First, from Kendra Zamzow** of Chickaloon:
"Climate Change is not an environmental issue.Second, from Rachael Gaedeke of Anchorage:
It’s a real estate issue when people leave behind homes destroyed or at risk from fire and coastal erosion. It’s a public health issue when saltwater seeps into drinking water wells as seas rise. It’s a public health crisis when heat kills hundreds or thousands of people.
It’s a public works issue when major cities like Miami run pumps to de-flood city streets and sidewalks.
It’s an infrastructure issue when railroads collapse and roads melt. It’s an agricultural issue when sustained flooding prevents crops from being planted. It’s a ranching issue when drought forces cattlemen to kill their herds. It’s a national security risk when military bases repeatedly flood, leaving planes and equipment stranded.
It’s an immigration issue when crops fail and farmers move, seeking land or work. It’s a defense issue when water tables drop, disrupting livelihoods and driving conflict. It’s a food resources issue when warm ocean waters drive algal blooms that cause shellfish to be poisonous . . ."
[*It turns out the second letter is not yet posted online in the ADN. I'll offer you part of it and will put up a link when the whole letter is available.] It talks about the hearings to take testimony on the Ambler Road, being proposed into roadless land for the benefit of a private mining project. The letter was written by Raechel Gaedeke:
"When I read through the DEIS, it was sadly apparent that no one had thought to address the negative social impact of this proposed 211-mile road. . .So, what makes these good letters?
"Study after study has shown that when mines are built, the communities closest suffer from increased rates of alcoholism, increased rates of domestic violence and increased rates of sexual assault. The villages in proximity to this propose road and this potential mine(s) do not have the resources to support the influx of miners, truckers and "man camps" that will follow. I greatly fear for the women and children in every village that comes close to the proposed Ambler Road. . .
"I strongly urge BLM to address the following questions:
1. How will you ensure the safety of the women and children living in the communities within proximity to this proposed road and the mine(s) that will follow?
2. What security measures will be taken to ensure that alcohol or drugs will not be bootlegged into the communities via this road either by truckers employed by the mine(s) or potential poachers?
5. What security measures will you take to keep poachers off the road . . .
6. How will you prevent the potential for sex trafficking on this road via truckers, poachers, etc. into the mine(s) or the man camps or the villages?
7. When More police officers and Village Public Safety Officers are needed, who will pay?
8. How will you research and document and mitigate the potential for negative social impact on the indigenous people in the region of the proposed mine . . ."
- They broaden the scope of the issues. The climate change one moves the discussion from simply 'record temperatures' or 'more intense storms and fires' to all the many ways a warming climate is going to affect people. These things are already affecting many people, but the scope will get greater and greater. This is not somebody else's problem. It's a human problem. The Ambler Road letter moves the discussion from narrow physical environmental impacts of the road to the social impacts of this sort of large scale remote development tends to bring with it.
- These letters are sensational. The issues they raise are well documented.
- I can't spot any factual fabrications or distortions.
- They pack a lot of information into relatively few words, though the Ambler Road letter is a little repetitive in its list of questions, though what I'm calling repetitive points seem to focus on a slightly different aspect.
- The language of each letter is clear and easy to understand. It's strong, but focuses on issues and does not attack individuals or categories of individuals. (That last sentence should go without saying, but nowadays needs to be said more and more.)
I realize those who emotionally deny climate change will be unhappy with the first letter and call it alarmist. The nearly 70% of US residents who think it's real and are worried about climate warming will learn more about the many likely impacts. (If they want to do something to help slow down climate change they can check out the Citizens Climate Lobby website.)
And those financially in favor of the Ambler Road, really are responsible for answering the questions raised. Can they prevent these likely externalities of their project? If not, should the State of Alaska allow a project that is likely to add to Alaska's high level of sexual violence to a large extent fueled by drugs and alcohol, and to increase sex trafficking?
So I thank these two letter writers for their strong and articulate letters raising important issues for Alaskans (and all US residents) to consider. And I thank the ADN for publishing them.
**I didn't know anything about Zamzow when I read the letter in the hardcopy paper today (Yes, it's still coming.) But there's a brief biographical blurb in the online version, which helps explain why the author wrote such a powerful letter:
"Kendra Zamzow, a resident of Chickaloon, is an environmental chemist and the Alaska representative for the Center for Science in Public Participation. She has a doctorate in environmental chemistry from the University of Nevada, Reno and a bachelor's degree in molecular and cellular biology from Humboldt State University, California."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.