Acronyms can be a bit of a mystery unless you follow the trail. CBD =
Center for Biological Diversity. Their job is to save endangered or
threatened species and, therefore, bats with white nose syndrome.
Linda Starr


On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Kristopher Megahan <
[email protected]> wrote:

>  What is the CBD?****
>
> ** **
>
> *Kristopher D. Megahan*
>
> Technical Director****
>
> Magnablend, Inc.****
>
> (972) 938-2028 ext. 3218****
>
> (469) 337-8637 mobile****
>
> [email protected]****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
> Of *wilsons
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2012 5:38 PM
> *To:* Stephen Fleming; Peter Jones
> *Cc:* Robert Foster; Evelyn Townsend; Bill Godby; John Collins; Don
> Martin; John Moses; Lee Wilson; Justin Peinado; Mailing List for SWR; Larry
> Foreman; Margaret Wilson; Jeff Bach; Luke Peerman; Stephanie Regan; Hadley
> Robinson; Kate Bach; Robert Wood; Lawrence Foreman; Hank Boudinot; Cordie
> Ross; Mike Bilbo; Bob Rodgers; Scott Anderson; Jeff Lory; David Winnett;
> Ashley Smith; Michael McWhirter; Grady Viramontes; Jackie Horton; Arvel
> Thomas; Dave Gose; Mike Bilbo; Kenny Stabinsky
> *Subject:* Re: [SWR] Keeping public lands caves open to the public -
> strategies needed****
>
> ** **
>
> I know I have missed much of this discussion and my comments are not new.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Has anyone from the caving community actually contacted CBD about their
> demands for complete closure to everyone? ****
>
> Perhaps this would be an opportunity to reach out and work with another
> conservation organization and help shape policy from the inside (where we
> thought we were).****
>
> ** **
>
> Karl****
>
> ** **
>    ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Stephen Fleming <[email protected]>
> *To:* Peter Jones <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* Mike Bilbo <[email protected]>; Kathy Peerman <
> [email protected]>; Karl Wilson <[email protected]>; Mike
> Lorimer <[email protected]>; Hank Boudinot <[email protected]>; Mike
> Dimatteo <[email protected]>; Bob Rodgers <[email protected]>;
> Stephanie Regan <[email protected]>; Justin Peinado <[email protected]>;
> David Winnett <[email protected]>; Evelyn Townsend <
> [email protected]>; Wayne Walker <[email protected]>; Robert Wood <
> [email protected]>; Jackie Horton <[email protected]>; Jeff Bach <
> [email protected]>; Dave Gose <[email protected]>; John Collins <
> [email protected]>; Luke Peerman <[email protected]>; Scott
> Anderson <[email protected]>; Ashley Smith <[email protected]>;
> Mike Bilbo <[email protected]>; Kenny Stabinsky <[email protected]>;
> Lee Wilson <[email protected]>; Kate Bach <[email protected]>;
> Robert Foster <[email protected]>; Margaret Wilson <
> [email protected]>; Lee Stevens <[email protected]>; Allen
> Wright <[email protected]>; Grady Viramontes <[email protected]>;
> Cordie Ross <[email protected]>; Gary Grogg <[email protected]>;
> Don Martin <[email protected]>; Steve Peerman <[email protected]>;
> Andy Eby <[email protected]>; Hadley Robinson <[email protected]>; Janice
> Tucker <[email protected]>; Jeff Lory <[email protected]>; Lawrence
> Foreman <[email protected]>; Arvel Thomas <
> [email protected]>; John Moses <[email protected]>; Larry Foreman
> <[email protected]>; Bill Godby <[email protected]>; Michael McWhirter
> <[email protected]>; Mailing List for SWR <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 14, 2012 4:52 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [SWR] Keeping public lands caves open to the public -
> strategies needed****
>
>
> 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).
>
> ****
>
> ------------------------------
> The information contained in or accompanying this e-mail is intended for
> the use of the stated recipient and may contain information that is
> confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient or
> the agent thereof, you have received this e-mail in error and any use,
> dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
> immediately at [email protected], and completely delete this
> message from your system.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SWR mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://caver.net/mailman/listinfo/swr_caver.net
>
>
_______________________________________________
SWR mailing list
[email protected]
http://caver.net/mailman/listinfo/swr_caver.net

Reply via email to