Category: Population

Copenhagen 1
© Richard Grossman MD, 2009

Governing a single nation is complex; building agreement between two hundred diverse countries is a monumental task. Getting those nations to solve a global problem, which affects each country differently, is beyond monumental. The United Nations will attempt to do just that this December.
Human ingenuity and population growth have lead to climate change because of carbon emissions from fossil fuels. People have proposed many ways of limiting climate change. This article touches on the diplomatic approach; a future article will look at the most cost-effective tactic—family planning.
In an attempt to limit climate change, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was formed in 1992 at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (the Earth Summit) in Rio. UNFCCC holds annual meetings to consider progress on climate change, called “Conferences of the Parties”. The third one, COP3, was held in Kyoto, Japan, twelve years ago. COP15 will be held in Copenhagen, Denmark this December.
The outcome of COP3 was the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (often referred to simply as “Kyoto”). This treaty was meant to limit greenhouse gas emissions (especially carbon dioxide). The 184 countries that signed Kyoto agreed to lower emissions by 6 to 8 percent below 1990 levels. Although the USA signed the Protocol, our Senate never ratified it. The Bush administration finally rejected Kyoto in 2001, fearing that its ratification would harm our economy. Kyoto is not strong enough, does not include the USA and expires in 2012. It is time to negotiate another treaty that will be acceptable to all countries.
COP15, nicknamed “Copenhagen”, promises to be a huge affair with 192 countries represented. All the beds in the city have already been reserved so don’t plan on trying to attend at the last minute. The conference will probably not nail down a final document, but we hope that the meeting will generate the skeleton for one. The goal is an enforceable treaty that will significantly decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Hopefully the treaty will be strong enough and enacted quickly enough so that global warming will be limited to one and a half or, at most, two degrees Celsius.
Large UN conferences have preparatory meetings at which much of the conference’s business is actually transacted. Last month the UN hosted the Summit on Climate Change in New York, attended by 100 heads of state. It was unique since its purpose was to encourage participation in COP15 at the highest levels. President Obama was there. In closing his speech he declared “We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.”
At the end of the Summit, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon summarized the meeting by saying: “There is little time left. The opportunity and responsibility to avoid catastrophic climate change is in your hands.”
Since it is unlikely that anyone reading this article attended the Summit or will attend Copenhagen, I suggest two website for information and action. 360.org has the goal of lowering carbon dioxide levels below the current 385 parts per million. Hopenhagen.org strives to make Copenhagen successful. Please join me in signing the petition on this site that begins: “We the peoples of the world urge political leaders to: Seal the Deal at COP15 on a climate agreement that is definitive, equitable and effective.” It ends with the desire that we “…secure climate justice for all.” Equity in greenhouse gas reduction will be the subject of the next column.
Decreasing carbon emissions is vital for our children and grandchildren. The Copenhagen meeting will offer the best chance to do so.

I would like to add a few words about Morley Ballantine, who inspired this column. She was a champion of women’s issues, concerned about human population growth and a defender of access to safe and legal abortion. I asked her in 1994 if she would help me publish a book on population. She said that she couldn’t, but that I could publish it, a chapter at a time, as a column in the Herald. We agreed with a handshake that I would keep the copyrights and be paid $30 a column, which I would donate to Planned Parenthood. Although the Herald has lived up to its part of the bargain, I am not sure that I have always increased my annual gift to Planned Parenthood by $360.
Morley has been one of my inspirations and heroes since then. After a long and illustrious life, she died this month. May she rest in peace.

This article may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org.

The article below may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org.

Express your Opinion on the Land Swap
© Richard Grossman MD, 2009

I appreciate Representative John Salazar for taking an interest in the National Forest Land Swap, an important issue for residents of La Plata County. His request to lengthen the comment period had the desired result—the Forest Service will receive comments until October 30th. I hope that more people will express their opinions about this proposed swap. I also hope that they will identify any vested interest. Apparently this sort of transparency was lacking during the recent public meeting during which most people in favor of the swap had reason to benefit financially from it.
In general, this column is about balancing humans with the natural world. The proposed land swap is about balancing the benefits of preserving one beautiful tract with three others.
To review, the Glacier Club (still called “Tamarron” by Durangotangs) wants to extend its properties to the north. It has proposed a land swap with the National Forest to gain ownership of property south of Chris Park. In exchange, it would give the National Forest three privately owned parcels. Closest is the tract where two branches of Hermosa Creek join. It is largely overgrazed meadow where cattle have damaged the streams. I hear that the second, “Mitchell Lakes,” is beautiful. With Forest Service ownership, both parcels could be protected from development and further harm. They intend to exclude cattle and restore the riparian habitat and native cutthroat trout to Hermosa Creek. An old mining claim in the Weminuche Wilderness, the third parcel is above Silverton.
The official appraisals of these four parcels are available on the San Juan Forest site at: www.fs.fed.us/r2/sanjuan/projects/projects.shtml. This site also has maps of the four parcels, a map showing existing public trails that would be closed if Tamarron prevails, and a link to the huge Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Most important, there is information on how to contact the Forest Service with your opinion on the swap.
The National Forest has been trying to get the Hermosa parcel for decades. It would be wonderful for this to happen; on the other hand, I would hate to lose access to some of the National Forest closest to Durango.
One of the things I dislike most about the proposed swap is that some of this beautiful land would probably be used for nine new holes of golf. Tamarron is already audacious enough to have built some of its current golf course on National Forest land, and part of the swap is to legalize that arrogance. Golf courses are notable for their harm to the environment. Not only do they destroy the native species that once thrived on the land, they require vast quantities of water and toxic chemicals to maintain non-native grass.
Like it or not, I think the land swap is pretty much a “done deal.” We do have the opportunity to request that the impact on the Chris Park area be minimized. I have written Cindy Hockelberg at: comments-rocky-mountain-san-juan-columbine@fs.fed.us with my suggestions to minimize the harm to the land and people of La Plata County. Here is my list of requests:
1. The Forest Service should select Alternative 4 because it would maximize the land available to people and wildlife. The total land taken by Tamarron is slightly less than with Alternative 2 (the alternative currently preferred by the Forest Service—and Tamarron).
2. The Forest Service could make the land available to Tamarron smaller, providing a wider buffer from the Chris Park Campground.
3. The emergency access road and parking lot proposed in Alternative 2 would seriously interfere with the Rapp Corral business. The additional road would be detrimental to wildlife, is not needed and should not be built.
4. It is important to make sure that the present Chris Park Road is not used for routine access to Tamarron, although it could be used for emergencies when not snow-covered. It is especially important to me that this road not be cleared of snow in the winter. My wife and I support Durango Nature Studies, which takes hundreds of school kids on snowshoes each winter on this road. We teach them about life in the cold with the “Surviving and Thriving in Winter” program. The Chris Park Road needs to have a locked barrier where it connects to Tamarron; traffic will interfere with this important use of the Forest.
5. The land swap plan provides for replacement of current trails that will be on Tamarron land. We need a guarantee that the new trails will be completed within a year.
I encourage readers to contact the Forest Service with their opinions about the proposed land swap. This is an important matter and our opinions can change the end result.