Archive for the “Environment” Category


WASHINGTON - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Monday defended the construction of a fence along the southwest border, saying it’s actually better for the environment than what happens when people illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico line.

“Illegal migrants really degrade the environment. I’ve seen pictures of human waste, garbage, discarded bottles and other human artifact in pristine areas,” Chertoff said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. “And believe me, that is the worst thing you can do to the environment.”

To curb illegal immigration, the U.S. government plans to complete 670 miles of fencing on the southwest border by the end of 2008.

But this has drawn complaints about damaging the cross-border economy and hurting the environment. Wildlife enthusiasts fear the natural wonders of the Rio Grande Valley in Texas could be spoiled by fences and barriers and could harm some animals by cutting them off from the only source of fresh water.

Read more.

Comments 4 Comments »

Wattenberg Wipes Floor With Krikorianâ??Fallaciously
August 30, 2007

Sophistry thy name is Wattenberg. Ben, that is. A long time senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which gains its succor from corporate and conservative donors, Wattenberg specializes in using anecdotal “evidence” to subvert arguments backed with credible data.

Ben Wattenberg

I say this based on his performance at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) press briefing on the release of its latest Backgrounder study, “100 Million More: Projecting the Impact of Immigration On the US Population, 2007 to 2060″, today, August 30, at the National Press Club here in DC.

Wattenberg [send him mail] was a member of the panel discussion which included Mark Krikorian, CIS Executive Director, Steve Camarota, CIS Director of Research, and Roy Beck, Executive Director of NumbersUSA. Wattenberg slyly diverted the focus of the meeting with his often-absurd anecdotes and comparisons, which undoubtedly was his objective.

Steven Camarota

In introducing the panel, Krikorian noted that, while the US government had no stated official population policy, its actions in permitting a massive number of immigrants, both legal and illegal to enter the country since 1965, constituted an implicit population policy. As Backgrounder author Steve Camarota explained, using updated US Census Bureau projections, this will likely add 100 million more people by 2060. Significantly, that number assumes more legal alien arrivals than illegalâ??a fact which is currently being overlooked by far too many of our government officials, who have gotten the message only about illegals.

Roy Beck then questioned strongly whether adding that number of people would improve the quality of American life. Beck noted that polls taken over decades constantly showed that most Americans wanted immigration reduced.

Enter master sophist Wattenberg, whose most recent book is Fewer: How the New Demography of Depopulation Will Shape Our Future.

In a low-voiced, avuncular manner, Wattenberg started with an anecdote, saying “Plural anecdotes are data.” This should have brought hoots of derision from his press corps audience. But it didnâ??t. Then, he introduced his housekeeper, Iris, who sat directly behind me in the audience. She, Wattenberg reported, had come to America illegally years before. Her present status was unexplained. But then no one asked.

Iris is the mother of three children, presumably born here, making them American citizens (some of us think of them as “Anchor Babies” because they can bring in alien relatives). Iris’ husband has left her and she is coping as a single mother. One child, a fifteen year old boy, is now a sophomore in high school and a linebacker on the football team. He is patriotic and will be well educated and will make a great contribution to Americaâ??according to his mother’s employer, that is.

Give me a break, Mr. W. How about those illegal aliens who killed those young American college students in Newark?

Heartstring-pulling remains the default-mode gambit of the open border advocates. But, doubtless, Iris’ story will make AEI’s contributors beam with delight.

Next, Wattenberg noted that in 1790 the US population was 4 million and now is over 300 million, a “75 times growth”, and we became the greatest country in the history of the world, he said. So why should we worry if the increase from now to 2060 of only 56%?

“What’s the problem”, he went on to opine, since we have so much open space and too many of us live on the two coasts. Plenty of open spaces, he chanted.

Would he solve things by putting more people in South Dakota? Apparently. You can go there, Mr. W. Their winters are smashing! The little matter of arable land and water resources was not noted.

Then of course he played the race card, saying that every wave brought groans from nativists, about the new comers. Jews, Italians, etc. were all hated initially but made huge contributions. He added that the “Hate Du Jour” is now Mexicans, who in their service in the US military have garnered more Medals of Honor (did he mean in the current Iraq War?) than any other ethnic group. [VDARE.COM NOTE: This is a myth.]

Anytime one of the other panelists offered comments after their opening statements, Wattenberg constantly popped in with “Let me say….” For example, at one point, contesting this de facto government policy of massive immigration and non enforcement of immigration law, Wattenberg cleverly managed to position CIS’s Krikorian as being against Social Security, which could fail in the next generation, even though Camarota’s study clearly demonstrates that importing this unneeded next 100 million will very minimally add to the number in the US work force. This opening gave Wattenberg license to go on about how popular Social Security was with everyone, etc., implying that it was somehow related to the topic under discussion and that Krikorian was somehow on the lunatic fringe.

Jousting with a sophist can be very trickyâ??particularly if the facts push the sophist into a corner. N’est pas?

Wattenberg’s hobby horse issue, addressed in his book, Fewer, is fertility rates, which have declined in many countriesâ??not just in rich, western countries, but also in some poor, less-developed countries. That the planet currently adds over 70 million a year in net new persons, over 95% of them in â??developing nationsâ?, and that total world population will certainly reach 9 billion by 2100 apparently fazes him not a whit. Global warming and the other problems must not be on his radar scope. He just wants more people. Above all, he considers more immigration into the US an unmitigated joy.

Wattenberg attacked Pat Buchanan’s argument that the US is being overrun by aliens with another anecdoteâ??his form of data-gatheringâ??by citing a couple at a Waldorf Astoria cocktail party of “hundreds of people” in the hotel ballroom who, upon seeing an “immigrant couple from Mexico” enter, say, “See, we’re being swamped.” Again, the racist cardâ??and a determination, which must please his corporate donors, to ignore not only the illegal alien invasion, but also the larger threat of present levels of legal immigration.

Camarota pointed out that an intruding couple at a cocktail party hardly described the repeated arrival of millions of aliens both legally and illegally. But Wattenberg’s barrage of irrelevant comparisons continued throughout the session.

This CIS report asks Americans to weigh in on this question: Do we want an additional 100 million people here in the next 50 years?

Are they needed and who benefits from their arrival are not questions the report answers. Clearly, Wattenberg’s alliesâ??the US Chamber of Commerce, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and the various ethnic lobbiesâ??have agendas: cheaper labor and more members for their groups. Most American citizens can plainly see with their own eyes the effect of growth since WW II. It doubled our population size to 306 million and could raise it to 1 billion by 2100. Crowding is bad enough. But we ignore the vital topics of cultural and political assimilation at our peril.

Of course, neither Wattenberg nor I will be around to see that 2060 date. But I close with my own anecdote. At 77, I remain fully employed and I notice that many of my age group are similarly occupied. I have many friends doing useful work well into their 90s. (For that matter, Wattenberg is 74.)

Backgrounder author Camarota’s study assumes a labor force of ages between 15 and 64. He points out that one way to fix Social Security would be to raise the retirement age. I suspect that as automation progresses even further, old folks like me will be even more capable of doing work that companies will want to pay for. To add cheap, young, uneducated workers to our work force at poverty level wages, as Wattenberg wants, claiming that â??they do work Americans won’tâ?, simply is not smart.

Further, if pay is adequate, young Americans will be available. And those early entry-level jobs make a huge impression on their values and life outlookâ??if my case (another anecdote!) is any measure.

David Francis noted in his May 21, 2007 Christian Science Monitor article, Fuse on the ‘population bomb’ has been relit:

“Two years ago, the United Nations projected that the number of people on this planet would reach 8.9 billion by 2050. In March, the UN Population Division revised that projection to 9.2 billion. If UN demographers are right, in 43 years the world’s population will increase by 2.5 billion, up from 6.7 billion today. That growth is equivalent to how many people lived on Earth in 1950. The difference in the two UN projections, separated by only two years, is equal to today’s population of the United States”.

Hardly a “birth dearth, “Mr. Wattenberg.

Related IWD post: Immigration to Add 105 Million to U.S. Population by 2060

Comments 8 Comments »

Clock is Ticking on Las Vegas’ Water Supply

The news coming from the Southern Nevada Water Authority Thursday about the valley’s future water supply is worrisome. Unless we act quickly, there will be no water for hundreds of thousands of Las Vegas Valley residents in just three years.

Startling Water Predictions For Las Vegas

Startling new predictions about running out of water in Southern Nevada has sparked a flood of feedback from across the nation. There has been an overwhelming response from people living here as well as watching online.

It’s disturbing to see the Water Authority’s data, which shows a significant water shortage of drinking water from the Colorado River, even if all of the construction projects are completed on schedule.

Plans to pipe in groundwater from the Spring Valley are moving forward. But once operational in 2012, the pipeline will still not cover the water deficit. Las Vegas comes up short starting in 2010.

Comments 11 Comments »

“On Tuesday, July 31, I spoke about immigration and the environment to a group of homeschoolers and parents at Santa Clara University (which calls itself “the Jesuit university in Silicon Valleyâ?). The kids were participating in the Homeschool Summer Debate Workshop, a yearly affair to bring homeschoolers together to learn debating skills and mix it up some.”

An Environmentalist Talks About The Need For Patriotic Immigration Reform
August 6, 2007

Let me tell you just a bit about where I’m coming from on the subject of immigration, because it is a complex, controversial and easily misunderstood topic.

My awakening came on March 19, 1996, and was a true lightning bolt. My eyes were opened as never before as I watched the House of Representatives on C-SPAN and heard Rep. Tony Beilensen, a Democratic from southern California, speak the following words on the floor of Congress:

Middle range Census Bureau projections show our population rising to nearly 400 million by the year 2050, an increase the equivalent of adding 40 cities the size of Los Angeles. But many demographers believe it will actually be much worse, and alternative Census Bureau projections agree: if current immigration trends continue, the population will exceed half a billion by the middle of the next century.” [PDF 1 2]

My jaw literally dropped in shock and horrorâ??I had no idea the situation was that extreme. I immediately understood that all we environmentalists had worked forâ??plentiful resources, open spaces, clean air, species protectionâ??would be swept away in an overpopulated America.

I felt something like a religious calling to become active in restricting immigration in order to preserve a recognizable countryâ??now and for the future. I knew that our uniquely influential nationâ??and therefore the planetâ??was in serious danger and I had to do something in my own small way.

Domestic overpopulation does have serious environmental consequences which we see at the local level. In California, explosive population growth in the last three decades is almost entirely due to immigrants and illegal aliens, and their children.

We Californians may soon face mandatory water restriction after just one year of below-average rainfall here in the north. If there is not substantial rain in November and December, officials may call for rationing around the first of the yearâ??just a guess on my part.

In the late 1970s, California had a moderate drought, and after 2-3 years duration, severe restrictions were mandated. Residents were advised to take short showers, water their gardens with previously-used “grey” water saved from washing machines, etc and put a brick in the toilet tank to lessen by displacement the water used per flush.

Parts of Marin County ran out of water. There was a large pipe hung on the Richmond Bridge that carried water from the East Bay reservoirs to Marin.

The difference between then and now is the number of state residents. In 1977, California’s population was fewer than 23 million. Today just 30 years later, the state is home to over 38 million residents. That huge growth of 15 million people is equal to the population of the whole state in 1960 (actually 15.7m).

If the rains don’t come, Californians will have to ration water far earlier than would have been necessary before immigration became a flood. Natural resources are finite, and thereâ??s only so much that technology can do to shield us from that basic fact.

And our beautiful state continues to be rapidly paved over for a destructive level of growth. The Department of Finance predicts there will be 60 million residents in California by 2050. That’s unimaginable.

Places like California are glittering magnets to foreigners around the world, from TV, movies and word of mouth. The state has jobs where English is not required and provides many taxpayer-funded services for immigrants and illegal aliens, plus there are enormous Hispanic communities, where ethnic groups can congregate and be around those who share their language and culture.

Those attractions are considered pull factors. On the other end of the scale are the push factors that make people want to leave where they areâ??unemployment, poverty, war and ethnic strife.

These problems are all exacerbated by explosive worldwide population growthâ??which is the 800-pound gorilla in the room of public policy. The effects of over six and a half billion people living on the planet are little recognized, even though the symptoms are discussed daily in issues from climate change to the conflict in Darfur.

Global population growth today is without precedent. We are going into territory where no human society has gone before. 1960 is a year which some in this room can remember, the year when John Kennedy was elected President. In that year, the population of this planet was three billion people. In 1999, the world population odometer flipped over to 6 billionâ??an astonishing doubling in just 4 decades.

Today, that number has continued to increase. World population now is over six billion six hundred million, and still rising. Many of those people are poor and would like a better life. In reality, almost five billion people live in countries that are poorer than Mexico, where the average per capita gross domestic product is lower than the Mexican mean of $9,600.

Overpopulation is behind many wars because of conflict over increasingly scarce resources like water and food production, but you never hear that aspect reported as part of the analysis. But the phrase “resource war” will likely become more common in coming years……

To read entire article click here.

Comments 3 Comments »

Mexico’s Hypocrisy
Lou Dobbs 8-1-07

The most polluted waterway in North America flows from Mexico into the U.S.

Comments 9 Comments »

Tucson Citizen

Photographs of glaring new stadium lights along the border near Yuma, taken when President Bush visited in April, sent shudders through astronomers across southern Arizona.

The 57-foot-high, thousand-watt lights, installed to illuminate the border and help U.S. Border Patrol agents see illegal crossers at night, send unshielded glare into the night sky for miles, greatly reducing the visibility of planets, stars and other celestial bodies.

Astronomers worry that more lights could diminish research at area observatories and harm one of Arizona’s major industries.

“If we have those lights all across the border, you can kiss astronomy in southern Arizona goodbye,” said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Bob Gent, an astronomer and president of the board of the International Dark-Sky Association.

The organization was founded by Arizona astronomers in 1988 to educate the public about light pollution and reduce its effect on dark skies, wildlife and human health.

Comments 13 Comments »


Is Napolitano all talk on migrant reform?
AZ Republic
June 30, 2007

Eighteen months ago, Gov. Janet Napolitano stood before the Arizona Legislature and vowed to get tough on illegal immigration.

“We are going to get real about one of the root causes of this problem,” she said. “People come here because they want to work and employers here are willing to hire them. If we want to stop illegal immigration, we’ve got to stop the demand.”

And so the governor, having consulted her mood ring, made an election-year vow to do what eight out of 10 Arizonans had long said they wanted done. To wit: “Those who continue to intentionally hire illegal immigrants should face substantial fines and penalties.”

On Monday, we’ll find out if she meant it.

Napolitano has until then to veto a raft of bills passed by the Legislature in its final hours, including one that would put the hurt on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants and another that would make it more difficult for the courts to ignore the no-bail requirement of Proposition 100.

Given her comments of last year, one would think that she would have signed House Bill 2779, the Fair and Legal Employment Act, before the ink was dry on the thing. Instead, she’s decided to wait until the last possible minute - the beginning of a holiday week, no less - to announce what she’s going to do, fueling suspicions that there may be a weasel factor afoot.

Advocates for the 500,000 or so immigrants who are in Arizona illegally aren’t happy about the bill. Neither are the people who line their pockets with the fruits of the immigrants’ labor. For the past week, the business community has been on a mission to get Napolitano to veto the bill, claiming it will put them at a “competitive disadvantage” with other states.

Somehow, I suspect they’ll survive. I’d feel their pain more keenly had they not for years been using the same old arguments to head off any attempt to make them obey the law: Wait for the feds to act. Even after Thursday’s collapse of immigration reform, they were singing the same old song.

“We’re encouraged by the substantial advances made during the Senate debate,” said Sheridan Bailey, head of Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform. “As a result, the nation is closer to a bipartisan solution to the immigration crisis.”

Yeah, in 2009 . . . maybe.

The bill on Napolitano’s desk would go after the lure that leads people to sneak across the border now: jobs. And though business owners may be gasping into paper bags over the prospect of having to follow the law, all it requires is that they make an effort to find out if the people they’re hiring are here legally.

That shouldn’t be so horrifying. Unless, of course, they really don’t want to know.

Sen. Ken Cheuvront doesn’t see a problem. The Phoenix Democrat voted for the bill and he owns a restaurant. “Democrats have been saying for a long time you can’t continually blame the immigrant, that you also have to hold employers accountable,” he said. “This bill does that.”

Which is why Napolitano will sign it.

That and because last year, she chastised the Republican Legislature for sending her a bill that was a joke. “Weak and ineffective,” I think she called it, while noting her own repeated calls for “meaningful employer sanctions.”

And because in the wake of this week’s Senate vote, it would be political suicide to veto it and Napolitano isn’t the suicidal type.

She’ll sign it and hope that in the ensuing high fives and celebration, nobody will notice what she does about Prop. 100.

Comments 7 Comments »

Washington Post

U.S. Border Patrol agents seeking to secure the nation’s border in some of the country’s most pristine national forests are being targeted by illegal aliens, who are using intentionally set fires to burn agents out of observation posts and patrol routes.

The wildfires also have resulted in the destruction of valuable natural and cultural resources in the National Forest System and pose an ongoing threat to visitors, residents and responding firefighters, according to federal law enforcement authorities and others.

In the Coronado National Forest in Arizona, with 60 miles of land along the U.S.-Mexico border, U.S. Forest Service firefighters sent in to battle fires or clear wild land fire areas are required to be escorted by armed law enforcement officers.

Armed smugglers of aliens and drugs have walked through the middle of active firefighting operations, the authorities said.

Read more.

Comments 10 Comments »

A totally one sided piece of pro illegal journalism. It won’t work! It will cost too much! We don’t want it here! Seems the author couldn’t find one person in this entire border town who was in favor of these towers. I wonder how hard she looked? GuardDog

“I can’t blame the little guys who are coming in. They get taken advantage of. The way I see it, it’s another slave trade,” said rancher Rob Kasulaitis, who spends hours collecting trash and fixing fences on his property, which is heavily traveled by illegal immigrants. “Congress has to get off its dead end to let these people in, have them checked carefully, work and go home. . . . I want order.”

Mary Scott is among many locals opposed to a 98-foot-high tower on the outskirts of Arivaca, Ariz., near the Mexican border. Nine such towers are intended to reduce illegal crossings. “It’s like having an unwanted family member in your life all the time,” one town resident said.

For Residents of Arizona Border Town, Towers Are Unwelcome Eyes in the Sky
Washington Post
June 10, 2007

Click here to watch a local news video of this story.

ARIVACA, Ariz. — The document arrived at the library one sleepy Saturday morning, without warning and without explanation. The librarian recalled that the messenger simply said: “This is sensitive.”

It turned out to be much more than that to this quirky desert community of 2,500 residents, who learned from an environmental assessment study that they were in the cross hairs of the Bush administration’s high-tech plan to use a “virtual fence” to stop illegal immigration.

One of nine 98-foot towers, equipped with long-range cameras, radar and night vision, has been erected on the outskirts of town. And most residents — iconoclasts who prize this unincorporated patch of desert for its isolation and lack of formal government — don’t like it one bit.

“It’s so close . . . that we feel like we’re under the scope of the cameras and the radar units and the night-vision cameras, and that’s troubling to the people here,” said Roger Beal, owner of Arivaca Mercantile, the town’s only grocery store. “It’s like having an unwanted family member in your life all the time.”

A simplified version of this technology is already in use in places along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico. But for the people of Arivaca, the towers represent one more sign of the militarization of the border, which is 11 miles south of town. Residents share the roads with hundreds of Border Patrol agents in sport-utility vehicles and National Guard troops in Humvees. Buses packed with armed guards and illegal immigrants rumble through. Temporary Border Patrol checkpoints where officers stop vehicles and ask people about their citizenship are often set up on highways outside of town, and a permanent checkpoint is under discussion.

The towers, many Arivaca residents contend, will not solve the economic, social and political problems behind illegal immigration.

“I can’t blame the little guys who are coming in. They get taken advantage of. The way I see it, it’s another slave trade,” said rancher Rob Kasulaitis, who spends hours collecting trash and fixing fences on his property, which is heavily traveled by illegal immigrants. “Congress has to get off its dead end to let these people in, have them checked carefully, work and go home. . . . I want order.”


When residents in Arivaca learned in April that a tower would be erected nearby, they had four days to comment on the environmental assessment. But on two of those days, the library was closed and the document was unavailable for viewing. The document did not even mention Arivaca, instead citing the tiny town of Sasabe, a port of entry right on the border, as the only significant community in the area of the nine proposed towers.

The towers, the assessment concluded, would have “no significant impact” on the land, residents, wildlife or vegetation, and “in contrast . . . will increase human safety in the area and as a result, more citizens and businesses may be attracted to the vicinity.”

A protest organized by residents of Arivaca prompted two recent meetings with Border Patrol and Boeing officials. Residents expressed concerns about the potential for invasion of their privacy and asked about the effect of the radar on things such as the town’s wireless Internet system and the local populations of bats and honeybees.

“Towers will not lead to a viable solution to the problems of illegal immigration and will negatively impact desert life,” said local artist C Hues, who helped organize the protest……

Comments 13 Comments »

Click to enlarge.


Tijuana — U.S. plans to expand and fortify fencing along the southwest border will harm animal species and key ecosystems shared by the United States and Mexico, scholars and environmentalists from both countries said yesterday.

The beefed-up barricades will cut off natural cross-border corridors for endangered species, such as the jaguar, black bear and puma, according to participants of a two-day meeting in Tijuana held at the Colegio de la Frontera Norte, or COLEF, a Mexican government think tank.

â??There will be a barrier dividing what is actually a continuum of ecosystems,â? said Rurik List, a conservation biologist at the Mexican National Autonomous University, or UNAM.

â??Animals that now can pass beneath or above the fence â??won’t be able to pass from one side to another,â? he said.

Read more

Comments 13 Comments »

â?¢ Court ruling allows U.S. authorities to stop up the cracks in All-American Canal
â?¢ San Diego County Water Authority: Relining project will save water lost in leaky bed
â?¢ Mexicans fear project will hurt wetland environment, leave farmers high and dry
â?¢ Tensions over water have long simmered on the U.S.-Mexico border

U.S. canal project raises tension on Mexico border
April 25, 2007

HECHICERA, Mexico (Reuters) — For decades, Mexican farmers and U.S. consumers have shared water from one of the world’s largest irrigation canals running along part of the parched California-Mexico border.

But a court decision that allows U.S. authorities to stop up the cracks and save water for thirsty farms and sprawling subdivisions in Southern California is raising tensions in the borderlands.

This month’s ruling by a court in San Francisco approved a plan to reline part of the All-American Canal with concrete, stopping accidental runoff from the waterway that has benefited Mexican farmers since it opened in 1942.

The court ordered the refurbishment of around a quarter of the 82-mile (132-kilometer) conduit to proceed “without delay” in an overhaul that is set to take up to two years to complete at a cost of some $250 million.

The San Diego County Water Authority says the project is needed to recover some 22 billion gallons (83.5 million cubic meters) of water lost through the leaky canal bed each year that local consumers in the water-strapped area have already been billed for.

Mexican authorities, environmentalists and farmers are furious at the planned relining, which they say could harm a fragile wetland environment and leave many villages in the Mexicali Valley south of the border high and dry.

“When they reline the canal, this area will dry out completely,” said farmer Alfredo Mendez, pointing to the green wheat fields cut through with irrigation channels near Hechicera village just south of the waterway. “A lot of people are going to get hurt,” he added.

Tensions over water have long simmered on the sun-baked U.S.-Mexico border, where farmers and city dwellers on either side of the 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) line compete for a scarce commodity.

To the east, consumers spar for the murky waters of the Rio Grande as it flows to the Gulf of Mexico. In the west they vie for the Colorado River, which is reduced to barely a trickle by the time it reaches its delta in the Sea of Cortez in Mexico.

The project to reline the canal — which carries water from the Colorado — was opposed by a Mexican community group and two U.S. environmental organizations presenting a complex array of objections, including claims of violations of U.S. laws such as the Endangered Species Act.

City Hall in the Baja California state capital, Mexicali, has agreed to bankroll a three-million-peso ($270,000) war chest to continue to fight the relining……

To read entire article click here.

Comments 10 Comments »

earth day

“From the conservationist view, increased legal immigration is just as bad as millions of illegals streaming through open borders. The optimal number of immigrants vis a vis environmental concerns is: zero.

ZERO. No more, nix, nada. After bingeing on population growth for decades, America needs a diet. We are already hugely overpopulated, in terms of sustaining natural resources for our own use and that of future generations. Let’s give it a rest. “

â??Redwoods Or Immigrants?â? Thatâ??s Americaâ??s Choice On Earth Day 2007
April 21, 2007

But for genuine environmentalists, April truly is the cruelest month. So many of those who claim to care about the health of the planet are stuck in an ideology that ignores the obvious: As Jacques Cousteau observed: “Population growth is the primary source of environmental damage.”

And the elected officials most insistent that action be taken on climate change are often the same ones who want to welcome unlimited foreigners to the country with the largest environmental footprint: the U.S.

The signs are everywhere that the United States is fullâ??and then some.

* In Northern California, Santa Cruz and San Francisco are already under an alert to cut down on water use, after just one winter of sub-average rainfall.

* Arizona has an arid climate (hence the name), but it has recently received even less-than-normal rain. The vital reservoir Lake Powell fell by nearly 80 feet as of 2003 and is now at its lowest level since it was filled in 1980. A recent Tucson headline read Water crisis possible here within 3 years, because spring runoff into Lake Powell has been below normal for 9 of the past 11 years. The fire season will start earlier this year and ranchers will have less water for stock. Tucson may face water restrictions by 2010. Yet Arizona is the fastest growing state in terms of population growth.

And even if we could solve the technical problems presented by immigrationâ??what about the amenity issue? Do we really want the sprawl?

One “solution” to water shortfall: recycling, a strategy in the pipeline of some southern California communities. But a serious drawback is the health concern that residual drugs and other undesired substances may remain after treatment. Even purified sewage may contain common contaminants like detergents, fragrances, caffeine, estrogen and painkillers.

Droughts come and go. They are a normal part of nature. But when humans overpopulate a dry region like Arizona and expect to have lush greenery, at some point the supply of water is not going to keep up with the demand. If the “permanent drought” predicted for the Southwest is for real, then importing additional tens of millions of people over the next few decades is terrible public policyâ??with predictable results.

Another disturbing marker: the U.S. is now a food importer after being a food exporter for many years. The U.S. has been the food supplier to the world in times of starvationâ??but farmland is now being lost to soil degradation and development.

Exploding population growth, whether from legal or illegal immigration, is causing some of America’s best farmland to be paved over. A study in California found roughly 26 acres of farmland were removed from production each day between 2002 and 2004.

In just two years, more than 18,800 acres of farmland in several San Joaquin Valley counties became subdivisions, shopping malls or other developments, setting a new state record for loss of farmland, according to newly released state data. A healthy real estate and construction market spurred farmers in Fresno, Kings, Madera, Tulare and Merced counties to sell 18,801 acres between June 2002 and June 2004. [San Joaquin Farmland Disappearing At Record Rate Associated Press, February14, 2007]



Group Calls for Population Control to Stop Global Warming
Cyber Cast News Service
April 18, 2007

Ahead of Earth Day on Sunday, an advocacy group warned that the United States is ignoring “the most crucial factor in reducing global warming” — population control.

“Human population growth is the paramount environmental issue,” Ric Oberlink, a spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, told Cybercast News Service.

“Global warming is a very serious problem, but it is a subset of the overpopulation problem,” he said.

Oberlink argued that an increase in the emission of “greenhouse gases” — carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for climate change — is a result of human activity, “like most environmental problems.”

Although one part of the equation is what people do, he said, the other part is how many there are.

“If we had half as many people, we wouldn’t have much of a climatic warming problem,” argued Oberlink.

“Many have noted the disproportionate impact of America on greenhouse emissions and rightly called for reduced emissions. But it’s hypocritical to say that the problem is that Americans consume too much and then say it doesn’t matter how many Americans there are.”

According to the population group, Americans are “by far the most voracious consumers and the greatest producers of greenhouse gases per capita of any nation on earth.”

And the U.S. population, it says, “has been doubling every 40 years and is headed for one billion before the end of this century.”…..

To read entire article click here.

Comments 5 Comments »

Graphic representation depicting the deplorable state our planet is in and what that means for our future. Part 2 directly relates to immigration. An eye opener for sure. GuardDog

World In Crisis [Part 1]

World In Crisis [Part 2]

Comments 12 Comments »


The Next Added 100 Million Americans, Part 9
News With Views

Crossing our Agricultural Rubicon

In 49 B.C., Julius Caesar defied the Roman senate by crossing the Rubicon River to wage civil war against another Roman, Pompey the Great. By crossing the Rubicon, Caesar made a decision whereby he could not turn back.

Today, â??Crossing the Rubiconâ? means no way to change, repair or undo your destiny. Yes, Caesar conquered Pompey, but the Roman senate, along with Brutus, stabbed Caesar to death.

If President Bush signs an amnesty or bill similar to S.B. 2611, he casts the dye; he crosses the Rubicon of Americaâ??s death knell. Bush ensures 100 million more people added to our country that explodes our nation to 400 million in the next 34 years on our way to a half billion. Once manifested, we will not be able to turn back.

In a crystal clear exposeâ??, â??Crossing the Agricultural Rubiconâ?, Dr. John Tanton, Spring 2005, The Social Contract Quarterly, presented harsh realities as to Americaâ??s food supply.

â??We export immense quantities of corn, wheat, soybeans, etc., but much of this crop is fed to animals or processed into food that we then re-import as higher-value agricultural products,â? Tanton said. â??It is the dollar value of imports that is projected to be equal to exports for 2005.â?

He continued, â??The U.S. consumes two-thirds of its own grown food. As population grows, more agricultural land will be converted to non-agricultural usesâ??roads, hospitals, schools, parking lots, shopping malls and housing projects. Our expanding population will cause us to import more food. The net result will be the gradual decline of our agricultural trade surpluses. We are already in energy deficit as we import 12 million of the 20 millions barrels of oil we burn each day. Now we have a diminishing agricultural exchange surplus with which to buy fuel to facilitate that very agriculture.â?

The United States feeds the world, but as Tanton exposes in his excellent graphs and charts, weâ??re already importing as much as weâ??re exporting: â??We wonâ??t feed people around the world much longer,â? Tanton said.

For example, Coloradoâ??s population will add 1.5 million by 2022. That increase means, according to the Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post, that 3.1 million acres of prime farm land suffer development into homes, roads, malls, schools and other development.

Whatever your population expansion in your state, commensurate farm acreage will be destroyed. For example, by 2050, Texas will grow from 21 million to 48.1 million, which means millions of acres of land will be taken out of farming for development. No one knows the disaster that awaits them as to water usage. â??Crossing the Rubiconâ? via farmland destruction brings yours and all states closer to Caesarâ??s fate……

To read entire article click here.

Comments 2 Comments »

“How fast is our population growing? According to Carrying Capacity Network, the U.S. population is growing at 1.1 percent per year which means that our current population will double in 65 years. In 2072, the U.S. population will reach 600 million and will be close to one billion in 2100.”

A Disgusted Democrat Says Her Party Must Be Pressed On Population
By Linda Thom
January 24, 2007

In his State of-the-Union address, President Bush proposed various environmental-energy initiatives that received enthusiastic applause from Democrats and Republicans alike. But, regardless of how one feels about the taxation issue or renewable energy sources, without a reduction in consumption, this legislation is quite pointless.

Helping twelve million (or twenty) illegal aliens to go homeâ??now that would reduce consumption. Blaming oil companies and U.S. auto manufacturers for producing gas-guzzling vehiclesâ??mere political rhetoric.

This Democratic writer would never suggest that Americans consume resources without regard to the environmental consequences. Nevertheless, American per capita consumption cannot be reduced without reducing the capitae. Immigrants are people. The more people there are, then the more consumption. Immigrants do not move to America to reduce their consumption.

When polled about their immigration preferences, most Americans voice discontent about the current situation. But among the least-cited reasons for concern: immigration-induced growth in Americaâ??s population, according to a poll sponsored by the Center for Immigration Studies. However, when told that the U.S. population will increase by 100 million in the next 50 years if immigration is not checked, 64 percent of respondents expressed shock. [The Publicâ??s View of Immigration, November 2006.]


According to the Census Bureau, the U.S. population reached 300 million last October. (Many believe the U.S. actually achieved that number some time ago.) Either way, things are getting very crowded and a future with our current, immigration-driven population growth will only make things worse.

How fast is our population growing? According to Carrying Capacity Network, the U.S. population is growing at 1.1 percent per year which means that our current population will double in 65 years. In 2072, the U.S. population will reach 600 million and will be close to one billion in 2100……

Comments 15 Comments »

E-mail It