Late last Friday night our Michigan Senate watered down and passed energy legislation that took months to put together. There was no attempt at bipartisanship here.  As a result Michigan has a pretty shabby RPS or Renewable Portfolio Standards compared to surrounding states. What took the wind out of the sails of this legislation was the deletion of mandates. There will be no mandates on business, which means business may or may not choose to reduce it’s consumption of fossil fuels by choosing other sources of energy.

The Senate decided to go the route where state government would lead by example and be the first to reduce it’s dependency on fossil fuels by choosing alternative energy and also through conservation. The idea is that business would likely follow suit—but they don’t have to!

The positive side of this move by the senate is that taxpayers will be spared the cost of switching to alternative energy sources, and struggling business in MI won’t have to spend more to comply with any mandates. The state will bear the burden for moving forward. This is protectionism and admirable, but it also degrades Michigan’s RPS to nothing. States that have a strong RPS have reaped big  rewards in economic growth as a result. Michigan is missing the importance of a strong RPS. It equates to jobs and investment into the economy.

So the biggest downside is that Michigan’s economy will not likely pick up soon despite the “Green Gold Rush” that is on right now. On top of that, among all the cities in the country that had dismal spring housing sales where that market dropped again, Detroit area home sales were actually up 8%. That was on the news. So Michigan is primed and salivating for economic growth from anywhere that more than likely will not happen thanks to this senate’s quick and rash decisions last week.

Also, Michigan ranks in the top fifteen states in the country for wind generation, but there were few incentives and little interest in wind production in the bills. Yet according to an article on Metro Mode’s website, “[A] fully harnessed wind industry could result in up to 50,000 Michigan jobs, ranging from construction to assembly to engineering to research.” In this instance, the Republican lead Senate in Michigan is actually blocking progress and job growth. Wind is nothing to overlook in Michigan where there are constant shoreline breezes.

 The last negative to the final version of the bills is whether or not the environmental changes that take place within the state government will require outside contracts. I don’t like the sound of government contracting. Senator Waxman has uncovered billions of wasted dollars in contracts on the federal level both in Afghanistan and Iraq. This kind of thing looks like just another opportunity for friends to get paid.

 Environmentally friendly voters should drop a line to our state senate. The cons outweigh the pros for their decision on this latest round of energy bills relative to the loss of a lot of new jobs, and new money into our economy from somewhere else besides the auto industry for a change. Michigan’s economy is supposed to be undergoing change remember? 

Read about RPS in MI: http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/2008/03/12/renewable-portfolio-standards-environmental-resume-for-states/

Entire article on Metro Mode about MI windpower: http://www.metromodemedia.com/features/MichiganWindPower0064.aspx

Personally, I don’t care if the speed limit is lower. I’ve lived through this before and it cut down road rage, traffic accidents, and therefore insurance premiums. If it’s posted 55mph, then we’ll go 70mph instead of 80mph and greater that I witness on the road all the time. Mind you, these speeders are generally juggling cell phones too.

Anyway, if the speed limit is lowered and we don’t like it, we only have ourselves to blame for not paying attention to what’s happening in our state congress relative to cutting pollution, helping the environment, creating more jobs, and enticing part of the Green Gold Rush to come to Michigan. It’s not happening for a reason. Pay attention and be pro-active in responding to our elected officials or we’re never going to turn around.

Venture capitalists are having a field day. There are even some pension plans racing to invest in a green market.  Some of the inventions are remarkable. There are already plastic bottles created from corn by-products so they are totally biodegradeable. And every thing and any thing is being sought after to accomplish either energy production or energy storage, right down to bacteria.

So it is true, out of something bad can come something very good.  

I read in the Union of Concerned Scientists newsletter, Volume 10, Number 3, Summer 2008, that the U.S. Senate approved bipartisan legislation in March to improve the effectiveness of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Good idea after last summer’s tainted spinach, tainted lettuce, beef recalls, and toxic toys went unchecked.

It seems there has been political interference in the work of CPSC employees like statisticians, psychologists, chemists, and engineers. The legislation is meant to keep science independent of political tactics to ensure consumers remain safe. There are whistle blower protections built in to the legislation that extends to other employees of companies regulated by the CPSC. The agency must also accept anonymous complaints via the Internet.

The Union of Concerned Scientists worked with doctor’s and consumer groups to put this Senate Bill together and encouraged scientists to speak up if they have had political interference in the past.

There is a House Bill that addresses the same problems but lacks the whistle blower protections. The idea now is to combine the bills to become the strongest legislation possible.

I’m certainly glad this is happening, but does it occur to anyone that we are now in the habit of writing legislation to keep the Bush administration’s mitts out of most things scientific, that we’ve had to use the supreme court and federal court judges to get the EPA to act on our behalf relative to the environment, and to get the Dept. of the Interior to move on putting polar bears on the endangered list?

If the agencies that are in existence to keep the public, environment, wildlife and habitat, food, and imports safe are being kept from doing their respective jobs by interference from politicians, then instead of doing this round about and creating new legislation, on top of legislation that already exists, wouldn’t it just be easier to get rid of the politicians affecting the problems? Remember to vote for a heck of a lot more than president this November, like voting out of office those that interfere with our safety, the earth’s safety, and wildlife looking to survive in a safe haven. 

Chimpanzees are being threatened in more ways than one. We like to think of Africa and point over there when it comes to the species closest to man, the little chimps that make us laugh and that everyone remarks are “so like us.” And they are. We’ve spent millions of dollars on the study of apes, on how much they are similar yet not exactly like us as we’ve come to find they have emotions, families, mates, tribes, and live life much like we do mourning death, being afraid, stressed, defensive, angry, happy, and depressed. Scientists have successfully taught large primates sign language, and they have conversed with humans too. There is only 1 percent difference in our DNA and their’s.

So to read the heart-wrenching stories of chimpanzees and other large primates used in research is depressing to say the least. What are we thinking spending millions to find out if a species is similar to humans, and when we do, use them as objects for research? The old cliché that “we have to do that to save human lives” is outdated and has been a crock for quite some time. Breeding research animals is big business. The medical community has been divided on the use of animals in research for years.  Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, NEAVS or New England Anti-Vivisection Society, In Defense of Animals, the Humane Society, Doris Day Animal League, and plenty of other organizations have been trying to get the message out in the mainstream that the use of animals for experimentation is no longer necessary. There are other and better alternatives.

How many times have we heard that a certain drug or procedure tested fine in animals, but not in humans? And we’re only lately seeing the results of what is known as a virus “jumping species.” When viruses jump species, from animal to human, dog to cat, etc., the virus usually becomes virulent or deadly to the new species host, i.e., the bird flu. So when the new human host of an animal virus passes that virus onto another human—look out. It could become a deadly epidemic. In this scenario, using animals for research should not be the norm, not to mention being outright inhumane? How inhumane are we? Read what Theodora Capaldo, president of NEAVS, and also a licensed psychologist with over 35 years of experience helping humans highlights in the NEAVS Newsletter about the lives of 3 different research chimps and their rescue into a sanctuary:

• Rachel [a chimp], raised in a home like a human child, was abandoned to a laboratory and spent the next eleven years in research. Even though she is now in sanctuary, her emotional breakdown left her prone to terrified screaming and attacking her own hand as if it were a stranger’s.
• Jeannie spent most of her life in a lab, being used in research that included cervical biopsies and HIV studies. She suffered what can only be described as a complete emotional collapse. She self-mutilated and screamed to the point that the lab considered euthanizing her. She was rescued and spent nine years in sanctuary before she died.
• Bill Jo endured repeated “knockdowns” during his 14 years in research, surrounded by groups of men while he was shot with darts of anesthesia. For years afterwards he couldn’t bear to have more than a few familiar people near his sanctuary enclosure. He died after nine years in sanctuary.

Theodora says that rescued research chimps display human symptoms of “trauma and abuse like hypervigilance, dissociation, depression, self-abuse, and relentless anxiety.”

This is just one misuse of primates that I’ve read about lately.  I also watched what happens to the chimpanzees and great apes imported for the express purpose of using them in shows, movies, even the circus. The TV special about entertainment primates aired on PBS not long ago. We think “Oh Hollywood is filled with rich people that are animal right’s activists,” and self assure ourselves the animals in show business are treated better than some human kids but that’s not the case. When the apes get older and unruly, they are simply shipped off in the most expedient manner to an immediate place, and by no means are they guaranteed a nice sanctuary somewhere.  Think about it. Young chimps are imported from the wild, and trained for a particular purpose in the entertainment industry. This means they get constant attention and stimulation from humans. They have names, are fed and taken care of, get medical attention, and bond with people. As they age, hormones kick in and many times the apes become erratic teenagers. This is when humans simply throw them away. They are discarded to all types of locations.

I watched a small, innocent chimp end up at a research facility that was no longer in use. There were a lot of cages and space available in buildings what looked to be out in the middle of nowhere. The little chimp was locked in a cage in a small room with little to no light, no other animal around, in dead silence, only to be given food once a day. There were no toys, no stimulus of any kind in that cage. The chimp was given a solitary confinement sentence for simply growing up.  He wasn’t cute or funny anymore, no use to humans. 

Hopefully since the series aired, he’s been given freedom at a sanctuary. Other entertainment apes won’t be as lucky. They’ll end up in research facilities going through what Rachel, Jeannie, and Billy Joe endured.  I’m surprised I haven’t found that some of these castaways ended up in a canned hunt in the U.S. somewhere–yet.

The practice of importing these apes for entertainment remains the same. It’s a cycle that needs to be broken. As fast as they are discarded, new apes are imported. Their lives are expended in order to achieve a little more laughter, a little more entertainment for humans. And it isn’t only chimps and apes that suffer this abuse.

Research and entertainment aren’t the only industries that are culprits in the abuse of the species that are the closest to human beings. The savagery of the illegal bushmeat trade is unbelievable. So unbelievable that I have to include the picture I received in a newsletter from the Jane Goodall Institute here:

The left half are what appear to be gorilla parts, the hands being a prized possession for a collector. Mind you, a gorilla named Suzie learned sign language and spoke with her human companion. That’s twisted irony.

The right half looks like cooked and/or dried chimpanzees.

People are starving. There is a world famine going on. These pictures are the result of both greed and starvation. Greed is an unordinary desire for wealth, whether for money or treasure. Starvation on the other hand, is the outcome of the unfulfilled basic human need for food. They are opposite on the spectrum of what is necessary, and what is outright wasteful and inhumane. We can do without both.

This is just a small snapshot to what is happening with many of our animal populations, animals we love, and have been aware of since we were children. Chimpanzees and apes are some of the biggest draws at the zoo, not by coincidence, but because they are so much like us. But we’re abusing them worldwide as we are each other, not only by fueling global warming, but also by our neglect for reverence for life, all life. It’s our world, our domain as humans and we’ve abused it to the point people are starving and eating anything. What’s next? I already did a blog on cannibalism as a next step. Tell me that in the picture above and on the right that it doesn’t look like a charred person lying there with an arm up near the head.

I’ve said all that to say this. There is a U.S. House Bill, H.R. 5852, the Great Ape Protection Act, that’s being considered in committee right now. This bill would end testing on chimpanzees, all breeding for invasive research on them, and retire chimpanzees currently in research to sanctuaries. It’s a brand new bill that I’m going to urge my rep to co-sponsor. Contact your rep to get this bill out of committee with few changes and onto the floor, or to co-sponsor it. 

We can do something immediate about research on apes. Great Britain, New Zealand, Austria, Sweden, and the Netherlands have already banned chimpanzee research.

Unfortunately, the greed and starvation causing the illegal death of chimpanzees and other apes have no immediate solution.  We need to practice the grandness of our humanity by being humane, not by the arrogance and unempathetic tendencies of which we are also capable to the detriment of our world and everything in it.

What’s wrong with this picture? I see a ridiculously bad attitude toward nature here. Boaters are willing to mow down a group of stranded dolphins with babies in order to celebrate. American’s are trying to get Canada to quit seal hunting, Japan to quit dolphin and whale hunting, and what to we do but offer another of our hypocritical bad examples.

If I was a Seabrite resident with a boat, I’d simply stay home. Have we finally become an overall mindless, unempathetic, feel good society, because if we have, it’s a good indicator of our overall decline that has nothing to do with politics or economy. It seems we suffer a selfishly bad attitude toward life besides our own . What would you do in this circumstance, stay home or mow down the dolphins?

In the meantime marine specialists are going to try and add predatory type negative vibrations to the water to drive the dolphins out to sea where they can be away from real harm, humans.

Yesterday both the House and Senate committees passed a comprehensive package of bills to prevent irresponsible water withdrawals from the Great Lakes. The bills were expected to move to both House and Senate floors for final passage.

This is only a small step toward comprehensive protection. Our Republican Senate backed lobbyists from industry and agriculture so groundwater failed to get public trust status. Gaining public trust for our groundwater has its detractors but in arguments for passage of these bills testimony from Cooley Law Professor Chris A. Shafer makes sense:

The basic tenet of the public trust doctrine is that certain natural resources, especially the waters and beds of the sea coast and navigable lakes and rivers, are of such importance to the public that they are incapable of purely private ownership and control. Legislatively extending the public trust to groundwater reinforces its importance and creates a mandatory duty for the MDEQ to consider this protection during regulatory procedures. For these reasons, all waters of the state must be protected to prevent excessive and unreasonable exploitation. Expanding public trust protections to include our groundwater must be clear and explicit in statute. Regarding concerns about private property rights, these bill packages specifically reserve riparian rights and property rights for lawful use of water. The ‘takings’ would actually occur when corporations divert water from local watersheds and affect the rights of riparian users. http://www.greatlakesgreatmichigan.org/Public_Trust.pdf

And considering groundwater makes up 79% of all of Lake Michigan’s water, I would have to agree. But groundwater as a public trust will have to come in another step. Michigan is taking too long and too many baby steps toward a clean future because we have too many politicians listening to industry lobbyists.

But on the bright side and according to a news release by Michigan’s Sierra Club the protections won in this package of bills include:

• Approval of the Great Lakes Compact, guarding against large-scale water diversions (Michigan will become the 7^th of the 8 states needed to approve it).
• Regulations ensuring that water users do not excessively harm aquatic resources by taking too much water.
• The adoption of conservation principles to be utilized by large water users.
• More public input into decisions about large-scale water uses that might impact local ecosystems.
• Overall, 75% of Michigan’s surface waters will be protected from harmful withdrawals. Use of the remaining waters will be subject to rules ensuring availability to all parties for reasonable use.

It’s the 25% that goes unprotected I’m concerned about. One quarter of our entire surface water falls under ambiguous rules and that will be enforced by whom? Right. And isn’t more public input into decisions about large-scale water uses that might impact local ecosystems just about equal to a public trust for groundwater anyway?  Geez.

Ford Motor Company is really reinventing itself. Ford is not just concentrating on delivering cars with greater mpg and lower emissions, but transportation in general for growing population centers.

Ford, in partnership with U of M, has been studying congested cities worldwide, tracking growing populations, and the migrations of these populations in order to offer solutions for metropolitan traffic. Their answer is a network of hubs within big metro cities that suffer the most traffic congestion. According to an article on world-wire:

By 2015, about two-thirds of the world will be living in urban areas, which will exacerbate traffic congestion and present major challenges to basic transportation and personal mobility.

“Ford Urban Mobility Networks” is a pilot program that is exploring how to coordinate a variety of transportation options and provide vital real-time information to individuals living in densely populated urban centers.

The program is the result of Ford’s ongoing collaborations with University of Michigan’s Sustainable Mobility and Accessibility Research and Transformation (SMART) initiative.

Ford’s Urban Mobility Network considers all types of transportation, buses, trains, taxis, car-share fleets, mopeds and bicycles. All or some of these modes of transportation transfer at the hubs. The hub idea looks to me like a way to converge and disperse smaller packs of people all over simultaneously, rather than allowing everyone to herd along in one big jam pile of traffic until individuals peel themselves out of the pack as they near his/her destination.

Well good luck with this one if our populations grow out of control that badly. The article said some 35 cities worldwide would have populations of over 10 million. In honor of George Carlin’s death, and his wonderful truths, I think he would say something like “wouldn’t a better solution be a little abstinence so we don’t have population explosions? I mean if we have to really gear up for all these people that are going to be born, wouldn’t it be a lot easier to forgo that big growth and just maintain for awhile. Afterall, population is something we can control.

And I would add,  if we can’t control our garbage, can’t sustain ourselves comfortably, can’t help ourselves let alone someone else, why are we still procreating like it’s 2,000 years ago?

Before I digress farther, the article is a good read to get a idea of what our transportation future might be: http://world-wire.com/news/0806110002.html.

Boy, am I slow. I just got around to putting a bunch of e-mail and newsletters together to figure out why wildlife, habitat, and our national parks have been under attack by the Bush administration. Well, at least the how. A group of wealthy hunters that comprise Safari Club International (SCI) are using their funds to permeate congress once again to allow hunting polar bears, and everything else on their exotic big game list of course, whether or not the animals are endangered, and to bring the carcasses back into the U.S. as trophies.

People all over the world are outraged about our treatment of polar bears already by not putting them on the endangered species list much sooner and continued threats to the bear’s environment by oil drills. And these guys want to hunt the bears. Is that not adding insult to injury that we civilized humans just dismiss a beautiful species and hundreds of other equally beautiful species already threatened by global warming as trophies? How utterly superficial. We fight the use of ivory, but condone canned hunts. Do we know what we’re doing half the time?

I read a little about SCI on Wikipedia, and Source Watch and how they direct their lobby money predominantly toward Republicans as their allies in congress. SCI also advertises that they donates money for the preservation of animal species and that they do not advocate canned hunts–except they do it. And they pretty much are interested in the preservation of species so they can hunt the animals they preserve. Got a crippled exotic, put it in a canned hunt. Got too many exotic offspring put them in a canned hunt. Nice, real sporting.

I just read my mail from the Humane Society Legislative Fund about canned hunts. I had no idea that 25 states still advocate them and the trend is growing via lobby money from SCI and others. America is hitting rock bottom on ethics/morals when it comes to money vs. our national parks, animals, and habitat lately. I couldn’t figure out how the wolf slaughter, the buffalo slaughter, the push to put guns in our National Parks and a lot of other abuse was happening with help from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service despite thousands of protests. It seems Dirk Kempthorne, as Secy. of the Interior isn’t the only hunting/gun advocate working too closely with wildlife and habitat.  Director of our U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Matt Hogan, is the former chief lobbyist for Safari Club International, and another Bush appointee. Figures. Talk about conflict of interest. I thought the EPA was bad!

Considering the plight of all of animals and humans due to global warming, there really should be a moratorium on big game hunting for trophy’s sake. The people in Gana Africa are eating exotics to just stay alive for Pete’s sake. Complain to you senators and reps about canned hunts and lobbyists like SCI.