial doesn't know the medical and scientific literature. What I am telling you is this: organic foods should be your first choice, especially when they are easily affordable. For example, organically grown apples, celery, spinach and peanut butter are extremely competitively priced. I'll tell you about more dangerous actors in the food supply in upcoming reports. It's your body, your health, and your right to care. ----- David W. Steinman, Publisher and Editor. www.freedompressonline.com =================================================================== Pollution may save whales from Norwegian hunters <http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_225856.html> Friday 2, March 2001 Sea pollution could be an unlikely ally in conservationists' battle to save the whale. Norwegian whalers have been told Japan will not import whale meat from them because it contains too many toxins. Greenpeace says the blubber exports and whale hunts must now stop because they are undermining confidence in all Norwegian seafood. Tests have shown Norwegian whale blubber contains 3.6 milligrams of PCBs per kilogram - far higher than Japan's limit of 0.5 milligrams, reports Norway's Aftenposten newspaper. =================================================================== February 26, 2001 'Zero-Cut' initiative splits Sierra Club <http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=10281> by Kirsten Bovee Are urban members ignoring rural range life? CHAMISAL, N.M. - Debating the use of public lands in northern New Mexico is like driving its dirt roads in springtime. Mud splatters, wheels spin, and those who brave the mire run a good chance of getting stuck in the muck. Up one such dirt road, in the pinon and juniper forests of the Sangre de Cristo Range, Kay Matthews and Mark Schiller live in the mountain village of Chamisal. In the 1960s and '70s, Matthews and Schiller fought for civil rights and protested the Vietnam War. Now they wield their pens on behalf of their neighbors - residents of small, predominantly Hispanic foothill communities. "It's all the same fight," says Schiller. The two run La Jicarita, an eight-page monthly newspaper that chronicles water concerns, community events and politics in towns such as Penasco, Las Trampas and Embudo. Both consider themselves environmentalists, but Schiller is quick to add, "There's a whole part of the puzzle missing when urban environmentalists ignore rural communities." That's exactly what they feel happened in 1996, when Sierra Club members approved a policy that advocated an end to commercial logging on public lands. In northern New Mexico's traditional communities, pinon pine is a winter staple for heat and cooking fuel. "Decisions are made by people sitting in offices in San Francisco who cannot grant autonomy to their local members," said Matthews. In October 1999, Matthews and six others stood on the steps of the state capitol in Santa Fe and withdrew their membership from the Sierra Club. Now Matthews and others are taking aim at a proposed Sierra Club policy that would call for an end to all commercial grazing on public lands. Just up the road from Matthews and Schiller, the Hispanic residents of Penasco have grazed small herds of cattle on the slopes of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains for generations. "These policies are affecting some of the most disenfranchised people in the community," says Matthews. "How dare they disenfranchise them again?" Zero cud? Weighing in at over 600,000 members, the Sierra Club is an environmental heavyweight whose endorsements carry considerable clout. The Sierra Club regularly juggles hard-line policy positions with dissension in its ranks, as with the call to drain Lake Powell (HCN, 10/13/97: Sierra Club moves to fortify its 'drain Lake Powell' campaign), the "zero cut" policy (HCN, 5/27/96: Sierra Club zeroes in on logging), and a failed initiative to limit immigration (HCN, 5/11/98: Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses). Wise-use groups are alert to the Sierra Club's positions. "We take these sorts of things very seriously," says George Landrith, executive director of Frontiers of Freedom. To bring "zero cud" to vote, supporters collected the requisite 1,300 member signatures at REI stores, trailheads and Sierra Club meetings. They focused on urban areas such as New York City, San Francisco and Los Angeles. Caleb Kleppner, a Sierra Club member from San Francisco who circulated the petition, considers the issue a "no-brainer" for members. "People can see what the cows are doing to the land," he says. Zero-grazing advocates say public-lands ranching damages riparian areas, costs taxpayers needless expense in subsidies, and diverts precious water to raise feed crops such as alfalfa. "Cattle have overstayed their welcome," says David Orr, who was also instrumental in the zero-cut campaign and is now field director for the Glen Canyon Action Network, a group that advocates draining Lake Powell. "Public lands should not be in place for private profit-making," he says, "especially at the expense of the environment." Orr says he recognizes the concerns of ranchers currently dependent on public lands. "I'm sympathetic to where they're coming from," he says, "but ranchers are part of a culture that's facing change, whether they're ready for it or not." Some members of the Santa Fe Group of the Sierra Club, however, think urban enviros are ignoring rural reality. "It's not all black and white," says Courtney White, long-time Sierra Club member and co-founder of the Quivira Coalition, an organization that espouses sustainable ranching techniques. Barbara Johnson, Sierra Club member and co-founder of the Quivira Coalition, agrees. "This kind of thing just polarizes people." She believes a no-grazing stance will make it "more difficult for the Sierra Club to work with people who are on the ground." Out on the range While public-lands ranchers today are often typecast as wealthy hobby cowboys, many in New Mexico fit a different profile. "These aren't Rolex ranchers," says Steve Miranda of the Camino Real Ranger District in the Carson National Forest. Andie Sanchez grazes 14 head of cattle in the mountain meadows near Penasco. He works full time doing maintenance for the school system; his small herd doesn't provide much of an income, he says, but it's enough to keep his family going. To Sanchez, public-lands ranching makes possible "our culture, our livelihood, our future." Sanchez's small herd is typical among the 16 members of the Santa Barbara Grazing Association, of which Sanchez is president. In the Santa Fe National Forest, 76 percent of the permittees graze less than 50 head. Courtney White says, "To lump all these guys together is patently unfair." Adding to the complexity is the fact that many of the public lands in northern New Mexico were once land grants, deeded to Hispanic settlers by Spain and Mexico. "When these were land grants, we had a right to be there," says Virgil Trujillo, who grazes his cattle on public lands near Abiquiu, N.M. "We didn't choose for land grants to become public lands." In northern New Mexico, says Trujillo, grazing permits are "heirlooms" passed from generation to generation. "There are many good examples of good stewardship," he says. "Why can't we sit down, talk about it, and get everyone's energy focused on the environmental situation?" Such arguments have not been lost on the Sierra Club. Last year, the Environmental Justice Committee of the Sierra Club asked the Santa Fe Group to take a closer look at ranching in northern New Mexico. They called upon anthropologist Ernie Atencio, who wrote Of Land and Culture: Environmental Justice and Public Lands Ranching in Northern New Mexico in response. The 50-page report concludes that "a zero-grazing policy would have an impact on a predominantly poor, Hispano population as negative as any discriminatory environmental policy that threatens the health and welfare of disenfranchised populations of people of color in any other context." Cliff Larson, Santa Fe Group Conservation chair, hopes the report will encourage "a more thoughtful approach" and forestall "knee-jerk votes" from urban voters unfamiliar with grazing issues. Sierra Club members will vote on the zero-grazing initiative in April. =================================================================== Why we should let wolves be by Cameron Smith http://www.thestar.com Two townships near where I live, north of Gananoque, have asked the provincial government to restore a bounty on wolves. It already is legal to shoot wolves at any time of the year in southern Ontario. So it's not the right to kill wolves that the townships want. It's a bigger incentive. What has sparked the calls for a bounty is the occasional loss of a lamb to a predator. Local evaluators inevitably say they were killed by wolves or coyotes. Undoubtedly they were killed by something canine: wolves, coyotes, wolf/coyote hybrids, dogs, or dog/coyote hybrids. However, farmers are compensated only if an evaluator declares that a wolf or a coyote did the killing, and almost always they're the ones found guilty. Local councils pay the compensation, with money provided by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs. In the latest case, concerning a large lamb, the compensation was $200. My guess is that there are no wolves anywhere near the two townships. If there were, they'd be eastern timber wolves, a type of red wolf native to Algonquin Park. However, wolves maintain their distinctiveness only by living in highly disciplined packs. When their social structure is disrupted, when the links that bind them together are broken, young males will wander off in search of romance and mate with coyotes. Their offspring may be more wolf than coyote, but behaviourally and psychologically, they sure won't be wolves. Differences between the two species are well-defined. Coyotes will breed in their first year; wolves only in their second or third. So killing coyotes is a hapless venture. They can breed as fast as you can kill them. Despite all attempts to kill them over the past 200 years, there are now more coyotes in North America than ever before. Wolves used to keep them under control, killing any that ventured into their territories. But as humans slaughtered wolves, coyotes moved in. The main sources of food for wolves is moose, deer and beavers. For coyotes it is mainly mice, rabbits, and other small game. A wolf pack will have a territory of 200 to 300 square kilometres. The territory of a group of coyotes can be as small as four square kilometres. Killing wolves disrupts their social structure, especially if it is the older wolves that are killed, the ones that teach the younger wolves and enforce discipline. Wolves are at the top of the chain of predators and so have a tremendous ability to influence an ecosystem. It's called a top-down influence. I saw it at work on Lake Gananoque last winter. A deer had been killed on the lake, and what probably were two wolf/coyote hybrids were feeding on it. Also feeding were two bald eagles. It reminded me that when wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park in the United States, ravens and bald eagles returned to the park. In addition to supplying food in winter to winged scavengers, foxes, fishers, and a host of other species, wolves keep prey populations, such as beavers, under control. In our area, beavers are so far out of control that they are considered a major nuisance, damming culverts and every trickle of water they can find, exasperating township road crews and landowners. Since coyotes rarely tackle a beaver, it's a sure sign there aren't many wolves around. The two townships are on the most southern part of the Canadian Shield. As farmers have been leaving marginal farmland, the forest has been returning. So the edge of the wild has been moving southward. With it have come species such as fishers, otters, red shouldered hawks, bald eagles, bobcats, bears and wolves - or, at least, wolf-coyote hybrids. New ecosystems are establishing themselves, and wolves will be an essential part of creating a balance. Surely it's time to recognize their role instead of slaughtering them and, in the process, deforming and destabilizing nature. =================================================================== Human Testing Strikes Controversy By LEON DROUIN KEITH 12/25/00 LOS ANGELES (AP) - Kimberly Wood pedals a stationary bicycle in a refrigerator-sized chamber and breathes into various tubes as she watches researchers monitor information about the air pollution levels inside. A contraption outfitted with hoses and gauges concentrates the ultra-fine soot and dust inside the chamber to eight times its outdoor level. Wood is among a growing number of research volunteers who are subjecting themselves to pollutants and other harmful substances, a trend some experts say raises ethical concerns because even a low risk runs counter to the physician's ancient creed, ``First, do no harm.'' The college student said she volunteered for the study, designed to monitor how particulate matter affects humans, because she is convinced such research benefits society at large. She pointed to recent studies connecting secondhand tobacco smoke to childhood asthma. ``What if air pollution is doing the same thing to small children?'' said Wood, 22, who is paid $200 for tests that took more than a day. ``That's something that needs to be looked at and taken care of.'' Deliberate human exposure to pollutants was an element of nine of the 110 projects approved last fiscal year by the National Center for Environmental Research, a division of the Environmental Protection Agency. Human testing has also been involved in studying the effects of a bacterium in causing diarrhea, and investigating whether certain doses of a water pollutant are harmful to humans. In November, Loma Linda University Medical Center found itself on the defensive after questions were raised about its water-pollutant study, in which participants ingested dosages of a rocket fuel component. Researchers there noted the amounts given to volunteers were low and said the possible health risks were outweighed by the study's potential benefit to the general public. The issue came before an EPA ethics panel on pesticides in September. The panel concluded human studies should be used only with great caution, but two dissenting members said no human testing of pesticides should be allowed. They said the recommendation ``lays the groundwork for a flood of submissions of data from research which should not be conducted and should not be accepted'' by the EPA. ``The issue, I think, comes down to whether an individual who is otherwise healthy should be put in harm's way for something that does not have any benefit to them,'' said Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Minnesota. He is a member of the EPA panel who doesn't favor an all-out ban on human testing. Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center in the Los Angeles suburb of Downey has exposed people to air pollutants in controlled conditions since the 1970s. The center, where Wood was being monitored, has several test chambers, including a partially dismantled car used to test the health effects of air-bag chemicals. The studies have been funded by a combination of local, state and federal agencies, and industry and nonprofit groups, said Dr. Henry Gong, chief of environmental health for the center. The research must be approved by an institutional review board. The board ensures that the risks of human testing are minimized, participants are not coerced and the scientific value of the research is clear. ---- On the Net: EPA: http://www.epa.gov/ Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center: http://www.rancho.org/ =================================================================== Judge rules reporter does not have to name confidential source <http://www.rcfp.org/news/2001/0228hibber.html> The reporter will not be compelled to identify an admitted arsonist who contacted the newspaper to defend his decision to burn a number of new homes. A Phoenix reporter will not be compelled to reveal the identity of a self-proclaimed serial arsonist after a judge on Feb. 27 granted the newspaper's motion to quash a grand jury subpoena. Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Frank Galati found that Phoenix New Times reporter James Hibberd was protected by the state shield law, but noted that he did not condone the reporter's actions or the paper's decision not to contact authorities after an exclusive interview in mid-January with the purported arsonist. In a phone interview, New Times attorney Mike Meehan said he was satisfied with the decision. "Obviously we believe the judge correctly applied the shield law," he said. Meehan also said the prosecution presented "a novel argument that in the face of a shield law, which is pretty broad, that you could make an exception for anyone who could be a perpetrator of a crime." Deputy County Attorney Paul McMurdie unsuccessfully argued that the arsonist did not qualify as a confidential source, since a crime was committed. Hibberd also will not have to release any materials he used during the newsgathering process, including a tape-recorded phone conversation with the alleged arsonist, computer disks, or any items that may lead authorities to a group claiming responsibility for the torching of nine luxury homes in the Phoenix Mountains Preserve. The prosecutor had asked that such materials be turned over. Hibberd and the New Times entered the controversy after the weekly magazine received an anonymous letter, titled "Thou Shall Not Desecrate God's Creation," from the arsonist, who did not reveal his identity, on Jan. 12. A week later, the paper printed a note on its cover telling "Thou Shall Not" to call the newspaper. After the paper received numerous calls inquiring about the cryptic message, the professed arsonist finally contacted Hibberd for an interview. Wearing a disguise to meet the reporter, the man told Hibberd that his group of mountain biker "eco-defenders" set the fires to discourage development in the area. ---- (In the Matter of the Appearance and Attendance Before the Grand Jury Re: James Hibberd; Media Counsel: Mike Meehan, Phoenix) -- ML =================================================================== International Cloning Ban Signed <http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0%2C1282%2C42124%2C00.html?tw=wn20010302> Associated Press Mar. 1, 2001 STRASBOURG, France - The first international agreement to ban human cloning took effect Thursday, when the Council of Europe said that the legislatures of five nations had ratified a protocol designed to prevent abuses of the technology. Legislatures in Slovakia, Slovenia, Greece, Spain and Georgia ratified a protocol to its Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine that was "the first and only binding international agreement on cloning," the council said. The measure called the Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings was drafted in the 1990s following successful attempts to clone mammals, particularly by embryo splitting and nuclear transfer. The council said it wanted to prevent the technology from being used on humans. Twenty-four of the 43 Council of Europe states have signed the protocol. It took effect after the five legislatures ratified the text, said the Council of Europe. Founded in 1949, the Council of Europe is best known for its 1950 Convention on Human Rights, a charter that is binding on all council members. =================================================================== Suits Against Hog Farms Prompted by Federal Inadequacies <http://ens-news.com/ens/mar2001/2001L-03-02-06.html> By Cat Lazaroff KANSAS CITY, Missouri, March 2, 2001 (ENS) - Smithfield Foods Inc., the nation's largest hog producer, is responsible for polluting the air and water in at least three states, charge a host of environmental lawsuits filed this week. The suits come on the heels of new reports showing that agricultural runoff damages ocean habitats, and that farmers eager to combat runoff are thwarted by a lack of federal funds. At a press conference in Kansas City on Wednesday, environmental attorneys Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Jan Schlichtmann and Charles Speer announced the filing of multiple lawsuits across the U.S. against Smithfield operations. The suits were filed on behalf of 35 groups representing environmentalists, animal rights organizations, farmers and ranchers, led by The Water Keeper Alliance, of which Kennedy is president. Smithfield, a Virginia company, operates massive hog production operations in several states including North Carolina, Utah, Oklahoma and Missouri. It is the world's largest pork producer, breeding some 12 million hogs a year. "This is the beginning of a legal campaign to get the family farmers back to the land and to force the corporations to take care of the land and animals they own," said Kennedy. Three suits were filed Wednesday to challenge Smithfield's operations in North Carolina. A fourth was filed on Thursday in Florida. At least 20 suits will ultimately be filed against Smithfield, Kennedy said, and future suits are planned against other major hog producers. The suits are a "last resort" effort to stop hog farms from polluting the environment, the lawyers said Wednesday. "We know this problem represents a failure of government," Kennedy said. "The groups that are supposed to be regulating these corporations are not doing their jobs, and often are in cahoots with the industry." In December, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed new regulations to manage animal waste from factory farms, including hog feedlots. The future of the new rules is now uncertain - they, and many other environmental initiatives, were put on hold in January when the Bush administration suspended implementation of all eleventh hour Clinton administration actions. Environmental groups are not willing to wait any longer for government to regulate pollution from hog farms, Kennedy said. The lawsuits filed this week seek to force hog farms to comply with existing regulations, prevent pollution discharges to the air and water, and clean up waterways already harmed by hog farm runoff. "If we have to we will march across the country and bring these types of cases against every single pork factory in America," said Kennedy. Smithfield Foods vice president Richard Poulson responded by charging that the lawsuits are politically motivated, and not intended merely to protect the environment. "If Mr. Kennedy truly believed that the nation's environmental laws were not being enforced, he would be suing the EPA to demand enforcement," said Poulson in a prepared statement. "But these lawsuits are not about the environment. They are about the social agenda of a group of unelected, unaccountable trial lawyers who want to override the legal and regulatory framework, substitute their own personal desires and financial interests for the wishes of the people and enrich themselves at the hands of the pork industry and ultimately the American consumer." Poulson argued that hog production is already "one of the most heavily regulated segments of American agriculture." Smithfield hog farms use "state of the art waste disposal technologies," Poulson said, and have few accidental discharges into waterways - far fewer than those stemming from municipal and industrial sources. "We will respond strongly, swiftly, and appropriately to defend Smithfield Foods and the way of life of the thousands of families who depend on us for their way of life," Poulson concluded. AGRICULTURE CALLED MAJOR SOURCE OF AQUATIC POLLUTION Hog farms have been targeted by environmental groups because of their potential to pollute drinking water, kill fish and other aquatic animals, and contribute to outbreaks of disease. Large hog farms store hog wastes - feces and urine - in artificial lagoons. Sometimes heavy rainfalls cause the lagoons to overflow, spilling onto soil and flowing into nearby streams and rivers. The lagoons also have the potential to fail completely, sending thousands of gallons of waste into the environment. When these wastes enter waterways, they can lead to enormous algae blooms that feed on the nutrients in the wastes. When the algae dies, it consumes all the oxygen in the water, smothering fish and other animals. Of course, hog farms are not the only source of nutrient laden pollutants. A new report of the Pew Oceans Commission released this week finds that polluted runoff from farms and cities - often far inland - went largely unabated or actually increased over the past 30 years, in many cases negating gains made in controlling direct sources of pollution. Scientists from the University of Maryland and University of Rhode Island point to increases in plant nutrients as the most pervasive pollution risk for estuaries, coral reefs, seagrass beds and other coastal ecosystems. The report, "Marine Pollution in the United States: Significant Accomplishments, Future Challenges," finds that many of the nation's coastal environments are suffering from too many nutrients. As a result, coastal regions are seeing a reduced production of valuable fisheries, threats to biodiversity and ecosystems less resilient to natural and human influences. "The hard to control sources of nutrients flowing into our coastal waters grew dramatically in the last half of the 20th century due to increases in chemical fertilizers, animal agriculture and emissions of fossil fuels," said Dr. Donald Boesch from the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. This week's lawsuits are "the last hope for the health of these rivers and communities affected by them. Smithfield has been balancing its books on the backs of family farmers and commercial fishermen," said Kevin Madonna, director of the National Litigation Project at Water Keeper Alliance. FARMERS NEED FUNDS TO COMBAT POLLUTION Water Keeper Alliance has organized the legal action against Smithfield in part because government efforts to reduce agricultural pollution have been inadequate, the coalition argues. For example, thousands of farmers are already trying to reduce their impact on the environment, but are hampered by a lack of federal funds, reveals a new report released Thursday by the conservation group Environmental Defense. The report, "Losing Ground," is based on U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data and is available at http://www.environmentaldefense.org. "Thousands of farmers and ranchers want to be better stewards of the land, but the federal government is turning them away when they seek technical or financial assistance," said Scott Faber, water resources specialist for Environmental Defense. The group's research found that half of the farmers and ranchers seeking technical assistance to improve tillage practices or install streamside buffers are rejected due to inadequate funding. Lack of funds also thwarts three out of four farmers seeking federal financial assistance to restore lost wetlands and woodlands, use less water, or manage manure better. More than 2,700 farmers hoping to restore more than 560,000 acres of wetlands are currently being turned away due to inadequate funding, and thousands of farmers in the path of sprawl offered to sell their development rights to USDA but were turned away due to lack of funds. "Farmland and ranchland cover 55 percent of the American landscape, dramatically impacting water quality, food safety, wildlife habitat and the pace of sprawl, " said Faber. "Federal spending for USDA conservation programs must be increased to meet demand from farmers and ranchers for financial and technical assistance, and to address many of these pressing environmental challenges." =================================================================== ELF Spikes Trees Near Eugene (OR, USA) EARTH LIBERATION FRONT CLAIMS RESPONSIBILITY FOR TREE SPIKING NEAR EUGENE, OREGON URGENT NEWS ADVISORY March 2, 2001 EUGENE, OR - The underground Earth Liberation Front (E.L.F.) has officially claimed responsibility for spiking trees and pulling survey stakes in the Hardesty Wilderness Area in the Umpqua National Forest. The spiking took place specifically in Units 6 and 8 of the Judie Timber Sale. A communique sent by the E.L.F. stated, "We inserted 60-penny nails and 8 and 10 inch spikes both high and low in the trees to prevent cutting of this native forest." The Earth Liberation Front is an international anonymous organization that uses direct action in the form of economic sabotage to stop the exploitation and destruction of the natural environment. The communique continued, "This Salvage Rider sale threatens the Laying Creek watershed which provides water to the nearby town of Cottage Grove. Scarred early in the century by fire, this vibrant forest provides habitat for rare plants, tree frogs, and elk (which we saw herds of during our excursion)." In the United States alone, since 1997, the E.L.F. has caused near $40 million in damages to entities profiting off the destruction of the environment. This latest action by the E.L.F. comes just days after the group claimed responsibility for a fire at the Delta & Pine Land Company in Visalia, California which targeted Monsanto's genetic engineering program. The communique finished by stating, "All responsibility for worker safety now lies with the owner of the sale, Seneca Jones Corporation and their accomplices, the Forest Service. Cancel this sale immediately. ELF Earth Liberation Front." For more information contact: North American Earth Liberation Front Press Office (503)478.0902 http://www.earthliberationfront.com Note: Craig Rosebraugh and Lesliejames Pickering, North American ELF Press Office spokespeople, are available for comment March 2-4 at the ELF Press Office table at the Land, Air, Water, Environmental Law Conference at the U of O in Eugene. The table is located in the Law building on campus. *A copy of the communique sent by the ELF follows below: COMMUNIQUE SENT BY THE EARTH LIBERATION FRONT "Units 6 and 8 of the Judie Timber Sale in the Hardesty Wilderness Area (Umpqua National Forest) have been spiked. Also, all survey stakes have been pulled and destroyed on the road cutting into Unit 8. We inserted 60-penny nails and 8 and 10 inch spikes both high and low in the trees to prevent cutting of this native forest. This Salvage Rider sale threatens the Laying Creek watershed which provides water to the nearby town of Cottage Grove. Scarred early in the century by fire, this vibrant forest provides habitat for rare plants, tree frogs, and elk (which we saw herds of during our excursion). All responsibility for worker safety now lies with the owner of the sale, Seneca Jones Corporation and their accomplices, the Forest Service. Cancel this sale immediately. ELF Earth Liberation Front" =================================================================== "Treat the Earth well. It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children." -Kenyan Proverb ====================================================== "We cannot solve the problems that we have created with the same thinking that created them." -Albert Einstein ====================================================== "The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders." -Edward Abbey ______________________________________________________________ To subscribe/unsubscribe, send appropriate email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. ______________________________________________________________ <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
