On 04/14/2012 15:26, Peter Jones wrote:
It was enlightening in many ways. For one thing, I was probably one of the only actual citizens (as opposed to corporate lobbyists, lawyers and other cutthroat scum that passes for citizens) who came in to speak my mind on the issue directly to congress people.
Very few voters ever do this. I have, and it is way more effective than signing petitions that will be answered with a "thank you for writing" reply, but usually nothing more accomplished.
Domenici seemed mildly amused that someone other than a lawyer/lobbyist came in... I think the associate I met with in Bingaman's office was livid that I was wasting her important time by *being a mere citizen* and addressing my grievances to her. I can still see her flared nostrils over the insolence of trying to express my views about saving Lech!!
Many elected officials now hold town hall meetings as either irregular or recurring events. If they are not pre-structured to preclude live statements, that is a place to ask things you want to know or make a point.
While it may be thrilling to walk into the Capitol to see some official, most cannot do that simply due to logistics and economics. And, while it also may be satisfying to speak to the actual official, it usually is easier (both from a time perspective and availability) to cultivate an ongoing relationship with a staffer in a local office. It is the staff that performs the vetting and that has the time to hear more than a sound bite. Furthermore, since the staff come from the local areas, they can have a better insight into issues and the public pulse than the official may have. If you get them interested, your chances of getting the official interested are that much greater.
I know. I have wandered the halls of Congress like Peter did, meeting with 3 elected officials. I also have spoken at length with a staffer in Albuquerque and that eventually led to a private meeting with the official when he was in-state on a legislative break. None of this had anything to do with caving, and was almost 20 years ago, but the process is way more effective than sending original or form letters, or signing petitions. However, it does take a lot more effort than clicking on a petition.
And just because an official's political orientation may not be to your liking does not mean you shouldn't wade in. Hold your nose if you have to. Do not ever assume you won't make progress.
Now, with the WNS stupidity, local knowledge isn't all that much of an issue (because this is an eastern problem, knee-jerked locally), except to get somebody to listen to the facts, look at the pathology-geography, the lack of demonstrable evidence from either researchers or the CBD, and come to the conclusion that the threat is overstated, unproven, and grossly misrepresented; and that reactions by the agencies are based on hysteria and fear, not science or good judgment.
What would be the most important blow would be to get a Senator or Congressman (or several) to demand that the agencies produce the scientific proof upon which they have taken the closure actions and instituted the decon procedures. What you want is a requirement for them to show, when the agencies cannot deliver the data that doesn't exist, why they think they can shut off access and require questionable processes on the basis of someone (the CDB) screaming the loudest. Fear-based action is not management. What will they do when the CBD determines "there is some evidence" (as they do with the WNS human vector theory) we may get hit by a meteor and demands equally arcane and insupportable actions?
Heck, cavers can demand this themselves directly from the agencies. Just be prepared for a total brush off as they are more afraid of the CBD than they ever will be of you, and will be loathe to admit they have taken an action to exclude public use of public land on the basis of "no basis". However, it is a good place to start. You have far more influence than likely any of you are aware. Why do you think some issues get attention and others don't? Those that do almost always are driven by local folks getting and staying fired up. Get your data request (those would be FOIA requests folks) rejections in hand and then go see your elected officials or their staffs.
I realize that in regards to that issue that we didn't quite get everything we wished for.
You never will. But, you can get a lot.
If they're going to mount a legal attack on us, I agree that we need to respond to them in kind.
I know what you are saying, but it also needs saying the CBD is not interested in attacking us (not even the NSS). There's no money in it. Directly contacting the CBD with impassioned pleas, logic or anything else is a waste of time. They do not care what any of us think, nor do they have to. The agencies are a different matter entirely. While they need to be responding to legitimate public interests and questions, they are totally cowed (definition: cause (someone) to submit to one's wishes by intimidation) by the CBD. So, the agencies are going to please the CBD, not the public. It's that lack of a spine and lack of leadership thing and will be so until they fear the public more than the CBD....which is where a bit of political intrigue is helpful.
Very few of us are lawyers, but that doesn't mean that we can't approach our own senators and representatives with our own responses to their attack.
Yep.
We need to agree that the spread of WNS is terrible and that we are doing all we can to prevent it through our own self-imposed decon- strategies, but be forceful in saying that the human vector has not been proven anywhere by anybody.
Saying there is no evidence, but continuing to perform decon processes foisted upon you by idiots and of no demonstrable efficacy (oh, it works because there is no WNS to deal with...thus remarkable, yea 100%, success), indicates acceptance of the folly and sends a signal you accept the notable lack of even the tinest shred of evidence of a human vector. You either don't believe the hype or you do. In the total absence of scientific evidence of either a vector or decon efficacy, there is no reason to play the game. Just refuse to do it. What are they going to do? Shut you out of the caves? Seems that already has happened. Stop being the victim.
Clearly the closing of caves is more detrimental to them (the article on Fern, for example, is a good illustration) than allowing for controlled visits. If we don't make that point to them, we will lose out to CBD without a fight.
You've already lost. You have to remember the CBD doesn't care about you, or the caves. They only care, purportedly (though settlement awards say otherwise) about the biology.
But, your statement implies a most curious argument. "We have to be allowed in the caves in order to save them". Really? That's just as specious as a human vector. On the other hand, how does allowing "controlled visits" mean the lack of visits is anything other than total control? The fact that you may be given a permit has no bearing on someone not inclined to obtain one as to whether they go in or not. Then there is that contingent of cavers that would be ecstatic if no one went into caves (except themselves, of course). The real issue is that we need access to caves (at least on public land) because it is a public resource and the public implicitly has a right of access.
If all caves are closed to everyone, that's like having a fire and locking out all the firemen to put it out!!
That pretty well describes the NPS model of cave management vis-à-vis letting the public go caving.
There is no reason why we can't use our constitutional rights to address our senators and representatives about what the CBD is doing. As you said, Mike, it's the numbers and we have far more of them than CBD does at the moment.
Well, you know what to do....everybody get busy. Start by flooding BLM with numerous FOIAs. Concentrate the effort on a single agency. When they reply, but not with what you asked for, dun them again. The others will fold as it becomes apparent their ruse no longer works (but settle in for a long wait).
_______________________________________________ SWR mailing list [email protected] http://caver.net/mailman/listinfo/swr_caver.net
