Opinion: How Pragmatism Brings Us Back to Nature 
By Bruce Missig, Board Member, Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society 

We are starting a new year with a new Administration that is more aligned with the thoughts and feelings of most of the population of the U.S. and the world about climate change. It is time we take hold of our future. There are more people who believe in environmental conservation than do not (1). With the proper information and a willingness to change, we can prove once again that many small actions add up to big change for the sustainability of the planet. We have to shift our mindsets and accept the consequential toll of climate change. As Johann Wolfgang von Goethe said in 1826, “There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.” 
 
And there is a difference between ignorance and stupidity. Being ignorant is to make an actionable choice to deny the effects of climate change; stupidity, is to disregard scientific findings and further, fail to apply deductive reasoning to imagine possible shared, sustainable futures. (2)
 
We have to wake up and face the facts that we control the future and it is only us who can make a difference. We created the problem and we have an obligation to fix it. Remember your science: nature never loses, it has adapted to thrive over and over again to catastrophic disruptions during the last 4.5 billion years. If you decide not to take action for yourself, take action for your children, your grandchildren and our children’s children’s children.
 
When I was growing up there was a comedy album called, “Everything You Know Is Wrong'' - which seems to be very true. As we learn more about science and how nature works, a lot of what we were taught became outdated, and eventually, time strips away more and more of our misunderstandings. With today's technology and in the nanoseconds required to disperse information, each of us needs to be able to make good decisions informed by researching what is true and what is false. If you are looking only at the far right or the far left for answers you will most likely be getting information that only fits a polarized narrative. 
 
Let’s get back to science, math, and medicine and follow what the experts are telling us, rather than being influenced by the often unfounded polarized beliefs of groups that may be driven by extreme philosophies. If the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) or the military tells you that climate change is real, believe them! NASA professionals are dedicated scientists - ‘King of the Nerds’ - and they know their stuff! Learn how to decipher the media ads you may be watching or hearing. A large percentage of media today is shaped by masters of spin who manipulate statistics and the words they say. Beware of such statements as, “No. 1”, “clinically proven ingredients”, “9 out of 10 doctors…” and so on. 
 
Scientifically based statistics and proof need to be provided in simple to understand language if climate change and its effects on the human species is going to be understood by the public. Remember, unless you are provided with the explicit context of quoted statistics, you cannot know the parameters of what is being claimed and may need to further research the claim at credible sources yourself. 
 
You may ask, “What is this author ranting about and what is his point?” The point is there is a lot of information in the media representing every degree of truth and falsity, but with the right information we can make informed decisions for best outcomes. Remember most companies want to make money and are working in their own best interest, not the individual’s. 
 
It is healthier to live following the examples of nature and as a case in point, lemons are a great natural oil and calcium cleaner. Wouldn’t you rather have fields of lemons - grown to organic, sustainable farming standards - producing fruit and giving off oxygen instead of tearing up the planet to find toxic chemicals to make cleaners? 
 
Hopefully with the soon to be rolled out Junior Guardians of Nature program and other activities hosted by Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society (WCAS), we will be able to explore exactly how and why the planet is in a symbiotic relationship with everything on it. We need everything on this planet to thrive, but to put something out of whack in our natural ecosystems causes unmanageable problems all the way up - and down - the chain of living organisms. 

Download: Opinion: How Pragmatism Brings Us Back to Nature (PDF)​

Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society Policy on Rodenticides

In order to keep birds of prey, our pets, and wildlife safe, Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society advises the use of covered snap traps for rodent control instead of rodenticide, a poison used to kill rodents. A rodent that has been exposed to rodenticide does not immediately die and may become prey to non-target wildlife, which typically results in the death of that animal. Killing animals that prey on rodents only perpetuates the rodent population problem which then requires further human intervention.

Covered snap traps, versus open snap traps, are recommended as they are more likely to be inaccessible to non-target wildlife, pets, and children. Birds do not generally forage in holes in or near the ground and, therefore, would not be attracted to a baited, covered snap trap. 

The Cuyahoga County Board of Health offers additional rodent control advice atwww.ccbh.net/rodent-control-2, specifically:

• Properly store all garbage in sturdy containers with tight-fitting lids. In commercial settings, dumpster lids must be kept closed and drain holes must be screened or sealed.
• Store dog food and other pet food in secure containers, preferably indoors. Remove dog feces from your property as frequently as possible.
•  Do not place food for birds, squirrels, etc. directly on the ground. Utilize bird feeders that minimize the spillage of seed onto the ground.
• Turn compost piles regularly and do not compost food products, such as meat, bones, fats, and oils.
• Eliminate needless debris in your yard.
• Elevate firewood at least 18 inches off of the ground.
• Seal off possible routes of entry to your home or garage. A rat can gain entry through an opening as small as 1/2 inch.

Following these steps to reduce the presence of rodents around your property in combination with using covered snap traps for additional rodent control is the recommended rodent management plan to protect non-target wildlife.

Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation (LEEDCo), an Ohio company in partnership with Norwegian firm Fred Olsen Renewables, is developing a plan for six wind turbines on Lake Erie, approximately seven miles from shore, northeast of Cleveland. Green Energy, good for the environment, who could complain? Well, representatives of the fishing, travel and tourism industry who count on the $15.1 billion in annual tourism spending to support 128,000 jobs and generate nearly $2 billion in taxes through clean water and lake access, along with the birding community do. Everybody agrees Lake Erie is a national treasure. “Can you imagine wind turbines in the Grand Canyon?” they say and filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Washington, DC to stop or modify it. ​

Who wins? Who knows, that’s why we have lawsuits. The birder/travel and tourism coalition asserts that the federal agencies’ review and evaluation, primarily the Department of Energy, conducted inadequate environmental review of Icebreaker, violating federal environmental laws, the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). 

In December 2019, the Black Swamp Bird Observatory of Ohio (BSBO) and the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), a national non-profit organization based in Virginia, sued the US Department of Energy and the Army Corps of Engineers, asserting they failed to develop an Environmental Impact Statement as required by NEPA. The bird groups, along with the Lake Erie Marine Trades Association, Lake Erie Foundation, Michigan Boating Industries Association and others ask the Court to set aside the DOE decision until adequate evaluation is completed. Rather than require an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) to evaluate the Icebreaker Project, DOE concluded an EIS was unnecessary and reviewed Icebreaker using the less rigorous Environmental Assessment (“EA”). Under the EA analysis, DOE concluded that Icebreaker would have no significant environmental impact. During the DOE review process, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”) had urged DOE to develop a full EIS in evaluating Icebreaker and that some of the data utilized was flawed, but those comments were set aside. FWS also noted the DOE Draft EA failed to meaningfully discuss any alternatives other than the proposed action and the no-action alternative, and therefore did not analyze other potential solutions.  
 
FWS also criticized the Draft EA’s failure to meaningfully discuss the project’s cumulative impacts, particularly considering the explicit goal of creating more commercial wind energy in the Great Lakes. “This reasonable outcome” is neither analyzed nor anticipated by the cumulative impacts section of the Draft EA. FWS was critical of the decision-making process, emphasized that the Icebreaker Project is likely to “establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration.”  The Project will be the “first installation of offshore wind anywhere in the Great Lakes, and likely only the second offshore wind facility in the western hemisphere” and that LEEDCo’s “ultimate intent is to expand from an initial 20-30 megawatt demonstration project to a 1,000 MW build out” in the near future. FWS stressed that “an EA is inadequate to fully address the potentially significant, precedent setting aspects of this project.” The lawsuit asserts further that while the full EIS was warranted, even under the minimal EA investigation, the review fails to meet the NEPA requirement to review and consider less impactful alternatives. 
 
As for LEEDCo, they say they are blameless and have done everything asked of them and as for future wind turbines, they would each need their own rigorous approval process. At this point, LEEDCo is pursuing an Icebreaker project of six turbines, nothing more. They also point to an October 2019 grant from DOE to deploy innovative sensor technology to track bird activity near the turbines, splitting $10 million with the University of Maine.
 
ABC points out that the DOE approval process did not adequately consider potential impacts on birds, especially those deemed “Threatened” or “Endangered” under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), and needlessly places birds at risk in a globally important bird habitat. ABC asserts Icebreaker will impair bird surveillance for scientific, recreational, as well as aesthetic benefits and establish a low threshold of review that will increase the risk that other wind power projects will be constructed elsewhere in major migratory bird corridors and nesting areas of ESA-listed protected birds.
 
Casual observers might be tempted to dismiss this criticism from bird groups as fringe activity, but the nonprofit Black Swamp Bird Observatory (“BSBO”) notes its event, a ten day birding festival in May, “The Biggest Week in American Birding,” which, in 2019 alone, drew 90,000 birders from all 50 states and 52 countries to visit the area to watch birds, spending more than $40 million in the area from mid-April to mid-May. So much for fringe activity. 
 
What’s the Law Say?
 
The lawsuit cites the violation of three federal laws: The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA); The Clean Water Act (CWA); and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Here’s an abbreviation of what the laws require:  ​
 
National Environmental Protection Act requires federal agencies to prepare a “detailed statement,” an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for all “major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment,” describing “the environmental impact of the proposed action,” “the adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided, and “alternatives to the proposed action.” The review of alternatives is part of the Icebreaker debate. NEPA requires that, in evaluating the alternatives of a proposed action, agencies take a “hard look” at the effects of the proposed action as compared to all reasonable alternatives. The alternatives under the DOE review were “go” or “no go,” without consideration of less harsh alternatives. In determining whether an EIS is required, an agency must consider whether the proposed action has a “significant” effect on the human environment. The “significance” determination is based on numerous factors, but includes “[t]he degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects.”  
 
The Clean Water Act is designed to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters,” and generally prohibits the discharge of pollutants, including dredged and fill material, into the waters of the US unless authorized by a permit, issued by the Army Corps of Engineers. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so, the conditions under which it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of this general balancing process,” including “conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, . . . fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, . . . water quality, energy needs, safety, . . . and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people.” 
 
The Administrative Procedures Act requires that a reviewing court “shall” set aside agency actions, findings, or conclusions when they are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, or when they are adopted “without observance of procedure required by law.” The standard for “arbitrary” and “capricious” is generally if the agency “relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem.”  
 
How Will This End? 
 
That’s what court cases are all about. The birder/tourism coalition says Icebreaker is sited directly in the heart of the Lake Erie Central Basin Important Bird Area, a designated Global Important Bird Area, adjacent to the Cleveland Lakefront Important Bird Area and the Lake Erie Western Basin Important Bird Area. The Central Basin and Cleveland Lakefront Areas were designated by the global organization due to the significant concentrations of various waterfowl, as well as migrating land birds. Despite the importance of the area, the coalition asserts the DOE approval process provided inadequate environmental review contrary to the environmental and procedural laws and needs to stop and start over. LEEDCo says they’ve done everything required of them and they have gotten approvals from the Ohio and federal regulators, with only the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) approval remaining. An OPSB staff investigation report, recommending approval of the LEEDCo application, was filed in July 2018. The LEEDCo application is listed as pending on the OPSB agenda, with no date set for consideration. OPSB approval will be challenged by the coalition as well.   The Icebreaker proceedings, in court, at the Ohio Power Siting Board and the all-important court pf public opinion, are being closely monitored elsewhere in the Great Lakes. A full-scale wind project of 100 to 200 turbines in Lake Michigan was proposed and subsequently abandoned. Following a proposal for 50 turbines in Lake Erie near Buffalo, a New York state lawmaker introduced legislation to establish a moratorium on wind turbines in any freshwater body within New York boundaries. Stay tuned! 

Kevin Cronin is a Cleveland attorney in private practice. He worked for a decade for the United States Congress for House and Senate members (on budget, tax, trade, regulated industries and other economic issues), as a Counsel for an auditing committee and as Associate staff of the House Budget Committee. Twice honored for volunteerism by non-profit Green Energy Ohio, he is currently the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association, Vice Chair of the Environment/Energy Subcommittee, and while Cronin is a chair of Environment/Energy Subcommittee of Cleveland Metropolitan Association, this writing and review represents his own views. These comments and writing are his own and do not represent the views of CMBA. 

Kevin Cronin is a Cleveland attorney, largely practicing with kids and troubled families in Juvenile Court. He is also currently serving as Vice Chair of the Environment/Energy Subcommittee, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association.  Active in Cleveland theater and cycling advocacy, he helped create and lead non-profit Bike Cleveland. He is League Cycling Instructor, certified by the national nonprofit League of American Bicyclists. A graduate of Columbia University and University of Wisconsin Law School, prior to returning home to Cleveland, he worked for a decade in Washington, DC as legislative aide to various House and Senate members (Senators Dick Durbin of IL and Dianne Feinstein of CA) and as a counsel to a congressional committee, generally focusing on budget laws and process and economics/regulatory issues. While working for Congress, he also taught at Catholic University, Master's Program in Congressional Studies.  ​

Kevin Cronin, Attorney at Law
The Brown Hoist Building
4403 Saint Clair Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44103-1125
kevincronin.us
League of American Bicyclists -- League Certified Bicycling Instructor (LCI) #1448
Ph: 216.377.0615 or 216.374.7578
Fx:  216.881.3928 ​

Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society (WCAS) Policy: Lake Erie Icebreaker Wind Power Project

Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society (WCAS) supports the lawsuit filed by American Bird Conservancy and Black Swamp Bird Observatory in Ohio.

In the case of the Icebreaker wind farm project in Lake Erie, it does not appear proper siting took place as the project developers, the Energy Department and Army Corps of Engineers, seem to have allegedly failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Water Act. The developers neglected to properly analyze the environmental impacts of the project nor did they look for alternate, safer sites for wildlife.

WCAS supports National Audubon Society’s position on wind power, and that is wind power is a necessary renewable energy source that is an alternative to fossil fuels, the primary cause of climate change. As was highlighted in National Audubon Society’s recent climate report, “Survival by Degrees,” two-thirds of North American birds are at risk of extinction due to climate change. The threat of climate change to birds is greater than the risks posed by wind turbines; however, wind development projects should be properly sited to minimize harm to birds and habitat.

Please see National Audubon Society’s Position on Wind Power and WCAS Wind Policy for more information.

- Board, Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society

The alternative to balloon releases, recommended by WCAS, is to plant native plants that are wildlife friendly, such as trees that provide habitat, shrubs that provide food (flowers, fruits or seeds) or flowering perennials that are good for pollinators (insects and hummingbirds). These would be a lasting legacy as a remembrance to a loved one, would provide a natural way to celebrate as the plants mature, and enhance a neighborhood, school yard or park. 

WCAS hopes that the information presented will be considered and help the environment in a small, but significant way. ​

From Petition to Law May 28, 2019: Single Use Plastic Bag Ban

Fran Mentch, Volunteer Water Co-Chairman of the Northeast Ohio Sierra Club Invites YOU to Be a Part of History and Celebration!

The public is invited Tues May 28th at 5:00 pm to attend the Cleveland Cuyahoga County City Council Meeting when legislation is passed to ban single-use plastic bags in Cuyahoga County.

​Attendees will be able to speak for a short period and witness this historic legislation.

Free parking is available in the garage on Prospect across from E. 9th St Cuyahoga County Administration Building. At the meeting ask to get your ticket validated.

​Western Cuyahoga Audubon is a chapter of the National Audubon Society based in Cuyahoga County in Northern Ohio, USA. WCAS seeks to connect and educate the public and conserve natural habitats for the sustainability of all bird species.

​Make A Donation to Western Cuyahoga Audubon. Your gifts guarantee chapter activities, programs and research continues to reach members and connect birding conservationists around the world. Use our safe and secure PayPal payment button below to make a donation of any amount you choose. All donations are gratefully received.

REPORTING: Single Use Plastic Bags Cuyahoga County May 2019 with Fran Mentch, Volunteer Water Co-Chair, Northeast Ohio Sierra Club.

On May 28, 2019 Cuyahoga County Council will likely turn into law a ban on single use plastic bags as a means to transport purchased items in Cuyahoga County.

This action is to address environmental public health for us and future generations. The ban will encourage recyclable bag use.

​At Wendy Park, Cleveland, Ohio Saturday, May 11, 2019.

Make A Donation to Western Cuyahoga Audubon. Your gifts guarantee chapter activities, programs and research continues to reach members and connect birding conservationists around the world. Use our safe and secure PayPal payment button below to make a donation of any amount you choose. All donations are gratefully received.

The Political Discourse of Plastics Pollution

The political discourse, on the ideological spectrum, about keeping plastics out of the environment, about legislating against plastics bags or whatever, it usually comes down to an argument over money and jobs.

And in many of these issues, it’s very complicated. To say where the money comes from, where it goes, how long it stays, who it ends up benefiting, all those things are extremely complicated.

We know from political science, voters look for a short-cut. They look for a heuristic. I don’t want to get all this complicated, I want something really easy. So the heuristic, is money and jobs. It’s taxes and jobs.

Well, that is pulled into the political discourse about plastics too.

It's All About Jobs and Money

They (the public) will say, “People are working. They have a job making plastics or whatever it is. The taxes from those jobs are helping everybody.” They’ll say, “If you pull the plastics out of the environment, you’re removing jobs.”

Well, again you have to dig deeper. It is somebody’s job but behind that is a large manufacturing enterprise. They have lobbyists and they are protecting their self-interests. Corporations protect their self-interests as we all do individually. That is part of the discourse.

However, it is more complicated that just somebody losing a job. You don’t know if those people could find another job. Will not the shift in thinking and the use of plastics have impact, they won’t disappear, but they will in fact shift. You need to think about that as a consideration.

It is complicated, but it is true that shift in energy in general, that jobs went from one sector to another and now there are all these ‘green’ jobs.

You don’t know how this would act out in the environment, either. If you own a grocery store and you spend less money on purchasing plastic bags and in dealing with them, you may in fact think I’m going to improve the quality of the experience of my customer. I might hire somebody to help facilitate packing bags, or all of these other things we look for quality and pleasure in our life.

So that’s part of the discourse of money and jobs. If you follow that, you’ll see it doesn’t always turn out the way that the argument is sold. I’ve lived through that several times as an activist and money and jobs usually shift one place to the other.

Nanny Government?

The other part of the political discourse is a “nanny government”. The government shouldn’t have to be involved in telling people, getting that involved in people’s lives. So there’s an ideological stance also. It’s just get the government out of our lives, the market will solve the problem.

And in many ways that is true, including the plastics. The most effective way to change people’s behavior is to, in fact, legislate against it. “It’s going to cost you ten cents if you use a plastic bag.” People will bring reusable plastic bags and will use less bags.

Let the Market Solve The Problem!

Back to this, “the market will solve all the problems,” in truth, the market is leading this argument on plastics. For over a decade, you can’t get bags from Costco, if you get them from Aldi’s or Save-a-Lot, they charge you. I think they are not even available. I don’t know what goes on with Whole Foods but it’s the same type of thing where the private sector is saying, “We don’t want to provide plastic bags for free because is something’s free it gets wasted, right?

People are willing to bring their own or pay for bags. So, the private sector is really leading in this way. So that’s another way to look at this on the ideological spectrum.

What’s going on locally, legislatively? The local is so important! People are much more interested in and bombarded with what goes on on the Federal level and even on the state level.

But really what impacts your life, maybe it’s not as interesting or sexy, what really impacts your life is local issues, local legislation.

Photos: Whiskey Island & Wendy Park, 2800 Whiskey Island Drive, Cleveland, OH 44102.

Make A Donation to Western Cuyahoga Audubon. Your gifts guarantee chapter activities, programs and research continues to reach members and connect birding conservationists around the world. Use our safe and secure PayPal payment button below to make a donation of any amount you choose. All donations are gratefully received.