Year: 2008

Apaches Rise to Defend Homelands from Homeland Security

http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4884

Brenda Norrell | January 10, 2008

Apache land owners on the Rio Grande told Homeland Security to halt the seizure of their lands for the U.S.-Mexico border wall on Jan. 7, 2008. It was the same day that a 30-day notice from Homeland Security expired with the threat of land seizures by eminent domain to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall. Homeland Security (DHS) declared that it will use the principle of eminent domain to take possession of land currently held by private ownership. DHS has also presented waivers requesting that the landowners grant DHS personnel access to their property for a 12-month period in order to conduct surveys for the intended construction project. The property owners were informed that if they do not voluntarily allow the federal agents on their property, the U.S. government will file a lawsuit to grant Homeland Security authorities unimpeded access to private land, despite the owners’ opposition. Homeland Security has stated that it will seize property even without the consent of landowners if necessary to complete the construction of the border fence. Many landowners, as well as civic leaders and human rights activists, oppose the U.S. government’s plans to allow federal law enforcement agents access to private property. The government’s demands and aggressive tactics are in conflict with settled rights of private property ownership and are particularly disconcerting to the indigenous peoples’ communities impacted by this undertaking. Deep Roots of Resistance The Texas communities along the international boundary zone are largely made up of Native Americans and of land grant heirs who have resided on inherited properties for hundreds of years. Homeland Security plans to complete the Texas portions of the fence before the end of the 2008 calendar year. “There are two kinds of people in this world, those who build walls and those who build bridges,” said Enrique Madrid, Jumano Apache community member, land owner in Redford, and archaeological steward for the Texas Historical Commission. “The wall in South Texas is militarization,” Madrid said of the planned escalation of Border Patrol and military presence. “They will be armed and shoot to kill.” In 1997, a U.S. Marine stationed on the border shot and killed 18-year-old Esequiel Hernandez, who was herding his sheep near his home in Redford. “We had hoped he would be the last United States citizen and the last Native American to be killed by troops,” Madrid said during a media conference call on January 7 with Apaches from Texas and Arizona. Instead, the number of people shot and killed or run over by Border Patrol and other U.S. agents has risen sharply as the militarization continues. Dr. Eloisa Garcia Tamez, Lipan Apache professor living in the Lower Rio Grande, described how U.S. officials attempted to pressure her into allowing them onto her private land to survey for the US-Mexico border wall. When Tamez refused, she was told that she would be taken to court and her lands seized by eminent domain. “I have told them that it is not for sale and they cannot come onto my land.” Tamez is among the land owners where the Department of Homeland Security plans to erect 70 miles of intermittent, double-layered fencing in the Rio Grande Valley. Tamez said the United States government wants access to all of her land, which is on both sides of a levee. “Then they will decide where to build the wall. It could be over my house.” Tamez said that she may only have three acres, but it is all she has. Tamez’ daughter Margo Tamez, poet and scholar, said, “We are not a people of walls. It is against our culture to have walls. The Earth and the River go together. We must be with the river. We must be with this land. We were born for this land.” Margo Tamez added that the recently approved United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples guarantees the right of indigenous peoples to their traditional territories. Rosie Molano Blount, Chiricahua Apache from Del Río noted that many people from the Chiricahua Apache have served in the United States military. “We are proud to be Americans,” Blount said, adding that the Chiricahua have always supported the U. S. government. Now, with the increasing harassment of people in the border zone, the local attitude toward the federal government is changing. “Ya Basta! Enough is enough!” Blount said, repeating the phrase that became the battle cry of the Zapatistas in Mexico struggling for indigenous peoples’ rights. Blount said there needs to be dialogue concerning the issues at the border, but not forced militarization or a border wall. She also directed a comment at Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. “Don’t come here and divide our families, Chertoff. You believe this is the only way to do things.” Michael Paul Hill, San Carlos Apache from Arizona, described how U.S. border agents violated and molested his sacred items, including a sacred stone, Eagle feather, and drum used in ceremonies while crossing the border. After participating in an Apache ceremony in Mexico, when Hill and other Apaches reentered the United States a SWAT team in full riot gear was waiting for them and interrogated them. “They called me a foreigner, ” Hill stated, adding that Border Agents manhandled his ceremonial objects and warned him he might “get away” with crossing the border without intrusive inspections in Nogales, Arizona “but not in Texas.” “It was incredibly frightening,” said Margo Tamez, who was also there. She pointed out how the escalating militarization at the border is terrorizing people as they go about their lives, working, taking care of their families, and holding their traditional ceremonies. Isabel Garcia, co-chair of Derechos Humanos (Human Rights) in Tucson, Arizona, said Arizona has been a laboratory for criminalizing the border. Pointing out that the Arizona border is the ancestral homeland of the Tohono O’odham, she said, “These borders are where people have lived since time immemorial.” Garcia described the climate of militarization and abuse by Border Patrol agents, noting that in 2002 “cowboy” Border Agents ran over and killed18-year-old Tohono O’odham Bennett Patricio, Jr. His mother, Angie Ramon, is still seeking justice for the death of her son. Garcia also described the deaths from dehydration and heat in the Sonoran Desert in southern Arizona, where failed border policies have pushed migrants walking to a better life into treacherous desert lands. “Two hundred and thirty-seven bodies were recovered in one year and most were on the tribal lands of the Tohono O’odham.” Legal Questions and Challenges Homeland Security recently waived 22 federal laws to build the border wall in the San Pedro wilderness area in Arizona, Garcia noted. Attorney Peter Schey, director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law in Los Angeles, said America does not need a “Berlin Wall.” Schey, renowned immigrant rights attorney, said Section 564 of the Homeland Security section of the Omnibus Appropriations Bill supersedes earlier legislation. Homeland Security is now required to consult with the communities. Schey said this means real consultation and real consideration of the community’s input and data. Schey took his first action by notifying Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff by letter sent by fax on behalf of Texas property-owner Dr. Tamez on Monday, the same day that a 30-day notice to Texas land owners expired with the threat of eminent domain land seizures looming. Schey informed Chertoff to halt the impending seizures of private lands. Schey said Section 564 strikes provisions of the earlier Secure Fence Act and requires Homeland Security to consult with property owners like Dr. Tamez in order “to minimize the impact on the environment, culture, commerce, and quality of life” in areas considered for construction of the border fence. “Furthermore, we believe that the new statutory provisions invalidate the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for fence construction published on the Department’s behalf on Nov. 16, 2007, pending completion of the required local consultations and other requirements as outlined in the Omnibus Bill,” Schey told Chertoff in the letter. Homeland Security has already built walls along much of the California and Arizona international boundary zone with Mexico, despite opposition from the government of Mexico. Apaches at the Texas border have formed a national working group coalition of supporters, attorneys, and fellow Apaches and other indigenous peoples to resist the seizure of their lands, the desecration of their sacred places and the militarization of their communities. In solidarity, the network opposes the seizure of private lands by Homeland Security by way of eminent domain, the militarization of the border, and construction of the border wall. Brenda Norrell is a freelance writer and Americas Policy Program border analyst, www.americaspolicy.org. Her blog can be found at http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Terrestrial ecosystem carbon dynamics and climate feedbacks p 289 “Recent evidence suggests that, on a global scale, terrestrial ecosystems will provide a positive feedback in a warming world, albeit of uncertain magnitude.” “It is evident that large uncertainties remain in our ability to assess terrestrial carbon-cycle-climate feedbacks over the coming decades. Current experiments give ambiguous results and do not provide definite conclusions on the importance of the mechanisms discussed above. Overall, it is likely that, at least on a global scale, terrestrial ecosystems will provide a positive, amplifying feedback in a warming world, albeit of uncertain magnitude. An important improvement in our understanding might be obtained by the combination of long-term multifactorial experiments with non-destructive ecosystem-level observations, such as whole-ecosystem flux measurements, and the integration of the results with ecosystem modelling in a multiple-constraint framework. As long as there is no fundamental understanding of the processes involved, simulations of coupled carbon-cycle-climate models can only illustrate the importance of, but do not show, a conclusive picture of the multitude of possible carbon-cycle-climate system feedbacks. Moreover, strong interactions between the natural processes described here and anthropogenic changes in land use, cover and management have to be expected.”

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06591.html

——————————————-

An Earth-system perspective of the global nitrogen cycle p 293 “Can management of the global nitrogen cycle help to mitigate climate change? Although various options have been proposed in the past, such as fertilization of forests and marine ecosystems, the scientific consensus is that their effectiveness is generally low, and that unintended negative consequences could be serious20. Therefore, the best strategy for reducing the potential threat from human activity in the ‘Anthropocene’ – this modern age in which humans have a significant impact on the Earth system – is to reduce the burning of fossil fuels.”

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06592.html

————————————————

A steep road to climate stabilization p 297 ” … simulations carried out with coupled climate and carbon-cycle models indicate that changes in climate will result in even greater reductions in the ability of land and the ocean to absorb anthropogenic CO2 by the end of the twenty-first century5. These simulations suggest that the combination of warming and drying will limit photosynthesis by plants and stimulate the decomposition of organic matter in soil, reducing the capacity of land-based ecosystems to store carbon (see page 289). In addition, it is widely thought that global warming will result in slower ocean circulation, leading to a decrease in the amount of carbon that is exported from the surface to the deep ocean and thereby reducing the flux of carbon from the air to the ocean. So it seems that future warming will reduce carbon sinks, leaving more CO2 in the atmosphere and leading, in turn, to greater warming. This positive-feedback loop has implications for the pathway to stabilizing the concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases. If land-based and ocean ecosystems store less carbon than is expected in the future, then a greater effort will be needed, in terms of reducing anthropogenic emissions, to achieve a given concentration of atmospheric CO2. The potential importance of this effect is illustrated by simulations carried out for the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These simulations indicate that to stabilize atmospheric CO2 concentrations at 450 parts per million (generally accepted as ‘safe’) by 2100, cumulative emissions in the twenty-first century need to be reduced by a further 30% when this feedback is taken into account.

<http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7176/full/nature06593.html> =========================================================

———————————————–

” In Indonesia, for instance, 44 million acres have already been cleared for palm oil development and forest destruction continues unabated as the demand for more land for energy crops increases. Not just forest cover is at risk; endangered wildlife such as the orangutan and Sumatran tiger, as well as the lifestyles of indigenous people, are also under threat.” “Equally important is that the government does not put all its eggs in one basket. Efforts (which should include financial support) must be made to explore other alternative energy sources like wind and solar energy.”

———————————————–

Bangkok Post January 17, 2008 EDITORIAL: Clearing Forests for Energy Crops

<http://www.bangkokpost.com/170108_News/17Jan2008_news99.php> As the surge in global oil prices appears unstoppable, governments and investors alike are scrambling to increase output of energy crops, oil palm in particular, to reduce dependence on fossil fuels or to boost biofuel exports for much-needed foreign exchange. Just as the oil-producing countries are reluctant to increase crude output which would certainly force prices down to a more realistic level, or at least make them more stable, the incentives provided by steadily rising oil prices are simply too tempting to resist for palm oil-producing countries in Southeast Asia, which include Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Otherwise totally dependent on oil imports to meet its energy needs, Thailand recently embarked on an ambitious project to substantially increase palm oil yields, which envisages an extra 2.5 million rai of land being planted with oil palm trees over the next five years. The new plantations will be on disused rice fields, deserted public land, flood-prone land, acid and degraded land in the South and the Eastern Seaboard, according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. Increased acreage aside, higher-yield palm trees would also be introduced. The search for alternative energy sources and the environmental threat caused by carbon dioxide emissions is highly commendable and worthy of public support. However, there are environmental risks associated with the expansion of energy crops which need to be addressed in earnest. Finding more empty land for palm cultivation is a big problem. In most cases, forests have fallen victim to encroachers to pave the way for palm plantations. In Indonesia, for instance, 44 million acres have already been cleared for palm oil development and forest destruction continues unabated as the demand for more land for energy crops increases. Not just forest cover is at risk; endangered wildlife such as the orangutan and Sumatran tiger, as well as the lifestyles of indigenous people, are also under threat. The scorched earth method employed to clear forests in Indonesia to make way for palm oil plantations has increased emissions in the atmosphere and caused serious concern at the European Council, which is considering a ban on imports of certain biofuels, including palm oil. If this measure actually goes into force, exports of biofuels from Indonesia – and probably Thailand if it produces enough surplus for export – will be affected. Forest clearing by encroachers to pave the way for crop plantations has long been a headache for the Forestry Department. The latest surge in this kind of land grab concerns para rubber, whose prices have skyrocketed in tandem with rising global oil prices. A big question mark in the minds of people concerned with the well-being of our forests is whether the government’s ambitious plan to almost double oil palm plantations over the next five years will indirectly encourage forest encroachment, as cleared forests are more fertile for crop cultivation than acid, flood-prone or degraded land which has been earmarked for new palm plantations by the Ministry of Agriculture. Investment-wise, the cost would be lower, too. The government – and not just the Ministry of Agriculture whose performance in dealing with forest encroachment leaves much to be desired – must make sure that its policy of boosting energy crops, oil palm in particular, must not jeopardise the state of our forests, which are already under threat. Subsidies which are to be granted to the growers must not fall into the wrong hands. Equally important is that the government does not put all its eggs in one basket. Efforts (which should include financial support) must be made to explore other alternative energy sources like wind and solar energy. Also, the government must have a comprehensive plan regarding how much palm oil it will need for energy purposes and how much for consumption, to ensure there are no shortages of cooking oil, which would have a serious impact on consumers.

© Copyright The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. 2006 -_______________________________________________________________________________________

The editorial below is a nice summary of consequences from warmer winters ( a beetle boom). So far, so good. But it doesn’t go on to explain the related and similar consequences of summer drought and increased frequency, length, and intensity of summer heat waves (sans the beetle) : dry, hot soils in which seedlings will struggle or fail to survive and replace the dead pines. The concept of forest as a renewable resource is hard to shake. And the importance of dead tree retention is still getting no media coverage. Lance

—————————————————————-

“According to a report released by the U.S. Forest Service Monday …. every mature, lodgepole-pine forest will be dead in three to five years. The culprit: warmer winters.”

————————————————————-

Boulder Daily Camera January 16, 2008 Rocky Mountain die Hasta la vista, lodgepoles

<http://dailycamera.com/news/2008/jan/16/rocky-mountain-die/>

Clint Talbott, for the editorial board It’s one thing to talk about the infestation of pine beetles in Colorado’s forests. It’s quite another to see the devastation from, say, the crest of the Continental Divide. Historically, the sweeping vista from high in the Indian Peaks Wilderness could take your breath away. It still can. But not in a good way. Down below, the familiar azure shapes of Grand Lake and its siblings appear as always. But the deep green of the lodgepole and ponderosa forest is succumbing to a massive wave of brown and orange, which signifies the death wrought by pine beetles. According to a report released by the U.S. Forest Service Monday, pine-beetle damage increased by 1,500 percent in Boulder County in the last year. Statewide, 500,000 acres were infested in 2007, bringing the total area affected to 1.5 million acres since the first signs of a beetle outbreak were noticed in 1996, the Camera reported. More alarming, the report projected that every mature, lodgepole-pine forest will be dead in three to five years. The culprit: warmer winters. Pine beetles are usually kept in check by extended, frigid temperatures of winter. In the Winter Park area, for instance, it was not unusual for temperatures to drop into double-digits – below zero – for many days. Beetles, which burrow into trees, can weather a mild cold snap, but they have greater trouble surviving a long deep freeze. The usual anti-empiricits dismissed the news, striving to deny that warmer temperatures (one product of our rapidly changing climate) is to blame. It’s fire suppression, some say. One denialist, cowering behind a fake name on the Camera’s blog, said, “I have NEVER read any papers conclusively pointing the blame at higher temps.” Of course, the supposed fact that one faceless commenter has read no conclusive papers does not mean that he hasn’t read papers that are, in fact, either convincing or conclusive. Or that, even if he hasn’t bothered to read them, that they nonetheless exist. The Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms that such research does exist. Consider this section of Chapter 1 of the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC’s Working Group 2. “Climate warming can also change the disturbance regime of forests by extending the range of some damaging insects, as observed during the last 20 years for bark beetles in the USA (Williams and Liebhold, 2002).” Similarly, Chapter 5 notes, “Recent warming trends in the U.S. and Canada have led to earlier spring activity of insects and proliferation of some species, such as the mountain pine beetle (Crozier and Dwyer, 2006).” As the report noted, the dying forests will have major effects on the state. Water supplies could be impinged by sediment from deficient soil cover. Wildfire danger will rise, obviously. And dead trees harm tourism, as they discourage campers, skiers and hikers. There are larger concerns, too. Forests are carbon “sinks,” meaning they consume carbon dioxide and emit oxygen. When forests die, CO2 concentrations rise that much more. Further, the wildfire factor means that we could not only lose a carbon sink but gain additional greenhouse-gas emissions. North and Central America lose about 0.3 million hectares of forest annually. Much of that loss is from logging and other forms of deforestation. A factor of increasing significance, however, is beetle kill. It’s probably too late to stop the devastation of our lodgepole and ponderosa forests. But the destruction should serve as yet another reminder of the very real and clearly harmful results of our rapidly changing climate. . © 2006 Daily Camera and Boulder Publishing, LLC. — ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++