Walks with Charlie - Dec/Jan

This is a guest column from Charlie Frisk.

This is the first of what is hoped to be monthly phenology reports from Baird Creek. I hike the trails at Baird Creek two to three times a week and I am always fascinated with the seasonal changes. If any of you have contributions that you would like to make to this column e-mail them to kathyf44@netzero.net

Late December, early January reports

On Dec. 23 I observed a pileated woodpecker in the park for only the second time. The pileated was observed on the high ground just above the hemlock grove, the same location it was seen two years ago. Two years ago I was watching one pileated and heard another one in the distance so hopefully the park has a breeding pair. I have observed pileated excavations in many locations in the park. The pileated work can be easily identified because the holes are roughly rectangular and much deeper and larger than those of other woodpeckers.

This year was a bumper acorn crop. Oaks typically have three lean years followed by a bumper year. The lean years depress the squirrel and chipmunk populations so that in the bumper year many of the acorns go uneaten and have a chance to become great oaks. When there was still snow on the ground it was easy to see where deer had dug down through the snow and leaves to get to the acorns on the forest floor. During the lean years almost every acorn is eaten or stored away by squirrels or chipmunks as soon as they hit the ground. This year there are still acorns lying around on the forest floor in January.

On January 1st I observed skunk cabbage and marsh marigolds poking through the ground in the seeps at Christa McAuliffe Park. Gary Fewless, (botany professor from UWGB), said that when very cold weather such as we had in early December is followed by a period of above freezing temps like we had in late December that these plants are tricked into thinking spring has come. He said the skunk cabbage are well adapted to sub-freezing temps and will not be hurt, but the marsh marigolds will not survive their early adventures. Only a couple of marsh marigolds pushed through but Gary said that in years where large numbers of plants are fooled into sprouting early the population can be greatly depressed the following spring due to the die off.

conservation lobby day 2006

Last Wednesday, I took the opportunity to participate in Conservation Lobby Day, organized by the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters (WLCV). It was definitely a worthwhile trip.

There were about 270 participants, more than twice as many as last year. From what I could tell, about 10 people from the Green Bay area were there to lobby their legislators about environmental issues. The day was extremely well organized, had a relaxed pace, and offered several other events to participate in. Each group of citizen lobbyists was assigned a lead professional lobbyist to help guide them through the process and to help with talking points. No bribes were exchanged!!

Many kudos to Green Bay’s own WLCV staffer Jessica Garrels for helping to organize a day that went off without a hitch!! (-and for making EXCELLENT announcements!)

I had the chance to meet with two aides from Senator Rob Cowles’ office, and then met with Assemblyman Phil Montgomery. It did raise the eyebrows of Cowles’ staff members when seven constituents sat down in his office. I don’t think they expected to see that many. In both of my meetings, we discussed the importance of improving the current state energy bill, protecting children from mercury pollution, raising state tipping fees, and a variety of other conservation issues.

Perhaps the most exciting part about the day was meeting and spending the day with all the other people there who share the same concerns about environmental issues. Events like this are always energizing.

In Green Bay, environmentalists have a lot of lobbying to do!! We really have only one state legislator who consistently votes for the environment: Senator Dave Hansen. He deserves our support and thanks. Other than that, we are represented by some of the worst, including Alan Lasee. My own Assemblyman, Montgomery, had a dismal WLCV score of 27% during the last legislative session and has only voted pro-environment ONCE during the current session, out of fifteen chances to do so.

In both of my meetings, I asked for my representatives’ thoughts as to why they think environmental politics in this state has become so partisan. In general, Democrats are pro-environment while Republicans vote against it. At least that is the perception. Sometimes, perception IS reality. Both offices blamed the situation on the efforts of the special interest groups, such as the Sierra Club and WLCV. That argument is a crock. If I didn’t want to keep the meetings “positive” I would have responded by screaming, “You’ve got to be kidding!”

First of all, judging by all the “anti-environment” legislation that has been put forward in recent years, I would have to say that the conservation “special interest” groups don’t have all that much influence (yet). Secondly, the environmental groups in this state make every effort to be nonpartisan. If the WLCV gives you a low score, you deserve it. They listen to a huge variety of conservation groups in order to decide what legislative votes “count”. They include long-time Republicans on their board and look at MANY votes that impact the environment. In the past, a few Republicans have received very high scores. The fault for the partisanship on these issues lies with the Republicans. It is their recent legislative attacks on the environment that have energized the citizen based conservation special interest groups. The leaders of the Assembly and Senate are two viciously anti-conservation attack dogs: John Gard and Alan Lasee, both Republicans.

The WLCV does a remarkable job of making it very easy to find out how your state legislator has been voting on environmental issues. Go to their website and click on “SCORECARD” and “VOTE TRACKER”.

I look forward to attending “Lobby Day” next year. What is my advice for the rest of you who make the trip to Madison? Don’t skip the “After Lobby Day Social”. That is when the REAL lobbying begins. Next year, according to WLCV’s Anne Sayers, we are going to have 500 participants! (I THINK she was the one who said that.)

eddy out,
rich

(from the Green Bay Press Gazette, 1/27/06)
Guest column: Strong state energy bill needed

Energy is one of the most important issues facing our state and our nation.

Local governments and businesses, just like families, have seen energy costs skyrocket in recent years. Prices for heating bills are expected to increase by 40 percent this winter.

Those additional costs will encourage more cuts to government programs and services, will diminish the competitiveness and profitability of area businesses, and will weigh heavily on many families in our community. All in all, energy costs are taking a bigger bite than they should.

Our current energy choices have consequences for our quality of life as well. In Green Bay, we know the negative impacts of traditional sources of power on our property, recreation and natural resources like the bay and local lakes and streams. Locally, coal dust has created problems for homeowners and boat owners, not to mention folks who like to spend time outdoors.

Additionally, burning the coal produces mercury as a byproduct, resulting in mercury advisories for all in-state waters in Wisconsin, raising health concerns among anglers who catch fish for consumption.

Wisconsin needs a cleaner, more sustainable energy future. Energy efficiency and renewable energy not only reduce the impact on the environment and public health, but have economic advantages as well.

Fiscal audits of our state's energy efficiency program, called the Public Benefits Fund and Focus on Energy, have found that for every dollar invested in these programs, you save at least $3 on energy bills. The cheapest and cleanest energy is that which you never have to generate. From a business perspective, these efforts save money and make "cents."

One source of renewable energy is wind. Wind power is not only pollution free, but is cost competitive with fossil fuels.

Once the initial investment is made, there are no fuel costs. Rather than exporting over $6 billion a year in fuel purchases because Wisconsin has no coal, natural gas or uranium deposits, we could be investing in wind-energy projects that can generate revenue for farmers and local communities.

The good news is that after several years of study, the state is now considering legislation, Senate Bill 459, that would establish a statewide goal of obtaining 10 percent of our energy from renewables by 2015. Not only is this goal attainable, but it is consistent with states around the U.S., including Minnesota, Texas, Colorado and Hawaii. The bill would also protect the money in the Public Benefits Fund from future government raids. Earlier this year, the village of Ashwaubenon and the Brown County Board passed resolutions supporting these goals.

While the intention of the bill is a good first step, the current version would close the door on future energy efficiency and renewables by letting the state off the hook for having to do anything more on these issues for the next decade. Rather than making this effort a floor, it could create a ceiling. Not only is that shortsighted, but it puts Wisconsin at an economic disadvantage if we want to remain competitive and sell ourselves as leaders on cutting edge energy policy and technology. Also, the legislation currently caps the amount of money for the Public Benefits Fund at levels that are less than half of its potential — this funding is not only effective, but in high demand and should be allowed to grow.

There is still time to change all this. Our local senator, Robert Cowles, is chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, and is working to offer a substitute bill that would clean up the current draft; the committee was expected to hold a public hearing at the Capitol this month. We applaud Sen. Cowles for his efforts on this bill and encourage him to continue working with members of the committee to ensure that this bill is as strong as it should be.

If we do not make this bill live up to its potential, we will have missed an important opportunity to move Wisconsin towards a cleaner energy future.

A-A Exteriors, Jeffrey Knutson, Winneconne; Bay Towel Linen and Uniform Rental, Paul Linzmeyer, Green Bay; C & F Repairs, Chris Fritsch, Hilbert; Highland Building Consultants LLC, Douglas Meek, Green Bay; and Sagrillo Power & Light, Mick Sagrillo, Forestville.

Public must beware of Lasee's agenda

This is a guest column from Kim McCarthy.

I was in attendance at Sen. Alan Lasee's DNR hearing on Jan. 10, and completely share the view of several recent writers: The whole sad affair was staged and the outcome predetermined. Unfortunately, the event received a fair amount of publicity, as Lasee intended.

As troublesome as the hearing was, the next step in Lasee's process will be worse. You can bet that Lasee will now take his phony "results" and use them as an excuse to introduce legislation to limit DNR regulatory authority, or transfer that authority to the Legislature.

If that type of bill passes, we will bid goodbye to science-based, impartial resource management and replace it with management by special interest campaign contributions.

Also troubling is Lasee's questionable use of taxpayer dollars. He clearly is on a crusade to do away with much of the environmental protection we currently enjoy.

To accomplish that end, he used his position of power to discredit and undermine the DNR with a staged hearing.

Taxpayers deserve a much more honest use of scarce dollars and need to be very wary of the senator's agenda.

Kim McCarthy

Time to Check Sen. Lasee's Hearing

Over the past several years, the Department of Natural Resources has withstood many attacks from the Wisconsin Legislature and polluters. Extreme personnel cuts during the budget process, attempts to split the agency, ad campaigns attacking the Department, and other tactics have combined in an attempt to weaken the DNR. These attacks, typically spearheaded by polluters hoping to avoid responsibility for the negative impacts they have on our water and air, only hurt the citizens of Wisconsin.

Everything I’ve heard since this committee was announced leads me to believe that this has little to do with the DNR, and much to do with polluters wanting to gut the laws that protect my drinking water, my air, and the places I bike and camp.

I attended the hearing in Green Bay on Tuesday, and I was lucky enough to be able to speak within the first 2 hours. Over the course of the hearing, I noted the following:

1. Kerry Schumann of the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters submitted her speaking registration slip ahead of mine. I was approximately the 7^th person to speak; at 2:45pm, more than 3 hours into the hearing, Kerry had still not been called to testify.
   
   
2. Two individuals with complaints about the DNR testified at both the Arbor Vitae hearing and the Green Bay hearing. At least one of those individuals arrived at the library auditorium after I had submitted my speaking registration, but was called to testify before I was.
   
   
3. After hearing several complaints, the common theme among them seemed to be a ‘lack of clear communication’ between county and DNR staff; within the DNR staff; and between staff, both county and DNR, and citizens. This theme was articulated by some of the Senators as well.
   
   
4. As one citizen was testifying, there was a dialogue between this citizen and Sen. Lasee, which may have been about permitting or property rights. During this dialogue, a citizen from the audience was inspired to yell, “It’s my river, too!” Sen. Lasee, who had been in the process of getting up from his chair, threw his pencil down and, as he left the stage in an agitated manner, said, “No, it’s not.”

I left the hearing around 2:45pm. At that time, the number of speakers with positive and negative stories was fairly equal. Unfortunately, you wouldn’t have known that from reading the newspaper. I guess that’s why it pays to have your people tell a complaint story for the first 2 hours—before the other side ever gets told, the press will have already left.

One tangible piece of constructive criticism, in my opinion, that came out of the hearings dealt with communication. In any organization, work situation, or, for that matter, personal relationship that I have been in or witnessed, communication has always been an obstacle that can cause tension. Better communication is not, however, something that can be legislated, and it will certainly not be solved by reducing funding or cutting staff. It could be made a staff priority, and I think it should be.

Laws are created to protect the public. In this case, laws that are implemented and enforced by the Department of Natural Resources are intended to make sure that the air we breathe doesn’t trigger asthma attacks in our children or cause cancer. They are intended to ensure that there will be edible fish in our rivers and animals in our forests for future hunters and anglers. They are intended to ensure that we have save drinking water and that we aren’t exposed to toxic chemicals that can cause our babies to be born with physical and mental disabilities. I appreciate the work the DNR does, and I am not willing to see these safeguards compromised.

green bay air quality screening

In Sunday's paper, UW-GB Professors Troy Abel and Michael Kraft had an analysis of the recent news that Green Bay's air quality figures were among the worst in the nation. You can read their "Guest column" in the Press Gazette for a few more days before it it gone from their website.

Guest column: Air quality screening tool gives good starting point

"Bushspeak": global warming

Will Ferrell as President Bush, speaking on global warming

It's funny.