Search

The problem with national monuments

We are an online community created around a smart and easy to access information hub which is focused on providing proven global and local insights about sustainability

09 May, 2024

This post was originally published on Healthy Forest

President Joe Biden recently signed an executive order adding 105,919 acres of National Forest System land to the San Gabriel National Monument.

According to a statement by the White House, the lands added to the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument “contain spectacular cultural, geological, and ecological resources. A diversity of animals, birds, reptiles, and other wildlife, including numerous sensitive, threatened, and endangered species, live among the unique geological and ecological features of the area, including its unusual canyons, chapparal and coastal sage scrub lands, riparian woodlands, and conifer forests.”

The San Gabriel National Monument is also one of six places the travel magazine Fordor urged readers not to visit in 2024, saying the monument is overwhelmed with trash and graffiti.

Added the Los Angeles Daily News:

What was intended to be the “crown to the Valley of Angels,” the living monument of chaparral, oak and conifer trees as well as numerous picnic, camping and fishing sites, has become “covered in trash, tagged with graffiti, and (is) posing an increasing threat to nature,” according to the magazine.

Even after monument status was bestowed in 2014 by President Barack Obama, the area, along with the entire 700,000-acre Angeles National Forest, was left in the hands of the U.S. Forest Service to manage. But the U.S. Forest Service, under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, did not get an allotment of dollars for the designation. Instead, the USFS must rely on corporate donations and the yeoman’s work of volunteer groups to maintain and manage the monument.

Recent publicity highlighted a portion of the monument at the East Fork of the San Gabriel River, which in the summer became inundated with people who left behind diapers, food wrappers and even mattresses. In a recent article in this newspaper, the USFS said it did not have enough money or resources to repair large portions devastated by storms and overuse, resulting in closure of more than 38% of the campgrounds.

Most Americans probably think a national monument designation ensures special protection and resources for public lands. Too often they add more layers of bureaucracy on top of land management, while shutting out local communities and making active management and other multiple uses of public lands more costly and prohibitive.

The Antiquities Act gives U.S. Presidents authority to declare “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” as national monuments. The law’s original purpose was to protect archaeological sites, or “antiquities,” and other specific, definable objects and landscapes in federal ownership at risk of theft or desecration.

The law states monuments should be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected. Four months after the passage of the Antiquities Act, President Roosevelt declared Wyoming’s Devils Tower our first national monument. The designated area covered just 1,304 acres, now dwarfed by the 452,000-acre San Gabriel National Monument.

Over the last century, presidents have expanded the use of the Antiquities Act to make its original purpose and intent unrecognizable. For example, President Obama issued 34 monument proclamations directing the management of over 550 million acres of federal lands, waters, and resources.

This includes the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument in 2016, covering nearly 3 million acres which are entirely underwater off Cape Cod. Denied their livelihoods, the Atlantic fishermen have so far unsuccessfully challenged the designation in court.

Since taking office, President Biden has established or expanded seven national monuments. Some want him to add many more to support his administration’s pursuit to set aside 30% of the nation’s lands and waters over the next decade (known as “30×30”).

For those wanting to set aside public lands from management, designations offer a convenient end-run around the normal democratic process. No public involvement is needed. No economic or environmental analysis is completed before designation. No congressional debate, approval, or compromise is required.

Maybe Americans are starting to catch on. As President Biden considers creating a Dolores National Monument in Colorado, a recent survey found the local residents largely oppose it. Said Mesa County Commissioner Cody Davis about the poll:

“I was surprised about how galvanized people are, I thought that last slide was telling in that most people prefer some form of conservation, but more people — 70% plus — preferred something other than a national monument.”

Pass over the stars to rate this post. Your opinion is always welcome.
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

Source: Healthy Forest

You may also like…

Energy Efficiency as an Imperative Climate Strategy

Energy Efficiency as an Imperative Climate Strategy

With mandatory climate statement disclosure rolling out in Australia, businesses need to start reporting on their emissions and sustainability plans for the future. As companies begin assessing the relevant risks and opportunities related to various climate scenarios, energy efficiency presents itself as an immediate climate-strategy with long-term benefits.

Commencing 1 January 2025, businesses that meet two of the three conditions — more than 500 employees, gross assets above $1 billion or $500 million or more in consolidated gross revenue — are required to lodge a climate statement, which discloses their climate-related plans, financial risks and obligations. As part of the gradual roll-out, by 1 July 2027, businesses that meet two of these conditions — more than 100 employees, gross assets above $25 million or exceeding $50 million in consolidated gross revenue — will also be required to report.

This climate statement will need to include the company’s sustainability governance, climate risks and opportunities, including those physical and transition related. They will also need to disclose their Scope 1 and 2 emissions, strategy to decarbonise, and conduct scenario analysis on the short, medium and long term impacts on the business. By the second year of reporting, businesses will also be expected to report on Scope 3 emissions.

Scenario analysis will be based on various assumptions of the state of the climate, one of which includes a possible future where global temperature has increased 2.5°C or more. They will be required to share their climate strategy and steps they are taking long-term in preparation for this scenario.

Common themes within climate strategies will include switching to renewable energy sources, electrifying fleet vehicles, purchasing carbon credits, and carbon capture and storage. Many of these methods look at reducing emissions through the energy source, or targeting the carbon aspect directly; however, climate strategies can also include reducing the amount of energy used. By investing in more energy efficient equipment, sites can maintain production whilst using less energy and producing less emissions.

When increasing energy efficiency and reducing energy consumption first, businesses will see short-term impacts; however, in the long term, they are also improving their foundation for an energy transition. Assuming no other changes, higher energy efficiency can lead to decreased energy demand, allowing for reduced system requirements when specifying and planning for self-generation or energy costs.

To understand what opportunities are available for upgrading to more energy efficient equipment, businesses can start with an energy audit to understand how energy is being consumed across site. Energy audits, like the ABB Energy Appraisal, can provide a roadmap for where and how equipment can be upgraded for the best energy saving potential. An energy audit identifies areas that can be immediately improved with existing equipment on the market, so there is no need to wait for the commercialization or development of more sustainable technology. Going beyond just changing all lights to LEDs, efficiency recommendations may include areas where variable speed drives can be added to control motor speed or upgrading from an IE3 motor to an IE5 ultra-premium efficiency or IE6 hyper-premium efficiency motor to reduce energy losses by 40% or more. This area can often be overlooked on sites as the Minimum Energy Performance Standard (MEPS) in Australia for motors is just IE2.

Mostly used in pumps, compressors, conveyors and fans, motors may seem like a minor part of a site; however, with 45% of the world’s electricity converted into motion by industrial electric motors, there are many opportunities for energy savings. In fact, a recent survey commissioned by ABB IEC Low voltage motors, showed that 92% of surveyed businesses in Australia recognize the important role of electric motors in achieving sustainability targets. In this same survey, participants ranked a reduction in operating cost as a more important driver for investing in energy efficiency than lowering their organization’s emissions. This is because upgrading to newer, more efficient equipment provides benefits beyond just emission reduction. For example, ABB’s Synchronous Reluctance (SynRM) Motors, available in IE5 ultra-premium efficiency or IE6 hyper-premium efficiency, use no rare earth metals or magnets. Running quieter and with bearing temperatures reduced by up to 15°C and winding temperatures by up to 30°, SynRM motors have longer maintenance periods, superior reliability, and contribute to a better operational environment.

Looking ahead, upgrading to an IE5 SynRM motor also provides more visibility into Scope 3 emissions, as SynRM motors meet ABB’s circularity criteria and transparency on environmental impact is provided through Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs).

By requiring companies to disclose their climate information, these new legal requirements are opening the door and facilitating more internal discussions on environmental impact and emission reduction. Whilst mandatory climate reporting is only required of large business entities this year, the progressive roll-out and Scope 3 emission reporting requirements mean that businesses of all sizes in Australia will be impacted by these new requirements. As businesses become more conscious of how sustainability should be integrated into their operations and finances, there is no better time to start investing in energy efficient solutions.

For more information, click here.

Image credit: iStock.com/denizunlusu

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Add your own review

Rating

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.