By Any Other Name...

Well, the end of the year usually brings some sort of retrospection. No, we are not going to bring you "Best Environmental Champion of the Millennium" or any such nonsense. We'd like to recap some of the PU's we've done in 1999. Remember that many of these are still live issues--they haven't gone away just because PU blew the whistle (or reported someone else blowing the whistle).

We thought it fun to give out awards, and we did a lot of thinking for names for both positive and negative awards, and then thought better of it. Taking a page on how we named this e-rag what we did, we remembered our Shakespeare (ok, we had to look up which play, but we knew it was the Bard):

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose 
By any other name would smell as sweet". 
(Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene ii)

So as you may have guessed, the folks getting "Rosies" did some sweet work for natural resources in 1999-- anyone awarded a "Stinky" did something less than sweet.

So here they are, the Rosie winners of 1999:

Best Maintenance of Course -- Group:

PFBC for protecting rare Pennsylvania fish and not cutting and running when developers and extractive industries and their friends in the General Assembly started to make noise. They held more public meetings, defended their science, and stuck to their list [http://www.rayproffitt.org/ pu/pu032399.htm]. Why does the General Assembly take offense when agencies carry out their duties, when those duties involve protecting rather than exploiting natural resources?

Best Adversity Under Fire -- Individual:

Judge Charles Haden of the Federal Court for the southern district of West Virginia for ruling that environmental laws and the regulations that were written to implement them, and ruling that they are indeed supposed to protect the environment. Judge Haden also maintained his dignity and upheld the dignity of the Federal judiciary in the firestorm of hysteria spread by elected official after the ruling. They should look to Judge Haden's example [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu092899.htm].

Best In Providing Ultimate Protection -- Group:

Oley Coalition, Berks County, for defeating a destructive water withdrawal permit application. The Coalition then realized that even though the luxury bottled water company gave up their lease, the area was at risk even though it is a large spring and associated wetlands complex in the headwater area of an Exceptional Value stream. The Coalition is "closing the circle" by looking to permanently protect, through purchase of development rights, the spring and headwaters area that narrowly missed being sucked out [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu012299.htm].

Congratulations to the winners and thanks to all the other conservation groups and individuals, inside of government and outside, for working to protect our natural resources.

And now, the envelopes please, for the winners of the inaugural Stinky awards:

Best Masquerading as an Environmental Agency -- Group:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District for mismanaging F.E. Walters Dam and confusing the public (and maybe themselves) on how Nationwide Permits might work [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu081199.htm]. (Editor's note: DEP received the most votes but was declared ineligible because they are no longer claiming to be an environmental agency -- they themselves brag that they are "open for business!")

Best Masquerading as a Natural Feature -- Group:

DEP, imitating a glacier in acting on the Tohickon Creek redesignation petition. Q: Why doesn't something like DEP's vaunted "Money Back Guarantee" exist for citizens trying to protect natural resources? A: Who does DEP consider their "customer s," the public at large or permit applicants? [http://www.rayproffitt.org pu/pu111999.htm]

Best At Creating Unnatural Features -- Group:

DEP, for allowing longwall mining knowing that it will destroy surface features, be they streams, springs, homes, roads, or utilities. They were supposed to gather information on destruction caused by longwall mining after Act 54 passed--but they haven't gotten around to it, years later [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu073199.htm]

Best "Retro" Performance and Costume -- Group:

DCNR, for continuing to push Swatara Dam, authorized in the 60's and still pushed today. Never mind that DCNR has plenty of State Parks with dams and few with streams (and which do you think costs more to maintain?). They have some real "retro" characters working there or some big time political pressure to still want to build this lava lamp of a project [http://www.rayproffitt.org/ pu/pu043099.htm].

Best Fiction (or Blasphemy) -- Individual:

Secretary Jim Seif of DEP for helping to name a proposed replacement wetland (sandwiched between the PA Turnpike and the mall that is going to destroy the real wetlands and stream. What's the name Seif and the developer came up with? The "Rachel Carson Wetlands!" [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu121699.htm]

Best Imitation of a Disney Character -- Group:

DEP, for crying wolf a few years ago that EPA's promulgation of antidegradtion regulations reduced protection for streams in National Parks like Valley Creek, Chester County. DEP and the EQB recently finalized regulations that removed National Parks, National Forests, and State Parks from the Exceptional Value waters definition. DEP actually said in their comment/response document [http://www.dep.state.pa.us/ dep/subject/eqb/eqb.htm#051999] that they were going to include them in the final regulation, but political pressure from extractive industries convinced DEP and the EQB to gut the regulation [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu062599.htm]. Remember the Disney character that told lies? DEP doesn't have a nose, but if it did...but this is a duet, and the partner is...

Best Musical Performance (as in song and dance) -- Group:

EPA Region 3 has to approve any water quality standards regulations that DEP sends them. DEP sent EPA a definition of EV streams that doesn't include National Parks or State Parks, which is in the Federal regulation that DEP has to match at a MINIMUM (see above award).EPA is hemming and hawing and failing to disapprove DEP's attempt to gut water quality protection for National Parks and State Parks. What's the problem? Either the language is there, or it isn't. DEP said it was going to include them, and didn't. It can't be stripped from the final regulation the way it was and still be there! The Raymond Proffitt Foundation has filed a 60 day notice- to-sue under the Clean Water Act in case EPA continues to insist that the emperor has beautiful new clothes [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu120199.htm].

Best Science by Elected Officials: - Individuals:

One of the tougher categories because of the caliber of the contestents. We have a three way tie!

State Sen William Slocum, R - ??, for chastising the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission for following the law and listing rare species as state threatened or endangered. Sen Slocum, when lecturing the PFBC staff that had testified, said the human beings were an endangered species. Not the last time we looked, Senator; Homo sapiens is doing quite well (which explains why many of the fish are not) [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu082099.htm]

State Rep. James Lynch, R - Warren, for introducing another bill that would distinguish between private and public property when designating streams as Exceptional Value. Streams can currently qualify by having exceptional ecology, but ecology doesn't know (or care) on whose land it's squatting, and the landowner, not the ecology, is the driving force for Rep. Lynch. Sorry, Rep. Lynch, the law in question is the Clean Streams Law not the Clean Streams Where It's Convenient Law. [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu082099.htm]

Speaking of clean water, State Rep "Bud" George, D- Clearfield, is our other winner. Now, Rep. George has introduced some good bills to improve water quality in mining country, but he hasn't stopped there. Not only should the water be clean, but the channel should be too! He's also introduced a bill that would "clean debris" from streams. One reason he gives is that it is bad for aquatic life! Never mind what he wants to remove is the stuff where aquatic life lives (fallen trees, rocks, etc.) The bill ought to be cleaned of its debris, not the streams [http://www.rayproffitt.org/pu/pu090399.htm].

We hope all the Stinky winners will think about how they ended up receiving such high honors, and strive to do better next year.

Happy New Year from Pollution Update!

<<<<END>>>>

return