Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PLANNED ARMY EXPANSION WILL INCREASE POLLUTION

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 05:53 PM
Original message
PLANNED ARMY EXPANSION WILL INCREASE POLLUTION
The military already has huge parcels of land in the American West, and they have not proven themselves to be more than mediocre stewards of the land, and the actions they take on 'their' Land have ramifications for many others. And just because they're the military doesn't, to me, mean they should get a hall pass on environmental concerns. In fact, the Pentagon itself recognizes that global warming and climate change is one of the largest problems facing us and one that military had better learn how to deal with.
--###--

original-peer

For Immediate Release: September 19, 2007
Contact: Carol Goldberg (202) 265-7337

PLANNED ARMY EXPANSION WILL INCREASE POLLUTION

Air, Water, Traffic, Noise, Wildlife and Energy Impacts Seen for Major Force Hike

Tucson — The U.S. Army foresees potentially significant adverse environmental consequences from its five-year expansion plan for bases in the US. Most of the harm will be felt around installations in the West, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

The range of forecast impacts are outlined in a Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement analyzing “force structure modifications” which include adding approximately 30,000 combat support troops and growing the Army by up to six active duty combat brigades. This augmentation would occur during the next five years through Fiscal Year 2013.

The Army has selected 17 installations for consideration of growth “scenarios,” with each option assigned a matrix of potential damaging effects ranging from air pollution to drains on water supplies to noise and air traffic congestion. Most of the target bases (11 of 17) are west of the Mississippi.

The installations slated to receive at least one thousand more soldiers and expanded operations are Fort Benning, GA; Fort Bragg, NC; Fort Bliss, TX; Fort Campbell, KY; Fort Carson, CO; Fort Drum, NY; Fort Hood, TX; Fort Hunter-Liggett, CA; Fort Irwin, CA; Fort Knox, KY; Fort Lewis, WA; Fort Polk, LA; Fort Riley, KS; Fort Stewart, GA; White Sands Missile Range, NM; Yakima Training Center, WA; and Yuma Proving Grounds, AZ.

The upper range scenario in the Army draft involves stationing “multiple” brigades totaling 7,000 additional soldiers. That upper range scenario would cause “high” adverse effects for air pollution, soil erosion, water usage, energy consumption, threatened or endangered wildlife, noise, air or surface traffic in some combination for virtually every installation. In some instances, the adverse effects were assessed as “very high” meaning that the impact could not be avoided through some possible mitigation.

“Unfortunately, the Army is under no legal obligation to minimize its global warming pollution or harm to the environment and public health, but it has a moral responsibility to do so,” stated Southwest PEER Director Daniel Patterson. “The issue for US leaders is how much more pollution, water loss, soil erosion, noise and congestion it will force on Americans when authorizing and funding Army programs.”

In related actions, the Army is seeking to significantly expand certain western bases, most prominently Fort Carson in central Colorado and the Yuma Proving Ground in southwestern Arizona. Large proposed land withdrawals are proving controversial in both states, with Congress already acting to shelve Fort Carson expansion. Expansion plans for Yuma Proving Grounds are yet to be detailed but preliminary indications are that as many as 500,000 acres of federal lands may be withdrawn from public use.

“In the West, there are growing conflicts between the military’s desire to claim larger landscapes for war games and weapons development, versus shrinking wildlife habitat and burgeoning recreation demands,” Patterson added. “The Army cannot be the sole arbiter of the amount of environmental damage it will impose on America’s people, lands, air, water and wildlife. Congress, the public and civilian oversight agencies need equal involvement.”

The Army draft plan will soon be open for public comment but its draft environmental assessment is now available for study.

###







complete release including links to related sources here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. Forgive Me For Saying That I Found This To Be Laughable At Best.
Not sure what else to even say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nosmokes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-19-07 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. What's so laughable,OMC? Cause me, I don't find nuttin funny about it
in the least. So I'm curious whatcha found humorous? taking half a million acres out of public access isn't real funny. Or maybe I'm missing sumpin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC