From the Seattle Times:
Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 12:49 a.m. Pacific
Crossing America: One year later | Israeli-Palestinian crisis | War on terrorism
Environmental labs caught faking data
By Larry Margasak
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Private laboratories are increasingly being caught falsifying test results for air quality, water supplies, petroleum products, underground tanks and soil, hampering the government's ability to ensure that Americans are protected by environmental laws, investigators say.
The fraud has caused millions of people to fill their cars with substandard gasoline that may have violated clean-air standards, or to drink water not properly tested for safety, the officials said.
In addition, officials making decisions at hazardous-waste cleanup sites have relied on companies that fraudulently tested air, water and soil samples.
"In recent years, what has come to our attention is that outside (non-government) labs are oftentimes in bed with the people who hired them, and conspired to commit environmental crime," said David Uhlmann, chief of the Justice Department's environmental crimes section.
The EPA's watchdog against fraud, Inspector-General Nikki Tinsley, has called the rise of lab fraud a disturbing trend.
"If it was my drinking water, I'd consider it very serious," she said, declining to identify locations affected by the ongoing investigations.
Private laboratories test products that are regulated by anti-pollution laws, and the results allow companies to certify that they are meeting the requirements of environmental-protection laws.
In one instance three years ago, investigators discovered fraudulent test results by contract employees at the Environmental Protection Agency's lab in Chicago. The head of the laboratory was transferred and the contractor, Lockheed Martin, was suspended from performing tests.
The Justice Department and EPA have prosecuted dozens of laboratories and employees in the past several years for fraudulent testing. Officials said they aren't certain whether an increasing number of labs are falsifying tests, or whether more are being caught through more aggressive investigations and whistle-blowers.
Tinsley said there were numerous reasons for lab misconduct: poor training, ineffective ethics programs, shrinking markets and efforts to cut costs.
In some cases, the labs duped the companies that submitted samples for testing. In other instances, the companies were part of a conspiracy with the labs, officials said.
Whatever the case, lab fraud hampers an environmental-protection system that frequently relies on voluntary compliance by companies backed by test results, officials said.
"If we can't rely upon science with supporting lab results, then we don't know what's out there for the public to eat or drink or use," said J.P. Suarez, the EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assurance.
"When people may not be getting harmed, they may be getting ripped off, using products that are not what they're paying for. And companies are paying for services they're not getting," he said.
Among the recent examples:
• Intertek Testing Services, of Richardson, Texas, was fined $9 million for falsifying results at its former laboratory in the Dallas suburb. The tests of air, soil, pesticides, nerve-gas agents and other hazards were used to make decisions for federal Superfund and other hazardous-waste sites, and at Defense Department facilities.
• Terian Koester, owner of Quality Water Analysis Laboratories in Pittsburg, Kan., was sentenced to 18 months in prison for violating the Clean Water Act and for mail fraud. He was accused of fraudulent analysis of wastewater, drinking water and hazardous waste.
• William McCarthy, a senior chemist for the Lawrence, Mass., drinking-water filtration plant, pleaded guilty to violating the Safe Drinking Water Act. During the 1990s, McCarthy, who supervised quality testing, admitted he fabricated test results. The plant draws water from the Merrimack River and distributes it to more than 60,000 people.
• Caleb Brett U.S.A. Inc., of Houston, was fined $1 million for misleading investigators about a scheme to falsify analyses on reformulated gasoline, a blended fuel that significantly reduces pollution in populated areas. The fraud resulted in distribution of 200 million to 300 million gallons of substandard gasoline in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.
• Tanknology-NDE International, of Austin, Texas, was ordered to pay $2.29 million in fines and restitution for false testing of underground storage tanks. The nation's largest underground-storage tank testing company admitted the fraud at postal facilities, military bases and a NASA facility, among other sites. The tests were supposed to detect leakage of petroleum products.
• Former environmental contractor James Edward Adams of Inman, S.C., was sentenced to 27 months in prison. His company, which provided testing services for underground storage tanks, directed employees to provide false test reports to owners and operators of petroleum-tank facilities in the Southeast, prosecutors said.
Full Version: Environmental Fraud
I wonder how the TOA study will look on this list?
Seems to fit the category--Labs in bed with the group that needs certain results to be found...
Seems to fit the category--Labs in bed with the group that needs certain results to be found...
una vez un gnomo siempre un gnomo
When dealing with suspected trolls, there are various strategies that you can employ. First of all, remember that just because you suspect that someone is a troll, it doesn't mean that they are a troll; also, just because you suspect someone is genuine, it doesn't mean that they are genuine. In view of this, the best tactics are:
* ignore postings that you suspect may be from trolls.
[ 01-23-2003, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: SailAway ]
When dealing with suspected trolls, there are various strategies that you can employ. First of all, remember that just because you suspect that someone is a troll, it doesn't mean that they are a troll; also, just because you suspect someone is genuine, it doesn't mean that they are genuine. In view of this, the best tactics are:
* ignore postings that you suspect may be from trolls.
[ 01-23-2003, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: SailAway ]
As soon as I read this, I knew Blu would be the next post to follow!
It’s easy to say corruption is rampant and that any lab result will probably be tilted to the one paying for the study, however this just goes to the basic conception of greed.
So the questions is how greedy is the green side of the equation verse the dunner's side?
Greens are trying to take something away from people who have it.
Greens invade & choke up money intended for the OHV community.
Greens, Have not participated in clean up, or advisory to the dunning public.
So it's still true Bad Science is still Bad Science. And that’s the cornerstone of the environmental question.
Dunners have no intention of converting the land to any other than it’s present use.
Dunners do believe that some land should be set aside
Dunners believe in educating users in environmental cohabitation.
It’s easy to say corruption is rampant and that any lab result will probably be tilted to the one paying for the study, however this just goes to the basic conception of greed.
So the questions is how greedy is the green side of the equation verse the dunner's side?
Greens are trying to take something away from people who have it.
Greens invade & choke up money intended for the OHV community.
Greens, Have not participated in clean up, or advisory to the dunning public.
So it's still true Bad Science is still Bad Science. And that’s the cornerstone of the environmental question.
Dunners have no intention of converting the land to any other than it’s present use.
Dunners do believe that some land should be set aside
Dunners believe in educating users in environmental cohabitation.
quote:Your right Lorne, It's like all those environmental orgs. and other members of "GREEN INC." falsifying environmental impacts, species counts, and putting fur from animals that were in zoos on fences so that they could close and control more public land! HYPOCRITE!!!
Seems to fit the category--Labs in bed with the group that needs certain results to be found...
![[Angry Fire]](graemlins/angryfire.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
Waiting for answers.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.P. Answer the question as it was asked
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK Blu, in you opinion which of the 3 studies conducted is the most accurate? Please no cut & paste links, I asked for YOUR opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then try again to answer my last question
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what was the total number of plants in 1977?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.P. Answer the question as it was asked
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK Blu, in you opinion which of the 3 studies conducted is the most accurate? Please no cut & paste links, I asked for YOUR opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then try again to answer my last question
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what was the total number of plants in 1977?
Tom,
I'm begining to think we're not going to get our answer to ether your question or mine!
But keep trying
I'm begining to think we're not going to get our answer to ether your question or mine!
But keep trying
quote:greens are trying to get our land managers to notice the effects of your recreation on the public's land.
Greens are trying to take something away from people who have it.
quote:if you're talking about green sticker money--those funds are administered by the OHV commission which is an appointed panel. You can argue that those funds are intended for the OHV community, but they can be spent in a variety of ways. right now they can be spent on law enforcement and habitat rehab-- neither of which the OHV community appears to be concerned about.
Greens invade & choke up money intended for the OHV community.
quote:it's your mess, you clean it up. The wind will blow most of the trash away anyway. It's the tracks and the habitat degradation that can't be easily repaired. Greens have advised the OHV community of their responsibility to use the land in a sustainable manner.
Greens, Have not participated in clean up, or advisory to the dunning public.
quote:greens are interested in scientific assessments of OHV impacts to public lands. Are you?
So it's still true Bad Science is still Bad Science. And that’s the cornerstone of the environmental question.
quote:but when faced with mounting evidence that developers USE OHVers to prepare natural lands for development, you bury your collective heads in the sand. Wake up!!
Dunners have no intention of converting the land to any other than it’s present use.
quote:please elaborate
Dunners do believe that some land should be set aside
quote:tell me more
Dunners believe in educating users in environmental cohabitation.
Trolling is like playing chess - there is a point to the game, and that point is to win. Unlike chess, though, there are various ways of winning for the internet troll. These might include:
* gaining credence for false and invidious ideas
* driving bona fide list members, and/or particular groups, out of the mailing list
* dominating the list with messages/posts that they have generated
* gaining recognition or an award for their trolling from fellow trollers
* getting reprimanded by individuals, list managers or internet authorities
* gaining the confidence, trust and support of bona fide list members
* distracting list members from their own bona fide discussions or objectives.
* gaining attention that they cannot get using their real personalities
* gaining credence for false and invidious ideas
* driving bona fide list members, and/or particular groups, out of the mailing list
* dominating the list with messages/posts that they have generated
* gaining recognition or an award for their trolling from fellow trollers
* getting reprimanded by individuals, list managers or internet authorities
* gaining the confidence, trust and support of bona fide list members
* distracting list members from their own bona fide discussions or objectives.
* gaining attention that they cannot get using their real personalities
quote:By closing land with fibrils lawsuits, exploiting loopholes in badly written ESA
Greens are trying to take something away from people who have it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greens are trying to get our land managers to notice the effects of your recreation on the public's land.
quote:Law Enforcement has helped in a verity of ways, better crowd control, more medical response, safety issues; after all this is a designated OHV AREA! And that money should be, and was intended for: the rehab of facilities, improvements for pads to lessen to congestion, better education of natural environment, funding OVH activities like kids only Easter egg hunt (on quads) that would teach bike & riding safety, respect for the environment, proper do's and don'ts
if you're talking about green sticker money--those funds are administered by the OHV commission, which is an appointed panel. You can argue that those funds are intended for the OHV community, but they can be spent in a variety of ways. right now they can be spent on law enforcement and habitat rehab-- neither of which the OHV community appears to be concerned about.
quote:We are cleaning it up! And doing a fantastic job at it! thank-you. Tracks blow away too; degradation is a matter of opinion should be based on good science. So again I ask:
Greens, Have not participated in clean up, or advisory to the dunning public.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s your mess, you clean it up. The wind will blow most of the trash away anyway. It's the tracks and the habitat degradation that can't be easily repaired. Greens have advised the OHV community of their responsibility to use the land in a sustainable manner.
OK Blu, in you opinion which of the 3 studies conducted is the most accurate? Please no cut & paste links, I asked for YOUR opinion.
And Tom Simrak:
What was the total number of plants in 1977?
quote:Greens are interested in shutting down access to bonifide OVH AREA PERIOD.
greens are interested in scientific assessments of OHV impacts to public lands. Are you?
quote:This is a designated OVH AREA and should be protected for that purpose, but I don't see land development for commercial building, or track houses, & condos a revel lent issue at Glamis!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunners have no intention of converting the land to any other than it’s present use.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but when faced with mounting evidence that developers USE OHVers to prepare natural lands for development, you bury your collective heads in the sand. Wake up!!
quote:49,000 along north 78 is an equitable balance, but greens want more (100%) and that’s not balance
Dunners do believe that some land should be set aside
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
please elaborate
Green = Greed
quote:Funding OVH activities like kids only Easter egg hunt (on quads) that would teach bike & riding safety, respect for the environment, proper do's and don'ts.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunners believe in educating users in environmental cohabitation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tell me more
That’s just one of my ideas for positive cohabitation, care to give some of your positive ideas on cohabitation?
And Checkmate!
[ 01-24-2003, 06:27 AM: Message edited by: Sand Wizard ]
quote:the plants were not all counted in 1977.
What was the total number of plants in 1977?
regarding my opinion of which of the three different methodologies used to count the PMV is most accurate--I would have to say the TOA method! by using lots of volunteers and vehicles to count every PMV within view, there is no question about how the grids were applied, etc. The only problem with this is that this type of study has never been done before, so in order to prove whether OHVs are impacting habitat of the PMV, a follow-up study using the same methods will need to be conducted and the results compared. but you knew this!!
quote:what is now vendor flats could easily be developed, though it is public land, so any development would be by the feds--how about low income housing?
I don't see land development for commercial building, or track houses, & condos a revel lent issue at Glamis!
quote:the issues go beyond a balance between recreational uses. If that were the only consideration, we would all support opening up more dunes for safety sake!
49,000 along north 78 is an equitable balance,
what's at issues is sufficient land to support a variety of populations of wildlife in this marvelous ecological niche.
quote:what about the kids that don't have a quad? How are you going to teach about the environment at the dunes with easter eggs? How can you respect the environment by speeding around to see who can find the most eggs?
Funding OVH activities like kids only Easter egg hunt (on quads) that would teach bike & riding safety, respect for the environment, proper do's and don'ts.
quote:I think if speed limits were kept to 15 mph, people would notice the dune ecology more.
That’s just one of my ideas for positive cohabitation, care to give some of your positive ideas on cohabitation?
you see, some people use their vehicle to enjoy nature...others use nature to enjoy their vehicle.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
[ 01-24-2003, 07:20 AM: Message edited by: Bluesky ]
http://www.intwg.com/trolls.htm
quote:
Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility.
Perhaps this sounds inconceivable. You may think, "Surely there is something I can write that will change them." But a true troll can not be changed by mere words.
quote:
The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.
When you try to reason with a troll, he wins. When you insult a troll, he wins. When you scream at a troll, he wins. The only thing that trolls can't handle is being ignored.
quote:I agree follow up studies are in order (unless the plant is de-listed), but until the follow up studies are done, the closures should come down until the follow up study proves OHV are significantly impacting the existence of that plant.
I would have to say the TOA method! by using lots of volunteers and vehicles to count every PMV within view, there is no question about how the grids were applied, etc. The only problem with this is that this type of study has never been done before, so in order to prove whether OHVs are impacting habitat of the PMV, a follow-up study using the same methods will need to be conducted and the results compared. but you knew this!!
To cause hardship on thousands of users on unproven theory, & speculation is completely irresponsible.
quote:Prove it, the studies do not show that area south of 78 is better habitat, or the north area is insufficient to support the species.
what's at issues is sufficient land to support a variety of populations of wildlife in this marvelous ecological niche.
[QUOTE what about the kids that don't have a quad? How are you going to teach about the environment at the dunes with easter eggs? How can you respect the environment by speeding around to see who can find the most eggs? [/QUOTE]
We’ll loan um one, It’s common knowledge that children learn more when is made into a game, please don’t insult my intelligence on stupid rebuttals.
Check
[ 01-24-2003, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: Sand Wizard ]
here's your proof from the ASA website
http://www.glamisonline.org/piersons_milkv...ansplanting.asp
Transplanting PMV - Why it Won't Work
- BLM EC Field Office
Peirson’s milk-vetch, Astragalus magdalenae var. peirsonii, is one of several species of rare, endemic (meaning restricted to) plants that inhabit the Imperial Sand Dunes. Its range in the United States is confined wholly to this sand dune system where it occurs in scattered colonies on windblown hollows and slopes. Many members of the genus Astragalus are substrate specific, meaning that they are restricted in their range by hydrologic (water) and/or soil conditions. Peirson’s milk-vetch is perfectly adapted to life in an active dune system and is said to be a psammophytic, or sand-adapted, species and is listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servive as threatened.
About 20% of this plants habitat is protected from the impacts of off-highway vehicles in the North Algodones Wilderness, north of State Highway 78. The remainder of its relatively undisturbed habitat occurs south of Roadrunner Campground in the central portion of the open area.
Many people have suggested transplanting the plants from the open area to the wilderness area where they will be protected from off-highway vehicle use. There are several reasons why this would not benefit this species. Desert plants in general are widely spaced in their habitat. This is due to the intense competition between plants for water. Removal of plants from one area and transplanting into another would cause an unnatural spacing of plants and would ultimately end in the death of plants from competition for water.
Another reason would be that the range of the species would be substantially decreased. The wider the range of a species the greater is its chance for survival. This is because if a species is located in only one locale the chances for adverse environmental or other factors to affect the entire population is increased due to this limited range. Rainfall, for example, in the wilderness area versus the central portion of the dunes can vary enough during any given year that plants can flourish in one area and not the other.
[ 01-24-2003, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: Bluesky ]
http://www.glamisonline.org/piersons_milkv...ansplanting.asp
Transplanting PMV - Why it Won't Work
- BLM EC Field Office
Peirson’s milk-vetch, Astragalus magdalenae var. peirsonii, is one of several species of rare, endemic (meaning restricted to) plants that inhabit the Imperial Sand Dunes. Its range in the United States is confined wholly to this sand dune system where it occurs in scattered colonies on windblown hollows and slopes. Many members of the genus Astragalus are substrate specific, meaning that they are restricted in their range by hydrologic (water) and/or soil conditions. Peirson’s milk-vetch is perfectly adapted to life in an active dune system and is said to be a psammophytic, or sand-adapted, species and is listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servive as threatened.
About 20% of this plants habitat is protected from the impacts of off-highway vehicles in the North Algodones Wilderness, north of State Highway 78. The remainder of its relatively undisturbed habitat occurs south of Roadrunner Campground in the central portion of the open area.
Many people have suggested transplanting the plants from the open area to the wilderness area where they will be protected from off-highway vehicle use. There are several reasons why this would not benefit this species. Desert plants in general are widely spaced in their habitat. This is due to the intense competition between plants for water. Removal of plants from one area and transplanting into another would cause an unnatural spacing of plants and would ultimately end in the death of plants from competition for water.
Another reason would be that the range of the species would be substantially decreased. The wider the range of a species the greater is its chance for survival. This is because if a species is located in only one locale the chances for adverse environmental or other factors to affect the entire population is increased due to this limited range. Rainfall, for example, in the wilderness area versus the central portion of the dunes can vary enough during any given year that plants can flourish in one area and not the other.
[ 01-24-2003, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: Bluesky ]
This still dose not proves that our activity is pushing this plant to extinction, and to hold thousands of people hostages. My opinions, and that of many others is that this condition is unreasonable. The issue is still fair balance of recourses for both species.
Hey Blu, or Lorne, or Loren or Brown,........ Whatever. As much as I'd like to pick apart your nonsensical ramblings here. I'm off to the desert now to ride my bike and drive my truck.
Oh did I mention that I'm going to an approved and legal (open to OHV activity) area. I promise to not intentionally run over any bushes or animals. I will pick up all my trash (and more than likely other people's too) that I create and leave my area BETTER than I found it, just like always.
I do however look forward to nit picking through your double talk and bologna when I get back........ok, probably after the game on Sunday....or Monday if I get too drunk on Sunday.(at my place of residence)
Have a lovely weekend and I won't be thinking about you one bit while I'm in the desert.....where it's legal to ride my dirtbike!
[ 01-24-2003, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: Race255 ]
Oh did I mention that I'm going to an approved and legal (open to OHV activity) area. I promise to not intentionally run over any bushes or animals. I will pick up all my trash (and more than likely other people's too) that I create and leave my area BETTER than I found it, just like always.
I do however look forward to nit picking through your double talk and bologna when I get back........ok, probably after the game on Sunday....or Monday if I get too drunk on Sunday.(at my place of residence)
Have a lovely weekend and I won't be thinking about you one bit while I'm in the desert.....where it's legal to ride my dirtbike!
[ 01-24-2003, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: Race255 ]
Have a fantastic & safe time there Race255 wish I was going with you, but I,m stuck hosting a SB party for x indian guides (Father/Son Group)reunion
Got the message Sand Wizard and I am too... but I've reached the end of mine
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Have fun!
Vicki
Vicky,
I do agree that all this time I've spent debating, has taken away from time I should have been sending letters to elected officials to help fill the sail with the changing wind in Washington.
I do agree that all this time I've spent debating, has taken away from time I should have been sending letters to elected officials to help fill the sail with the changing wind in Washington.
quote:You've just hit on the payout of the Troll's game.
Originally posted by Sand Wizard:
Vicky,
I do agree that all this time I've spent debating, has taken away from time I should have been sending letters to elected officials to help fill the sail with the changing wind in Washington.
Vicki
quote:Exactly our point. If they were not counted, and they weren't, you cannot say they are in danger. In order to say numbers are declining, you by default need numbers. To randomly pick an area and count is junk science. you could count 5 plants in front of you, but 20 feet away there could be 1000 plants. But there not counted because they are not in the transects.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What was the total number of plants in 1977?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the plants were not all counted in 1977.
quote:The study was not to show impact on a plant. The study was to show the number of plants. I dont think anyone would make the claim that ANY activity in the dunes, including the 2 or 3 annual hickers, does not have an impact on the dunes and plant life. The questions is, is it enough impact to be a threat to the plant or animal? An example would be the pescky grease woods. Sure there are less on our side of the highway, but does that constatute a threat to the existance of the plant. No there are plenty. The point of the TOA study was to show that there are plenty of PMV. BUt we could go back today and there would be far less PMV in those exact locations vrs when we counted. That is because of the life cycle of the plant. ANother reason the transect method is flawed. But, you knew that!!!
regarding my opinion of which of the three different methodologies used to count the PMV is most accurate--I would have to say the TOA method! by using lots of volunteers and vehicles to count every PMV within view, there is no question about how the grids were applied, etc. The only problem with this is that this type of study has never been done before, so in order to prove whether OHVs are impacting habitat of the PMV, a follow-up study using the same methods will need to be conducted and the results compared. but you knew this!!
And anytime the blm or cbd wants another study, they should hire a firm and get a study done.
In any event, thanks for finaly answering our question. We knew you had the truth in ya somewhere.
[ 01-24-2003, 08:13 PM: Message edited by: Tom Simrak ]
Top nock Tom, very well said…
Now we need to concentrate on revising these loop holes in the ESA
quote:
Congressman Walden,
Thank-you so much for your introduction last year of HR 4840, your continued effort to reform the ESA is essential to the well being of thousands of Americans.
The ESA as it stands now is harming all of us. And I urge you to reintroduce another bill this year similar to HR 4840, your efforts in this matter will effect the lives of millions of Americans now facing hardship as the ESA is presently written.
Thank-you for continued effort!
Osman Castillo, US Citizen
30701 Fox Run Lane
San Juan Capistrano, Ca. 92675
osmanc@cox.net
please take the time to thank both congressman Pombo, (11th District,CA) and Walden (2nd District, OR) for their effor in reforming the ESA. We should alway encourage our representative, to represent our views.
rpombo@mail.house.gov
Greg.Walden@mail.house.gov
keep those letters rolling
Now we need to concentrate on revising these loop holes in the ESA
quote:
Congressman Walden,
Thank-you so much for your introduction last year of HR 4840, your continued effort to reform the ESA is essential to the well being of thousands of Americans.
The ESA as it stands now is harming all of us. And I urge you to reintroduce another bill this year similar to HR 4840, your efforts in this matter will effect the lives of millions of Americans now facing hardship as the ESA is presently written.
Thank-you for continued effort!
Osman Castillo, US Citizen
30701 Fox Run Lane
San Juan Capistrano, Ca. 92675
osmanc@cox.net
please take the time to thank both congressman Pombo, (11th District,CA) and Walden (2nd District, OR) for their effor in reforming the ESA. We should alway encourage our representative, to represent our views.
rpombo@mail.house.gov
Greg.Walden@mail.house.gov
keep those letters rolling
quote:that doesn't make sense..
Exactly our point. If they were not counted, and they weren't, you cannot say they are in danger.
quote:the base line is provided in the 1977 study. the subsequent studies all used the original methods and so the results were compatible and could be compared.
In order to say numbers are declining, you by default need numbers.
quote:Are you a scientist? have any training in science or biology? The biologists with FWS and BLM devise the methods most likely to yield results within the constraints of time and budgets. Prove to me this is junk science!
To randomly pick an area and count is junk science. you could count 5 plants in front of you, but 20 feet away there could be 1000 plants. But there not counted because they are not in the transects.
In the meantime, do a follow-up count and compare the results with the TOA numbers you came up with. That is, if you really want to know the answer.
quote:OK Mr Science. What we need is proof that OHV rec is NOT pushing the rare plants of the dunes toward extinction. Otherwise, we need to maintain the closures if we are to keep the plants around.
BUt we could go back today and there would be far less PMV in those exact locations vrs when we counted. That is because of the life cycle of the plant.
HEHEH, your so much fun. You just never seem to get it do you. Lets go...
As per the webster dictionary.
Science:1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding.
I didnt see anything under science that said science is "MOST LIKELY to produce..."
Can you provide any number with which your claim of declining numbers is based on?
As I have said before and I'll say again. The TOA study was not done to show declining or increasing number of plants. It was to show total number of plants. Thats exactly what it did. It showed there were 72,000+ plants. By law, 72,000 is not endangered. Because the TOA study was not to show comparison numbers, it does not need to be recounted. In order to compair a study, which the fws claims they did with the "77" study, You would also need to repeat the weather patterns. There is no way they could do that. It may have been a very rainy time in 1977. That would not compair with a drought year in the recount.
You know what is comforting to us... the fact that the greens do think like you. It's very nice knowing that they just dont get it. Scary to think they may be reproducing...
[ 01-25-2003, 08:39 AM: Message edited by: Tom Simrak ]
quote:Yes I do, but that doesn't matter. If your counting within time and budget constrants, your not looking for accuracy. When we run out of time and money, were done counting? Oh thats good science. Come on blue, even your not that stupid. Well...
Are you a scientist? have any training in science or biology? The biologists with FWS and BLM devise the methods most likely to yield results within the constraints of time and budgets. Prove to me this is junk science!
In the meantime, do a follow-up count and compare the results with the TOA numbers you came up with. That is, if you really want to know the answer.
quote:What happens if we have more time or money now?
the base line is provided in the 1977 study. the subsequent studies all used the original methods and so the results were compatible and could be compared.
quote:No, We disagre, we need to first prove the plant is rare, and threatened, then prove the cause, the find a solution. Thats rare AND endangered. Ya see, you don't, well normal people dont punish others without cause.
OK Mr Science. What we need is proof that OHV rec is NOT pushing the rare plants of the dunes toward extinction. Otherwise, we need to maintain the closures if we are to keep the plants around.
quote:let me re-read it... yep makes good sense to me. anyone else? Let me try to explain. If you dont have an accurate number(baseline) to compair, how can you say another inaccurate number is less? You simply dont have accurate numbers. Less than what? Less than our last guess? Perhaps if I wrote this in spanish for you?
Exactly our point. If they were not counted, and they weren't, you cannot say they are in danger.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
that doesn't make sense..
As per the webster dictionary.
Science:1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding.
I didnt see anything under science that said science is "MOST LIKELY to produce..."
Can you provide any number with which your claim of declining numbers is based on?
As I have said before and I'll say again. The TOA study was not done to show declining or increasing number of plants. It was to show total number of plants. Thats exactly what it did. It showed there were 72,000+ plants. By law, 72,000 is not endangered. Because the TOA study was not to show comparison numbers, it does not need to be recounted. In order to compair a study, which the fws claims they did with the "77" study, You would also need to repeat the weather patterns. There is no way they could do that. It may have been a very rainy time in 1977. That would not compair with a drought year in the recount.
You know what is comforting to us... the fact that the greens do think like you. It's very nice knowing that they just dont get it. Scary to think they may be reproducing...
[ 01-25-2003, 08:39 AM: Message edited by: Tom Simrak ]
quote:as a scientist, you know that's false...You can't count all the fish in the ocean, yet we do need to have an idea of fish populations in order to protect them from overfishing, so scientific methodologies are developed to test a part of the population. This was done with the PMV studies.
If your counting within time and budget constrants, your not looking for accuracy.
quote:if you want to compare to the original study, you need to keep the same methods.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the base line is provided in the 1977 study. the subsequent studies all used the original methods and so the results were compatible and could be compared.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens if we have more time or money now?
if you have more time or money, you do a new survey as was done by TOA--but then you need to do some follow-up studies to compare the new populations. In the meantime, we use the old info which shows the PMV in decline so the closures remain in effect.
quote:this was done by USFWS and CNPS among others.
we need to first prove the plant is rare, and threatened,
quote:can you show me where in the law it says this?
By law, 72,000 is not endangered.
Well I'll admit "law" was not the proper word to use. Can I show you, certainly, will I show you? Again, nope. I'm not going to waste my time. You see Lorne, you have shown over time that regardless of what is put in front of your face, you dont care. You and people like you only have one goal, one cause and one result with which you will be satisfied. It matters not what can be and is proven to you. Your close minded and unwilling to accept anything else. Fact is, you dont care about a plant, or beetle or a trail. Simply you want to ban the use of OHV's and other personal freedoms the we enjoy. My goal here was to finally get you to admit, which you have, that the TOA study was more accurate then the 1977 study and that you could not provide numbers to back your claim of declining numbers. You have done this. And because of that I am done with you. I, like many many others will no longer respond to you. Your a waste of time. Will I continue to seek you out? You bet, and you will know when I found you. NO, it's not a threat as you may think. But I am not going to lower myself to you. Good luck to you Lorne, I fear you may need it.
quote:
. I, like many many others will no longer respond to you. Your a waste of time.
TROLL! LIVE FREE OR DIE!
quote:well what is the proper word? can you explain waht you mean?
Well I'll admit "law" was not the proper word to use
quote:you haven't made a convincing case for your point of view. You don't counter my points with arguments, just tantrums and yelling. that's not going to get more area for OHV use.
You see Lorne, you have shown over time that regardless of what is put in front of your face, you dont care.
quote:that doesn't make sense. I don't even know you, why should I care what you do with your personal time?
Fact is, you dont care about a plant, or beetle or a trail. Simply you want to ban the use of OHV's and other personal freedoms the we enjoy.
You think you can impact the public's natural areas and no one's going to notice? You think that the laws written to insure sustainable use of public land are going to go unenforced so you can exercize your personal freedom to turn it into a lifeless dust bowl?
quote:then you must feel proud of yourself. Why the rancor??
. My goal here was to finally get you to admit, which you have, that the TOA study was more accurate then the 1977 study
quote:the good news is that's not my job. There are plenty of experts around who can interpret the findings of the dunes studies done in the past years.
you could not provide numbers to back your claim of declining numbers.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:And "YOU" have???
you haven't made a convincing case for your point of view. You don't counter my points with arguments,
TROLL! LIVE FREE OR DIE!
You just got ***** slapped there Blue.. Your a tool and a fool. Finally admitted the latest count is more accurate! Man Blue, Id like to meet you face to face. I would like to see how you respond in social situations. Not well I would surmise, as you like to hang out with plants and petrified ****...
![[Monkee Dance]](graemlins/monkeedance2.gif)
RoostKing...
RoostKing...
quote:No doubt about that.
Originally posted by SailAway:
* gaining attention that they cannot get using their real personalities
quote:Welcome to the club! Unfortunately there will always be new duners, new forum members, new virtual "faces" that will fall into the same trap of thinking this person can be reasoned with. Think of all those wasted keystrokes.
Originally posted by Tom Simrak:
And because of that I am done with you. I, like many many others will no longer respond to you.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
AHHHHHH, the fresh taste of reality. Your exactly right though. There is no way to get anything from him but an argument. He is unable to see anything in front of his face and his mind is a steel trap. Unable to be opened. Allthough he knows the truth, as he has admited, he will still argue the other side just to argue. I have far more important things now to do with my time.
quote:It's spreading!!!!!!
I have far more important things now to do with my time
![[Cheese]](graemlins/cheese.gif)
![[Face Lick]](graemlins/facelick.gif)
![[Spin]](graemlins/spin2.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Disturbed]](graemlins/disturbed.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
quote:You are right but a part of me can't help but feel that as an adult, he desparately needs an ass kicking like he obviously got as a kid.
I have far more important things now to do with my time.
![[Ninja]](graemlins/ninja.gif)
Well Jet, your not alone in your thoughts. Just hold on to the thought that he WILL get his in due time.
Once again Blu, you've missed the point!
Simple English, no hidden meanings... Just leave us alone.Feel free to crusade all you want about illegal areas, most of us here abide by the laws and agree with you on that ONE point.
But STOP giving us a load of crap for riding in the areas that we're ALLOWED BY LAW to ride in.
quote:We (unlike you) don't want MORE land. We just want you to leave us alone on the little bit of land we ALREADY have.
you haven't made a convincing case for your point of view. You don't counter my points with arguments, just tantrums and yelling. that's not going to get more area for OHV use.
Simple English, no hidden meanings... Just leave us alone.Feel free to crusade all you want about illegal areas, most of us here abide by the laws and agree with you on that ONE point.
But STOP giving us a load of crap for riding in the areas that we're ALLOWED BY LAW to ride in.
Ok Bridge Dweller,
Plead your case and if you lose then go away.
More to follow, I'm having "browser issues"
quote:And if they don't see it your way, they're dubbed wrong and you won't let it go.
greens are trying to get our land managers to notice the effects of your recreation on the public's land.
Plead your case and if you lose then go away.
quote:I can't believe you even wrote this. You b1tch and moan about these areas but won't actually DO anything about it. Pretty dumb statement, even for you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greens, Have not participated in clean up, or advisory to the dunning public.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it's your mess, you clean it up. The wind will blow most of the trash away anyway. It's the tracks and the habitat degradation that can't be easily repaired. Greens have advised the OHV community of their responsibility to use the land in a sustainable manner.
More to follow, I'm having "browser issues"
ok back to it.
The same appiles to the green studies, it's highly biased toward the green opinion. You've stated this yourself so don't try to deny it.
As for developers USING us to"Prepare" land for development? You're not going to convince anyone of this, it's opinion and subjective.
quote:I think we all are, but if it's a loaded study, then there's no valid assessment is there. If I pay for a study what kind of results will I get? ones to MY advantage right?
greens are interested in scientific assessments of OHV impacts to public lands. Are you?
The same appiles to the green studies, it's highly biased toward the green opinion. You've stated this yourself so don't try to deny it.
quote:What other use would we want for this land, we can enjoy it and so can anyone that wants to. That's why it's called "Public Land" last time I checked we're part of the public too.
Dunners have no intention of converting the land to any other than it’s present use.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but when faced with mounting evidence that developers USE OHVers to prepare natural lands for development, you bury your collective heads in the sand. Wake up!!
As for developers USING us to"Prepare" land for development? You're not going to convince anyone of this, it's opinion and subjective.
quote:Tell me otherwise....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunners believe in educating users in environmental cohabitation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tell me more
quote:Poiks,
Welcome to the club! Unfortunately there will always be new Dunners, new forum members, new virtual "faces" that will fall into the same trap of thinking this person can be reasoned with. Think of all those wasted keystrokes.
I hesitate quashing anyone’s view, and although I have now given-up on long unyielding debates with Blu, I still defend his right to express his opinion.
It’s now my option to waste my time, or to turn to more productive ways to get what I want: OPEN THE CLOSURES & REFORM THE ESA!
I know that I will never be able to offer an objective view to Blu, which will bring us to middle ground.
But I must thank Blu, for our debates, as I'm now more than ever ready to take on these people that have little, or no regards to the social or economic upheaval they cause. With out Blu, I might have stayed on the sidelines.
I think GD.com is an awesome bunch Dunners, and it is my hope to be able meet & dune with you all. However, if your going to invite Enviro's to post & share you have to put up with some of the more relentless and unyielding of them. Or change the board to a Dunners only board, like that jeep board. There board is about jeepers doing jeepers things, and if you’re not a jeeper, GO AWAY!
And that’s OK with me.
I now have focused my attention to getting us Dunners, not to waste time with Blu, and to begin again writing letters, to get ****ed at our legislators, get what we want, OUR DUNES BACK.
I hope I have not offended any one on this board, including Blu.
Osman
thank you Osman. You have not offended me
BTW the jeepers board put up with me for months and we actually had some laughs together. They are even more open-minded than you all are and they decided they would never censor anybody's post.
I commend you on your determination to pursue a lawful and informed way to protect your interests in public lands.
I haven't studied the history of the ESA. I do know that when it was enacted (In the 60's) that we had about 1/2 of the people in the US that we do now. The purposes for which the ESA were enacted are still valid. We need to care about the environment that nurtures us all. I can't believe that outdoorsmen would think that it's OK for their recreation to destroy nature!
I could expect the extraction industries (logging, mining, grazing) to resist the ESA, but not outdoor recreationists. We of all people appreciate the clean air, silence, little animals, open spaces, uncontaminated water, beautiful plants that we see in our natural areas.
BTW the jeepers board put up with me for months and we actually had some laughs together. They are even more open-minded than you all are and they decided they would never censor anybody's post.
I commend you on your determination to pursue a lawful and informed way to protect your interests in public lands.
I haven't studied the history of the ESA. I do know that when it was enacted (In the 60's) that we had about 1/2 of the people in the US that we do now. The purposes for which the ESA were enacted are still valid. We need to care about the environment that nurtures us all. I can't believe that outdoorsmen would think that it's OK for their recreation to destroy nature!
I could expect the extraction industries (logging, mining, grazing) to resist the ESA, but not outdoor recreationists. We of all people appreciate the clean air, silence, little animals, open spaces, uncontaminated water, beautiful plants that we see in our natural areas.
"I do know that when it was enacted (In the 60's) that we had about 1/2 of the people in the US that we do now."
You don't "know" much then BS:
Your facts are about as good as most "environmentalists"...
The ESA was enacted in 1973-not the 60's.
US Population in 1973-211 million.
US Population now- 276 million
But hey, only a couple hundred million off!
There were 240,000 people at Glamis last weekend too...
Even if you go all the way back to 1960, US population was still 180 million-nowhere near half of what it is now.
Julie
[ 01-29-2003, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: luvdunin ]
You don't "know" much then BS:
Your facts are about as good as most "environmentalists"...
The ESA was enacted in 1973-not the 60's.
US Population in 1973-211 million.
US Population now- 276 million
But hey, only a couple hundred million off!
There were 240,000 people at Glamis last weekend too...
Even if you go all the way back to 1960, US population was still 180 million-nowhere near half of what it is now.
Julie
[ 01-29-2003, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: luvdunin ]
quote:WE? Since when are you a member of OUR community??? This is the GLAMIS ONLINE BOARD! It is here so that "WE" the OHV community can communicate with each other in order to inform and educate fellow duners and protect ourselves from people like you who are trying to take away our FREEDOMS! The fact that "WE" allow you to post on this board is a testament to this fact. "WE" respect the fact that "YOU" have the right to your own opinion! I also feel that it is in our best interest that you are allowed to continue to post here. Like they say, "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer!" I do not in any way agree with the babble that you post, but you still should be able to post it. Now if you could return the favor Lorne, try it some time, (to respect others rights that is) maybe then you would be able to see why your point of view is so discouraging to those who believe in the rights of others!
We of all people
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
quote:thanks to Slappy I'm part of WE
WE? Since when are you a member of OUR community???
quote:Only in your warped little mind, Blu.
thanks to Slappy I'm part of WE
quote:Don't kid your self Lorne, Slap is being VERY generous in allowing you to post here. He as do I believe in freedom of expression, but don't think for one minute that "YOU" are a part of "OUR" community.
thanks to Slappy I'm part of WE
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
I cannot believe how much you let the little troll get to you guys!
I laugh my ass off with his posts... I certainly don't get mad!
Vor
I laugh my ass off with his posts... I certainly don't get mad!
Vor
You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
Try it,it works.
Try it,it works.
quote:If you read that carefully, you'll see that the WE I referred to was "we outdoor recreationists" of which I am one.
I could expect the extraction industries (logging, mining, grazing) to resist the ESA, but not outdoor recreationists. We of all people appreciate the clean air, silence, little animals, open spaces, uncontaminated water, beautiful plants that we see in our natural areas.
but you knew that
quote:Hmmmm, I thought you were a
outdoor recreationists, of which I am one.
TROLL! trying to close the desert! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Grenade]](graemlins/grenade.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.