Spike Bull 's Link
By the way, Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring was about the effects of pesticides and herbicides on birds. Not on simply human carcinogens like your link says. Regardless, "Similarly, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has determined that DDT is possibly carcinogenic to humans. EPA has determined that DDT, DDE, and DDD are probable human carcinogens." It is clear that DDT is not good for most organisms, especially bald eagles who were almost wiped out by DDT.
Yes DDT will kill mosquitoes and prevent spread of disease. It also kills non-target insects like bees. Kill off the pollinators and see how long we last. It also bioaccumulates and kills a lot of aquatic life. Just because a chemical is good for one situation does mean we ignore the unintended effects on non-target species. We are better off without it and have moved on to less destructive treatments like antimalarial medication and bite prevention chemicals like deet.
Good discussion but I believe Pruitt is not good for the EPA. I want clean air, water, soil. I don’t buy that environmental regulation is choking off business. With all of the environmental regulation we still have a strong and growing economy. I don’t think it was environmental regulations that has cause catastrophic economic disastersin U.S. history. The last crisis was the lending and investing practices of banks. Maybe we should focus more on future prevention of those things instead of the destruction of the EPA by a friend of the oil industry. Pruitt is the fox run amuck in the hen house. It may give you comfort but not me.
I have no idea what you do for a living KS.....but I'm gonna go out on limb and guess you don't have a government agency breathing down your neck. The idea that the government can go to a low spot on a farm and claim government control and oversight because occasionally there is standing water there is ridiculous. But that is but one of our starting points to reel in an out of control agency.... every bit as out of control or more so than the IRS and a few other alphabet government bureaucracies.
Not that I am supportive of indiscriminate DDT and other pesticide but they did have their use, still does in some places of the world.
There's the CLASSIC chicken little lie that when used totally discredits whatever the person who said that lie says after that. No one "denies" climate change. The climate has been changing for over 4 billion years and is changing as we speak. The climate as well as the planet would change weather we were here or not. All you have to do is look at land forms and rivers to see that. The scam of blaming man for all of it is just another way for politicians and other tyrants to take more individual freedom/money from people.
The climate change scam is the new communism, and like all communism is based on a lie, which you so kindly provided us with proof of in your statement.
There is some debate on effect. But not so much on whether it's occurring or whether our activity was / is a player.
There are some who suggest it's not real or that the data is fudged etc. Ill agree to that. But the overall flow of research has been pretty solidly laid out at this point.
The commiEs started out claiming this was all due to man,AGW, falsifying data to support their BS and when that started to be exposed for the lie it is they changed to just global warming and when that became obviously an exageration, at best, they morphed again into Climate Change.
The facts are that climate change is here to stay, always has been, global warming may or may not be happening but there are too many complications with data collection to proove any durable, measurable change, and poor old AHW is still the unicorn fart is always has been. Sure, some very small percentage of change MAY be connected to what we humans do but the lies and falsifications of data by the commiEs make all the supporting data suspect.
What is not up for questioning here is that Pruitt, human though he may be, is pushing Trump's agenda of deregulation and that the Soros-Democrats are trying to destroy him for it as it impedes their desire to reduce this country to third world hellhole status.
I, for one, am damn glad Pruitt is doing his job correctly.
jss- I completely agree with your last statement. We are not outside of natures laws and there will be a correction at some point. Exponential human population growth will eventually cause a crash and like you said we don't know who will get it first or when it will happen. That being said I'm a conservationist and would like to conserve as many resources we can for future generations. We will always need water, food, and shelter to survive so I would like to conserve those resources for my children.
Oh, boy...TD you ask what I do. I'm going to catch hell for this and you all will say I'm completely bias. But I also don't want to dodge or hide but to be honest with you all. I'm a biologist and I do work with endangered species, wetlands permitting, etc. Now before you blast as a tree hugging wacko please understand I'm not a preservationist but a conservationist. I drive a 4x4 truck, burn fossil fuels, hunt and eat what I bring home, and use electricity, and I know there is a cost to using those things. But we can be smart about what we use, how we use it, and reuse/recycle/conserve what we can. Don't forget that hunters and fisherman were the first conservationist.
"The first rule to intelligent tinkering is to save all the pieces..." - Aldo Leopold
OK I got my helmet on so blast away...
You won't get any grief from me about your profession.
My older sister had a long and successful career as a water law attorney and project manager for the EPA over 2 administrations. She's beside herself with anger over Pruitt systematically dismantling the EPA, and I agree with her.
How any outdoorsman can be happy about rolling back pollution regulations and conservation measures is beyond me.
Thanks for what you do!
They most certainly CHANGED the description and criteria to classify the property, fairly recently too. The property did not change, regulations did. EPA control and power expanded with that change. It expanded to cover and control ever smaller and smaller areas from what they originally controlled. PRIVATE land, not public.
EPA has a place. It should be a very small place. Their expansion and control, like nearly every government agency, IRS, etc. has grown too far, too fast. It is the nature of public sector to do so as there is little to no tangible result required to justify expansion such as in the private sector. All they need is a "cause". Or some dramatic event or looming disaster to talk up. That is their "business plan". You will NEVER hear a public sector agency say they need to downsize or need less budget, less control, less power. Never.
That has to come from outside the agency. Pruitt seems to be doing a very good job at seeing what is needed and what is not. His job is not to grow the agency. It is his job to make it more efficient and sort through what is necessary and what is needless layers of bureaucracy, paperwork and regulation.
WRT Climate Scientists...... see public sector agencies above. Not many,if any, are going to gut their own personal golden goose. (although they have no issues with slaughtering others....) That's why much of the contrary opinions are coming from those who used to be but are no longer in that "industry". If there are no public emotions of urgency or drama, impending doom, their budgets will get cut, THEY will get cut. That's why the dramatic BS about Himalayan glacier predictions, polar bears wiped out (currently at their highest population in over 50 years...) New York underwater (should have happened already according to many) on and on, false prediction on top of false prediction. Add in getting caught at falsifying data, hiding data that doesn't support the claim..... little wonder people are about fed up with it all. They cannot be trusted.
I get it, it's human nature..... house payments, kids in school, dental bills, etc. plus EVERYBODY wants to feel their job, what they do,is important. Necessary. I just wish more folks understood and factored in much of the underlying motives of human nature as well.
What Trump and Pruitt are doing is trying to limit any federal jurisdiction to only traditional navigable rivers (i.e. Mississippi River). You can’t control water pollution in these large water bodies without protecting upstream.
Can you provide an example where th EPA or USACE condemned wetlands on private property? Not regulate or require a permit but condemn.
Pruitt is not there for environmental protection he is only there to destroy the EPA. If we are wanting to have reduced regulations and streamline permit processes he could ask scientists and industry reps not an attorney from OK. There are ways to protect public resources and respect private property rights.
When my father retired from the farm I think he said he was filing some 200+ pages of forms and reports to some agency or another, a good many of them explaining/confirming that he DIDN'T use this or that or DIDN'T grow this or that. It also required reporting on everything from crops planted and harvest rates to irrigation sources (most from private wells, some from ditchline systems) etc. and various testing, inspections, etc. The only thing he had really changed in over 50 years was the forms and time needed to deal with a half dozen or more agencies who suddenly felt what he did was their business...... people clueless as to WHY people even become farmers.....
WRT Pruitt..... the link above pretty much sums up my views of the EPA and what Pruitt is doing. Not ignoring science as the left is screaming from under their skirts..... he is saying we will no longer use closed confidential studies that are not open to peer review as a basis to create regulations. REAL transparency and real proven science for regulation instead of literally political science driven regulation. If that is "dismantling the EPA" then it deserves to be dismantled.
That would require weapons-grade naivete to believe.
Unfortunately it is the power to regulate by rules which have the power of law made up by burocrats which is disturbing. The LEGISLATURE, that would be Congress, is the only body allowed to make laws, NEVER unelected burocrats, which is what the Soros-Democrats have done.
Thank you Mr. Pruitt, and of course, President Trump.
Following your logic Spike, then isn't Pruitt an bureaucrat that is changing the law by removing regulations? I thought you only wanted congress to do that?
Congress does not draft regulations. Congress passes enabling legislation, setting the boundaries for what an agency can do. Agencies promulgate regulations under the rules of the Administrative Procedures Act.
It might be helpful, KS Flatlander, if you'd quit trying to show everybody how clever you are. It's not working.
I’m not trying to be cute Spike. Your logic just seems contradicting.