4B. Rugby State Natural Area grows to 450 acres
[Information from The Rugbeian]

Last year, a 323-acre tract within the Rugby National Register Historic District was designated as the Rugby State Natural Area (NL272 ¶1C). This was part of a larger acreage that Historic Rugby had acquired over the years, and the tract in question was sold to TDEC (Tenn. Dept. of Environment and Conservation) prior to its Natural Area designation.
TDEC has now purchased an additional 127 acres from Historic Rugby, increasing the size of the State Natural Area to 450 acres, and protecting the Historic District on the south and east from development. The area includes Allerton Ridge with the Massengale Homeplace, which will become an outdoor exhibit that interprets Appalachian life in early Rugby.

4C. Status of development proposed for Norris Dam State Park
[Contributed by David Reister]

[Background, from NL272 ¶3D: In November, the Campbell County Commission voted to fund construction of the “Lighthouse” convention center and hotel complex in the forests of Norris Dam SP. The project will supposedly include a hotel, restaurant, wedding chapel, ice rink, fake waterfall, 70' lighthouse, and tram to the marina.] The following is an update by David Reister.
Bill Owens (a Knoxville lawyer) is trying to develop a convention center on public land in Norris Dam State Park. His partners are the Campbell County Commission and the manager of the marina at the Park. The public land was conveyed from TVA to the Park with an easement that requires that TVA approve in writing any plans. Furthermore, only the State Park can propose plans to TVA. The TCWP strategy is to prevent the State Parks from proposing to build a convention center.
In 2005, TCWP contacted TDEC (the State Parks Division is part of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) and received the following response from Jim Fyke (head of TDEC): “We have not yet received a proposal from Campbell County in this regard. However, please be assured a meeting will be held at the park seeking public input before any consideration for approval of this project would take place.”
On April 19, 2007, The Knoxville News Sentinel reported that TDEC's general counsel had given the go-ahead for public meetings on the convention center. When TCWP questioned a TDEC contact, he provided the following response: “When I asked our General Counsel about the Norris Dam item that ran in The Knoxville News Sentinel on April 19, he said the newspaper's blurb in the Business section provided less than full context regarding his communication with Campbell County officials.
“The Department's most recent correspondence with Campbell County officials offered guidance on how the public input process would work in this situation, as part of many steps remaining before the proposed project could proceed. We also shared a lengthy list of other reviews and approvals that would be required for this capital project to move forward. I assume we will continue to dialogue with local officials as those making the proposal have a number of additional milestones to meet.”
TCWP will continue to monitor and oppose this project.

4D. Tennessee leads states in number of caves

Tennessee has more than 8,500 caves, most of them one private land. The Tennessee Chapter of The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is now using a federally funded Landowner Incentive Program (LIP) to help safeguard privately owned caves and the animals that live in them. An important part of such protection is keeping pollution out of surface water that becomes groundwater which drains into or runs through caves.
Under the LIP program, the federal government pays 75% of costs for cleanup, restoration, and improvements. The matching funds come from TNC and/or the landowners. “In kind” contributions through volunteer labor may also count toward the match.

5. THE SMOKIES and NEARBY

5A. Area legislators urge monetary settlement in lieu of North Shore Road

In a letter of March 28, area legislators asked Sec. of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne to “begin immediately to work with us to provide a cash settlement to the citizens of Swain County, North Carolina, rather than further constructing the [North Shore] road.” The letter was signed by the majority of the North Carolina Congressional delegation (Sen. Elizabeth Dole and 7 of the 13 Representatives), and virtually the entire Tennessee delegation (Senators Alexander and Corker, and 7 of our 9 Representatives, with only Duncan [R-1] and Mashburn [R-7] missing).
The signatories cited the “significant environmental and economic costs associated with building the North Shore Road” and the commitment made to Swain County in 1943, and recommended three steps:

5B. Fate of Foothills Parkway Sec. 8B

Scoping meetings were held March 19 and 20 as the first phase of an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) for the proposed Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway. The Parkway has been completed or almost completed between Chilhowee, at the western end, and Wear Valley (Sections H and G open to traffic; Sections F and E under construction). At the eastern end, the short Section A (5.6 miles) has also been constructed from the western end, at I-40, to Cosby. The three intermediate Sections (B, C, D), totaling 33.5 miles are, as yet, undeveloped. Several of those who attended the scoping sessions for Section 8B felt they should remain so.
The Park Service (NPS) has proposed four concepts for Section 8B, which extends from Pittman Center to Cosby, the right-of-way averaging 1,000 ft in width: (a) no action; (b) Foothills Parkway construction (~14 miles); (c) a Foothills Trail (~14 miles of one of three types (ranging from a 2-3ft width to a 10 to 12ft-wide asphalt path; and (d) a Parkway (6 miles)/Trail (8 miles) combination. People who commented were asked for their preference among the concepts, or for suggestions of alternative concepts. Comment deadline ended April 20.
You can learn more by going to http://parkplanning.nps.gov/grsm and selecting Foothills Parkway Section 8B EIS. The next series of public meetings will present the EIS study alternatives and discuss their associated impacts and costs. Our input will be important at that stage.

6. TVA

6A. TVA's Strategic Plan should focus on environmental stewardship

Over the past month or so, TVA has been seeking public input on its forthcoming Strategic Plan. At several public meetings, citizens expressed their concern that TVA's preoccupation with producing ever more electric power appears to be trumping what should be the agency's objective of environmental stewardship. Validating this concern was a recent talk by TVA's president during which he remarked that TVA promoting energy conservation would be “like McDonald's telling you not to eat hamburgers.” (See Southern Alliance for Clean Energy's Monthly E-newsletter of 5/5/06)
TCWP submitted comments to TVA which read as follows (in part). “TCWP … urges TVA to remember the objectives for which it was created and to make environmental stewardship a main component of its Strategic Plan.
“This environmental stewardship applies not only to TVA's management of its lands and waters, but also to what TVA emits into the atmosphere—which has a huge potential of affecting the environment of this region and, indeed, of the world. As the largest public power producer in a nation that has until now contributed disproportionably to the atmospheric gases that are causing the Earth to warm dangerously (and with potentially catastrophic effects), TVA must now take a leadership position in reversing this trend. TVA must be a leader in promoting energy efficiency and the clean production of energy.
“We challenge TVA to meet its specific prediction of a 2% annual growth in energy demand by setting specific green goals for meeting this demand. The increased demand should be met through energy efficiency and by addition of power sources that do not produce greenhouse gases.”
TVA's website for the Plan is http://www.tva.com/stratplan/comments.htm, The deadline for public comments was May 9.

6B. The upcoming Watts Bar Plan; sta- tus of Whites Creek SWA

Some time ago, TCWP urged TVA to give Small Wild Area (SWA) designation to the ~88-acre shoreline parcel (#237) immediately upstream from the Whites Creek SWA (NL262 ¶5A). All three Alternatives developed in the May 2005 Draft Watts Bar Land Management Plan and EIS in fact do give it this listing and place it in Zone 3 (“Sensitive Resource Management,” the highest level of protection). Parcel #237 is described as “Proposed addition to Whites Creek Small Wild Area.”
Finalization of the Watts Bar Plan was subsequently delayed to allow TVA to develop its Land Policy (NL271 ¶4A), but release of the revised Draft Plan is now expected for early July, with a 45-day comment period to follow. TCWP and AFORR will co-sponsor an information session with TVA officials to review the Plan on July 26 in Oak Ridge (details later; or call Sandra at 865-522-3809). As far as we can ascertain, designation of Parcel #237 has remained the same as in the May 2005 version.
Land allocations in the revised Plan are more important than ever. While TVA's new Land Policy bans land sales for residential developments, it allows TVA to consider leases or sales of lands for commercial recreation or industrial use, provided the parcels under consideration have been allocated for such uses in the land management plan.

6C. Lawsuit against TVA air pollution may reopen

Among major emission sources that contribute to air pollution in the Smokies, TVA's coal-fired Bull Run power plant is the most proximal. In 2001, environmental groups (led by NPCA) sued TVA under the Clean Air Act because the agency had made significant modifications at Bull Run without installing best available pollution-control technology.
At that time, a US District Court refused to consider the case on its merits, ruling that the statute of limitations had run out. A couple of months ago, this decision was reversed by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. The case will now go back to the District Court to be considered on its merits.

6D. TVA making more green power than it's selling

TVA's green power -- wind, solar, and landfill methane – is paid for by voluntary purchase of blocks of 150 kwh (about 12% of the average family's monthly consumption) at $4, a higher rate than what TVA charges for its ”conventional” power. For several years now, TVA did not produce nearly all the green power it got paid for. Since March 2006, however, the situation has been reversed. Hopefully, increases in the production of green power will continue.

6E. The upcoming Watts Bar Plan; sta- tus of Whites Creek SWA

Soon after being appointed to TVA's new 9-member Board, Susan Williams took the lead in getting the agency to formulate a new Land Management Policy. In this, she was supremely successful (NL271 ¶4A). Unfortunately, her term is expiring this summer. We'll miss her.

7. NATIONAL ISSUES

7A. National Forest Roadless Areas: reinforcements and attacks. There needs to be a law!
[Sources: The Wilderness Soc. and EarthJustice]

Almost from the moment it came to power, the Bush Administration waged a relentless campaign to undo the protection that 58.5 million acres of undeveloped national forest lands had received from the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. Last year, the USFS actually repealed the Rule. In September, however, federal judge Elizabeth LaPorte ruled that this repeal was illegal (NL270 ¶7). Two months later, the court strengthened this decision by blocking road building associated with post-2001 oil and gas leases in roadless areas. There were 327 such leases in 14 national forests and grasslands.
The court decision upholding the Roadless Rule is, unfortunately threatened on various fronts.

7B. Protection must be restoredto small streams and wetlands
[Information from American Rivers]

A 2006 Supreme Court decision (Rapanos and Carbell cases) left in legal limbo the protection that small upstream waters and wetlands have enjoyed for more than 30 years under the Clean Water Act. Polluters are now flooding the courts with appeals to destroy these waters, which constitute 60% of the nation's stream miles and provide drinking water supplies for more than 110 million Americans. Congress could resolve this problem by passing legislation to restore full federal protection for all our waters.

7C. Sen. Alexander co-authors bill to cut power-plant emissions

On April 19, along with Sen. Lieberman (I-CT), Sen. Lamar Alexander introduced a clean-air bill that sets schedules for power plants to reduce emissions. Significantly, it includes a cap-and-trade provision for CO2. Sen. Alexander, who has for some time been concerned about air pollution over the Smokies, is a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, a key environmental subcommittee of which is chaired by Sen. Lieberman. Alexander is also the co-chairman of the TVA Congressional caucus.
The bill would:

7D. Small increase in stateside funding for the LWCF

Appropriations from the Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) come in two major categories (with subdivisions): (a) federal projects and (b) state and local projects, which require matching funds from the states. In ¶1B of this Newsletter, we have discussed federal projects, noting that the Bush-year budgets have shrunk these to a small fraction of the authorized level. The Bush budgets have been even harsher on the “stateside” portion of the LWCF, in several years zeroing it out altogether (Congress usually managed to enact at least a small amount of funding). At the end of 2006, Sen. Alexander (R-TN) managed to include a special LWCF provision in a bill that opened a new area off the coast of Louisiana to offshore oil drilling. According to this provision, 12.5% of future federal revenues from this development are designated for state grants under the LWCF. Funding could eventually reach $100 million per year. Louisiana will receive 37.5% of the money, with the remainder distributed to the other 49 states according to a formula. Provided the total reaches $100, this would mean an average of $1.3 million per state per year.

7E. Funding for conservation programs
[Source: The Wilderness Society, 4/5/07]

The Administration budget for FY2008 made severe cuts in already badly underfunded conservation programs. Both House and Senate, however have passed budget resolutions that would begin to restore essential funding to items such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund, endangered species protection, National Wildlife Refuge System, and other critical land management and wildlife programs. The final FY2008 budget will be worked out by a House-Senate conference committee.

7F. Nationwide Permits are re-issued

Earlier this year, TCWP submitted comments opposing the proposed reissuance and expansion of the Corps of Engineer's Nationwide Permit (NWP) program (NL271 ¶6D). NWPs provide a “streamlined” approval process for projects that have so-called “minor” environmental impacts. They lack basic Clean Water Act safeguards, such as public notice requirements and a thorough evaluation of less damaging alternatives. Our comments noted that these rubberstamp NWPs would lead to much more than “minimal harm” to the environment, and we urged that strict limits be included on wetland and stream destruction and that NWPs not be applied to developments in floodplains. Unfortunately, the Corps not only re-issued all existing NWPs, effective 3/19/07, but issued 6 new ones. Several NWPs deal with mining and with oil & gas extraction, which certainly can cause much more harm “minor” environmental impacts. The documents may be viewed on http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/nwp/nwp_final.htm.

8. GLOBAL WARMING

8A. Parts 2 and 3 of the latest IPCC report describe impacts and possible remedies

On February 2, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released Part 1 of its Fourth Assessment (which may be viewed on www.ipcc.ch). In it, the scientist-authors concluded with a confidence level of greater than 90% that greenhouse gases from human activities are the main causes of global warming (NL272 ¶8A).
Part 2 was released on April 6, and Part 3 on May 4. The IPCC reports include input from more than 1,200 authors and 2,500 scientific expert reviewers from more than 130 countries. They have an exceptional degree of scientific credibility and thus the potential to be highly influential in the formation of climate policy. Part 2 details the probable disastrous impacts of climate change; Part 3, the partial remedies – the choices we have to reduce emissions and avoid the most dangerous consequences. A final synthesis will be published late in the year.
Part 2, “Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability”
This 1572-page report was endorsed by 120 countries, including the USA, but some statements in the 21-page summary were weakened by China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, making the document less quantified and striking than it could have been. The report is, however, no longer based on models, but on hard empirical evidence: human-caused warming “over the last three decades has had a discernible influence on many physical and biological systems.” Coastlines, for example, are already showing the impact of sea-level rise.
With the atmospheric buildup of greenhouse gases that has already occurred (a 70% increase since 1970), temperatures and sea levels will continue to rise for decades (and longer and to a greater degree if we don't start acting now). The resulting impacts from droughts (famines) and flooding will be felt most severely in regions that are already poor. Even in overall prosperous societies, poor people will be hit the hardest. [Projection for the Southeast USA, one of the areas most sensitive to climate change: forests may convert to grasslands and savannas because of drought, insect infestation, or fire. More frequent storms may impact forest canopy and promote growth of brush and non-native species.]
As for the rest of life on Earth, there is going to be a mass extinction of species within the next 100 years unless climate change is limited. In addition to stressing the extreme urgency of reducing greenhouse gas buildup in the atmosphere, the report underlines the need to deal with the effects of climate changes that have already occurred.
An independent study published in late March by the International Institute for Environment and Development addresses the risk of flooding. Coastal areas lying at lower than 33 feet above sea level are located in more than 180 countries and are home to 634 million people now (and a larger number as populations grow), 75% of them in Asia.
Part 3, Options for reducing emissions
This report deals with remedies -- the options we have for reducing global warming emissions. It concludes that, using known technologies, significant progress towards stabilizing and reducing greenhouse-gas emissions can be achieved NOW at relatively low cost. This explodes the Bush Administration's argument that a strong attack on climate change would cripple the economy. While, in the long run, we'll need to make major investment in carbon-free energy sources, there are no constraints on what we can do right now -- with existing technologies -- to make our cars, appliances, and buildings a whole lot more energy efficient. In addition, alternative fuels such as cellulosic ethanol do not require long-term development. At the same time, we must not delay limiting (and in many cases, eliminating) the growth of polluting technologies, such as coal-fired power plants that lack carbon sequestration capabilities. Also, we can right now take action to reduce deforestation. Many of the proposals in the report are already contained in bills that have been introduced in the Congress (¶8C, below). The recent Supreme Court decision (¶8B, below) should also help. “We aren't going to prevent global warming; that horse is out of the barn and disappearing over the ridge. But we can keep it from getting worse than it has to be – keep it miserable instead of catastrophic.” (Bill McKibben, Forest magazine, Spring 2007)

8B. Supreme Court rules that EPA can regulate CO2

On April 2, the US Supreme Court by a vote of 5 to 4 declared that CO2 is a pollutant and that the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate it. Sounds obvious, doesn't it? Not to the Bush Administration, which had claimed for years that since CO2 was not considered to be a pollutant when the Clean Air Act was passed, and was not specifically mentioned, it could not be regulated under that law.
The Supreme Court ruling, which concerns vehicular emissions, does not, however, require the EPA to take action, although the only way it could avoid doing so would be to make a determination “that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change.” A White House spokesperson said: "...we're going to have to let EPA take a good look at it, and they're going to have to analyze it and think about what it means for any future policy decisions." This negative attitude of the Administration increases the necessity as well as the momentum for Congress to pass strong global warming legislation (¶8C, below).
The Court's majority opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens, rebukes EPA for having offered a “laundry list” of reasons not to regulate CO2. The dissent written by Chief Justice Roberts (with Scalia, Thomas, and Alito joining) does not consider the merits of the case and is based solely on the assertion that the ~30 plaintiffs (a coalition of states, cities, and environmental groups) lacks the legal “standing” to sue. The majority notes that it is only necessary for one of the many plaintiffs to meet the definition of “standing,” and that the state of Massachusetts clearly does.
The Court's ruling will be very beneficial to the efforts of California (and 11 other states) to limit tailpipe emissions, beginning with 2009 models, of vehicles sold in their states, with emission limits becoming stricter each year until 2016. Automakers went to court to halt the California program. Their challenge should now lose validity.
While the case was brought over the issue of tailpipe emissions, the Court's statement that the federal government has clear jurisdiction over “any air pollutant” that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger “public health or welfare” should broaden the application of the finding. Specifically, EPA's refusal to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants can now be challenged.
In fact, in a second Clean Air Act case decision of April 2, the Supreme Court reopened a federal enforcement effort against Duke Energy Corp. under the “new source review” provision. NSR requires older power plants, which had been permitted to pollute under the Clean Air Act's “grandfather” clause, to conform to regulations once they add capacity or make renovations.

8C. Numerous pending bills address global warming
[Sources: Union of Concerned Scientists, Environmental Defense]

As shown by the IPCC reports (¶8A, above), our window of opportunity is closing rapidly, so we have to act fast, and we must get it right the first time. Congress must not settle for a bill that just pays lip service, and it must, at this time, avoid peripheral issues or long-term solutions (e.g., a hydrogen economy) that do not require immediate, concrete actions.
There is general agreement that the most effective way (and perhaps the only meaningful one) to reduce greenhouse gases is to attach a significant price to carbon emissions. This can be done either through a carbon tax or through a mandatory hard cap on carbon emissions from all sectors of the economy. (Al Gore, Jr., has proposed for 14 years that we ought to reduce employment-based taxes to near-zero and replace them with pollution-based taxes, principally on CO2.)
Emissions must be reduced to levels that scientists have determined to be sufficient to stabilize the climate. Among the bills listed below, a couple do not meet this goal.

8D. Mandatory CO2 caps gain support

Early this year, 10 Fortune-500 companies joined with environmental groups to form an alliance – the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) that called for strong national legislation to cut global warming pollution (NL272 ¶8C). One of USCAP'S 6 recommendations was to establish a mandatory cap on CO2 emissions.
A number of other groups and individuals have subsquently called for similar regulations.

8E. Global Warming and Global Security
[From the New York Times, 4/20/07]

In mid April, 11 retired admirals and generals released a detailed 68-page report arguing that climate change could be a “threat multiplier” in already fragile parts of the world. Rising sea levels could threaten the livelihoods of more than one billion people living within 45 miles of Asia's coastlines. In Africa, recurring heat waves could cause widespread shortages of food and water, leading to large-scale migrations and escalating tensions.
Anthony Zinni, the retired Marine general, made the point elegantly when he said that “we will pay for this one way or the other” — either now, to control the emission of greenhouse gases, or later, in military engagements and “human lives.” The military elite has now joined mayors, governors and business leaders in demanding action.
The UN Security Council held its first-ever discussion of the link between climate change and international conflict. While the overwhelming majority of nations voiced grave concerns and urged stricter worldwide controls on greenhouse gases, the USA and China argued that the Council was the wrong place to raise the issue.

8F. More thoughts on biofuels
[Sources: AP, 3/13/07; and Sierra, May/June]

As pointed out earlier (NL272 ¶8G), we should remember that biofuels must fulfill a dual function: (a) to wean us from oil, and (b) to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Many of our politicians tend to forget (b). Emissions produced during production of the fuel, as well as during its burning, must be considered.
Last year, ethanol production used 12% of the US corn harvest and replaced 2.8% of the nation's gasoline consumption. Ethanol production has doubled in the past three years, and is expected to double again in less than two years.
Cars must be specially equipped to be able to use fuel that is more than ~10% ethanol. US automakers, with federal incentives, have committed to having half the cars they produce run on either E85 (i.e., 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline) or biodiesel by 2012.
For ethanol made from corn, it takes the energy equivalent of at least 3 gallons to make 4 gallons of it. Growing the corn requires agricultural machinery that is quite energy consumptive. The production of fertilizers and pesticides also consumes fossil fuels. The corn must be transported to a production plant where conversion to sugar, fermentation, and distillation consume energy; and the finished product is transported by rail and/or tanker truck to the distribution point, consuming yet more energy.
Mandating an increase in fuel-efficiency standards could be more effective than switching to corn ethanol. An analysis by Lester R. Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute, finds that increasing automobile fuel efficiency by just 20% would be equivalent to converting the entire US grain harvest into ethanol.
Corn is not the only possible source of ethanol, however. One source of cellulosic ethanol (i.e., ethanol made from plant fiber) is switchgrass, a prairie grass native to the Midwest. Its cultivation requires far fewer pesticides than does that of corn; and though its processing has been more complicated and expensive than that for corn, this technology is now being simplified tremendously. The best source of ethanol, so far, is sugar cane because the production step of breaking down starch to sugar can be skipped. Ethanol produced from sugar cane has permitted Brazil to achieve virtual energy independence. According to venture capitalist Vinod Khosla, sugarcane ethanol reduces greenhouse-gas emissions per mile driven by about 60-80% -- as compared to about 20% for corn ethanol.

8G. Interesting facts of all kinds

• The burning of 1 gallon of gas in an automobile engine releases 20 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere.

9. THE OAK RIDGE AREA

9A. Comments on GNEP siting
[Based on a letter by Frank Hensley]

On April 25, TCWP submitted comments on the scope of the Siting study for the GNEP (Global Nuclear Energy Partnership) facilities. DOE has posted all 11 GNEP siting studies on the following website:
http://www.gnep.energy.gov/gnepSitingStudies.html
Our comments were restricted to site selection and did not discuss the merits of the proposal itself, though this deserves the strongest scrutiny (importation of nuclear wastes from all over the world to be reprocessed into usable fuel).
We strongly recommended that, should Oak Ridge be chosen for any of these facilities, they be located on “brown fields,” such as the 5,000-acre ETTP site (K-25), which has been decontaminated at great taxpayer expense in order to make it available to new industry, or the unused Clinch River Breeder Reactor site. We strongly oppose the wasteful and short-sighted proposal to build GNEP facilities on a presently unspoiled forest area in the Oak Ridge Reservation. ORR land is an irreplaceable resource for climate and biological research by ORNL, and for education, outdoor recreation, and wildlife habitat. The proposed site was chosen (and ETTP and the Breeder Site were rejected) by a disingenuous non-public process.
TCWP has long suggested that a land-use plan be generated for the ORR. The need is now greater than ever, and we intend to pursue advocacy for such a plan.

9B. Trails in the BORCE
[Information from Bill Johnston]

There will be more walking opportunities in the ~3,000-acre Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement in the western part of the ORR. According to Jim Evans (Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency), DOE has agreed to open up the gravel roads on the southern end of the BORCE as hiking trails, and to add woodland trail(s) to the existing trail network on the northern end of the BORCE. Some details concerning parking still need to be worked out. We'll have more details later.

9C. City Council election, June 5.

On May 3, TCWP joined AFORR in sponsoring a special candidate forum on matters affecting the environment in and near Oak Ridge. Six of the 7 candidates were present: Fred Childress, Ella Hawkins Dubose, Ray Evans, Charlie Hensley, Jerry Marrow, and Ellen Smith (Tom Hayes did not attend).
If you were not present, we urge you to inform yourself on the candidates' positions on issues such as:

10. TCWP NEWS

10A. Upcoming activities
[For additional information on any of the listed events, contact Sandra at 865-522-3809, or at sandra@sandrakgoss.com]

“The Environment of the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR)” – May 31
[Contributed by Carol Grametbauer]
Dale Rector, an aquatic biologist with TDEC, who has long experience on the ORR, will acquaint us with the area's current status. This TCWP Quarterly Meeting is to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 31, in the Fellowship Hall at the Chapel on the Hill. Park in the upper parking lot, which directly accesses the meeting room.
East (Tellico) Lake Shore Trail: the Sequel -- June 9
[Contributed by Sandra Goss]
The East Lake Shore Trail on Tellico Reservoir, site of a TCWP hike last summer, was so enjoyed by participants that a reprise has been scheduled for Saturday, June 9. The trail, opened in 2004, is a project of the Watershed Association of Tellico Reservoir (WATeR) and TVA.
Hikers should meet at the trailhead at 9:45. Wear sturdy shoes, and bring appropriate outer-wear, lunch and water. Dogs are welcome. To reach the Trailhead, travel Route 321 between Lenoir City and Maryville, and turn south on Route 95 toward Greenback. Travel on 95 South 1.8 miles to Axley Chapel Road on right. Travel 1.5 miles on Axley Chapel Road and turn right on Coytee Road. Trailhead is on the left.
Alliance for the Cumberlands meeting – June 12
[Contributed by Sandra Goss]
(This is not a TCWP-sponsored activity, but we thought our members might be interested, especially since TCWP was instrumental in getting the Alliance started.) The Alliance for the Cumberlands will hold a general meeting on Tuesday, June 12, at Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville. Among the agenda items are a review of the Tennessee-Kentucky Conservation Action Plan, an update of the Wildlife Viewing Trail, and a presentation on the Heart of the Cumberlands initiative (¶3A, this NL). For more information, or to register for the meeting, call 865-546-5998 or visit www.allianceforthecumberlands.org
Review of Watts Bar Management Plan – July 26
[Contributed by Sandra Goss]
TCWP and AFORR will co-sponsor an information session with TVA officials to review the revised Watts Bar Draft Management Plan on July 26 in Oak Ridge. For time and place see NL274, or call Sandra at 865-522-3809.
Tree-identification outing – August 18
[Contributed by Carol Grametbauer]
Larry Pounds will lead a tree-identification outing along Melton Lake Greenway on an easy 1- to 1.5-mile walk. Participants should meet at 8 a.m. at the gravel parking lot across from Rivers Run.

10B. TCWP receives gift
[Contributed by Sandra Goss]

TCWP received a major financial contribution last month from a member who no longer lives in Tennessee. Designated for general operating expense, this contribution will help offset the costs we incur to pay our Executive Director, publish and mail our Newsletters, and hold our meetings, among other things. The formerly active member noted that TCWP is a great organization that works hard and effectively to protect some of the loveliest lands and waters in the country. His faith in our work is very gratifying, and the money will be put to good use in continuing our work

10C. Special mentions

Linda LaForest
For a couple of years in the 1990s, Linda did a wonderful job as TCWP Executive Director until she had to move out of town with her family. Soon after she returned, she enrolled in U.T.'s veterinary college, earning her doctorate in veterinary medicine (she already had a master's in agricultural economics). While working long hours in a veterinary practice, and raising two wonderful kids, she also made time for volunteering with TCWP's active activities committee.
In January, when Dr. McArthur died suddenly, Linda became head of the McArthur Animal Hospital. Her many TCWP friends are happy that she is continuing her volunteer work for TCWP.

Miriam Guthrie Kertesz
How sad that our “special mention” must be a good-bye! Miriam, who died on April 18, had a long and active association with TCWP. In 1983, she was our Vice President, but even before that she served on the Board (1982), and chaired the nominating committee (1973). Hal Smith remembers that she was active in some committees, and that she helped with TCWP's development and maintenance of the North Ridge Trail. She loved the out-of-doors and enjoyed hiking, canoeing, and biking. And she was a good friend to many of us who greatly mourn her passing.
The family requested that memorials be made to TCWP (or to one of several other organizations). Several have already been received, and we are grateful.

10C. We thank our volunteers

A wonderful group of people goes to work each time a Newsletter needs to be assembled for mailing. The following helped with NL271: Dick Raridon, Helen and Ken Warren, Frank Hensley, Jean Bangham, Charlie Klabunde, and Sandra Goss. And here are the ones who worked on NL272: Ken and Helen Warren, Dick Raridon, Carol Grametbauer, Charlie Klabunde, Frank Hensley, and Sandra Goss.
Francis Perey always gets the Newsletter up on the TCWP web site in record time. And Francis manages all our other web-site features too. We couldn't operate without him!
Several members have assisted with the TCWP display at a number of recent functions. Hal Smith set it up at Wilderness Wildlife Week, then took it down. Mary Lynn Dobson helped with the display at the Spring Wildflower Pilgrimage, and Ralph Harvey at Earthfest.

11. CALENDAR; RESOURCES