People for the West -Tucson
Newsletter, June-July, 2018
PO Box 86868, Tucson, AZ 85754-6868
Real environmentalism can go hand in hand with natural resource production, private property rights, and access to public lands
Local Control for Conservation
by Jonathan DuHamel
People for the West promotes natural resource production, private property rights, and access to public lands. Proper conservation makes the best use of our resources. PFW may coordinate with like-minded organizations. Here is one of them.
The Pima Natural Resources Conservation District (https://pimanrcd.wordpress.com/) is a local branch of a state agency for conservation and property rights. I am one of the supervisors of Pima NRCD.
The Pima Natural Resource Conservation District encompasses 2.14 million acres in Eastern Pima County and a small part of Pinal County near Red Rock, including more than one million acres of grazing lands owned by the Arizona State Land Trust. The Arizona State Legislature established 32 Conservation Districts in 1942 “as local units of state government with special expertise in the fields of land, soil, water, and natural resources management within the boundaries of the district.” The State of Arizona now also recognizes 10 Tribal Soil and Water Conservation Districts.
The mission of the Pima Natural Resource Conservation District is to provide for the restoration and conservation of lands and soil resources in the District area, the preservation of water rights and the control and prevention of soil erosion, and thereby to conserve natural resources, conserve wildlife, protect the tax base, protect public lands and protect and restore rivers and streams and associated riparian habitats, including fish and wildlife resources that are dependent on those habitats, and in such manner to protect and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the people. Meetings are open to the public.
Overarching Goals of the Pima Natural Resource Conservation District
• Promote soil and water conservation through prescribed fire, brush management, and coordinated resource management planning of water distribution systems.
• Protect sovereign Arizona authority over water rights against federal government overreach.
• Protect the local tax base in accordance with the mission and the statutory authorities and duties of the District.
• Participate in the public planning processes for federal, state and county land use projects.
• Establish judicial standing on proposed regulations through timely submission of comments under federal laws such as the National Environmental Protection Act, Endangered Species Act and other federal laws.
• Protect the District cooperators’ livelihoods, unique heritage, culture and lifestyle from regulatory overreach and junk-science.
• Promote the idea that the Endangered Species Act needs to be carefully viewed from the perspective of all species in an ecosystem including the all-important human species.
• Educate the public on the basic principles of soil and water conservation and the environmental benefits of science based cropland farming and grazing management.
• Establish a public record of the impacts to ranchers from the past and present Mexican wolf program, Jaguar Critical Habitat designation, Pima Pineapple regulations, and other regulations that impact District cooperators.
• Continue existing working partnerships with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and Arizona Association of Conservation Districts.
• Train district cooperators in the voluntary Best Management Practices for ranching.
• Enter into coordination, if appropriate, with the U. S. Bureau of Land Management, U. S. Forest Service, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Arizona State Land Department, other relevant state and federal agencies, the County of Pima and other municipalities.
• Enter into coordination with appropriate state and federal agencies to address ecological impacts of border security infrastructure projects and policies.
• Support environmental education programs together with funding Altar Valley Conservation Alliance research, public education and conservation projects.
There is also an association for the entire state: Arizona Association of Conservation Districts. ☼
The Real State of Climate Science – A rebuttal of Climate Alarmism
by Jonathan DuHamel
This article summarizes and links to several past articles which review climate science and brings together some main points on the state of the climate debate. These articles show that the politically correct, carbon dioxide driven climate claim is wrong. Click on the titles to read the complete articles on my Wryheat blog. These articles tell you all you need to know to counter climate alarmism.
Climate change is a major issue of our times. Concern is affecting environmental, energy, and economic policy decisions. Many politicians are under the mistaken belief that legislation and regulation can significantly control our climate to forestall any deviation from “normal” and save us from a perceived crisis. This post is intended as a primer for politicians so they can cut through the hype and compare real observational data against the flawed model prognostications.
The data show that the current warming is not unusual, but part of a natural cycle; that greenhouse gases, other than water vapor, are not significant drivers of climate; that human emissions of carbon dioxide are insignificant when compared to natural emissions of greenhouse gases; and that many predictions by climate modelers and hyped by the media are simply wrong. This article also addresses sea level rise and ocean “acidification.”
A simple question for climate alarmists – where is the evidence
“What physical evidence supports the contention that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are the principal cause of global warming since 1970?”
(Remember back in the 1970s, climate scientists and media were predicting a return to an “ice age.”)
I have posed that question to five “climate scientist” professors at the University of Arizona who claim that our carbon dioxide emissions are the principal cause of dangerous global warming. Yet, when asked the question, none could cite any supporting physical evidence.
Rather than being a “pollutant,” carbon dioxide is necessary for life on Earth as we know it. Earth’s climate has been changing for at least four billion years in cycles large and small. Few in the climate debate understand those changes and their causes. Many are fixated on carbon dioxide (CO2), a minor constituent of the atmosphere, but one absolutely necessary for life as we know it. Perhaps this fixation derives from ulterior political motives for controlling the global economy. For others, the true believers, perhaps this fixation derives from ignorance.
The “greenhouse effect,” very simplified, is this: solar radiation penetrates the atmosphere and warms the surface of the earth. The earth’s surface radiates thermal energy (infrared radiation) back into space. Some of this radiation is absorbed and re-radiated back to the surface and into space by clouds, water vapor, methane, carbon dioxide, and other gases. Water vapor is the principle greenhouse gas; the others are minor players. It is claimed that without the greenhouse effect the planet would be an iceball, about 34∘C colder than it is.* The term “greenhouse effect” with respect to the atmosphere is an unfortunate usage because it is misleading. The interior of a real greenhouse (or your automobile parked with windows closed and left in the sun) heats up because there is a physical barrier to convective heat loss. There is no such physical barrier in the atmosphere. *There is an alternate hypothesis:
Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell proposed in his 1871 book “Theory of Heat” that the temperature of a planet depends only on gravity, mass of the atmosphere, and heat capacity of the atmosphere. Temperature is independent of atmosphere composition. Greenhouse gases have nothing to do with it. Many publications since have expounded on Maxwell’s theory and have shown that it applies to all planets in the Solar System. The Grand Canyon of Arizona provides a practical demonstration of this principle.
The U.S. government’s National Climate Assessment report and the UN IPCC both claim that human carbon dioxide emissions are “intensifying” the greenhouse effect and causing global warming. The carbon dioxide driven global warming meme makes four specific predictions. Physical evidence shows that all four of these predictions are wrong.
“It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is; it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” – Richard Feynmann
In this article, we will examine the Earth’s temperature and the carbon dioxide (CO2) content of the atmosphere at several time scales to see if there is any relationship. I stipulate that the greenhouse effect does exist. I maintain, however, that the ability of CO2 emissions to cause global warming is tiny and overwhelmed by natural forces. The main effect of our “greenhouse” is to slow cooling.
The United Nation’s IPCC and other climate alarmists say all hell will break loose if the global temperature rises more than an additional 2º C (3.6ºF). That number, by the way, is purely arbitrary with no basis in science. It also ignores Earth’s geologic history which shows that for most of the time global temperatures have been much warmer than now. Let’s look back at a time when global temperatures are estimated to have been as much as 34ºF warmer than they are now. Hell didn’t break loose then.
The EPA’s “endangerment finding” classified carbon dioxide as a pollutant and claimed that global warming will have adverse effects on human health. Real research says the opposite: cold is deadlier. The scientific evidence shows that warming is good for health.
Melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets have been blamed on global warming, but both have a geologic origin. The “Blob” a recent warm ocean area off the Oregon coast, responsible in part for the hot weather and drought in California, has been blamed on global warming, but that too may have a geologic cause.
It has been claimed that 97% of climate scientists say humans are causing most of the global warming. An examination of the numbers and how those numbers have been derived show that only 8.2% of scientists polled explicitly endorse carbon dioxide as the principal driver.
Read also a more general article: On consensus in science
The basic conclusion of this review is that carbon dioxide has little effect on climate and all attempts to control carbon dioxide will be a futile and expensive exercise to no end. All the dire predictions are based on flawed computer models. Carbon dioxide is a phantom menace. The greatest danger we face from climate change is that some ignorant politicians think they can stop it.
See also this report from 2017 which concludes that there is no evidence showing that carbon dioxide has a significant effect on global temperature.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” – H. L. Mencken
“Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory.” –Stephen Hawking ☼
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT PROBLEMS
Abuse of the Endangered Species Act
by Jonathan DuHamel
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was passed with good intentions, but in practice it has many problems. The ESA actually encourages private property owners to rid their properties of endangered species and their habitats because of the restrictions in beneficial use the Act imposes on property owners. The ESA is very expensive to taxpayers (regulatory costs exceed $1.2 billion per year). Besides trampling on property rights, the ESA destroys industries (remember the timber industry in the northwest?).
The ESA is easy to “game,” a characteristic that radical environmental groups take full advantage of through their “sue and settle” tactics. According to attorney Karen Budd-Falen, “Species are listed by a petition process, which means that anyone can send a letter to the federal government asking that a species, either plant or animal, be put on the ESA list. The federal government has 90 days to respond to that petition, no matter how frivolous. If the federal government fails to respond in 90 days, the petitioner – in the vast majority of cases, radical environmental groups – can file litigation against the federal government and get its attorneys fees paid. The simple act of filing litigation does not mean the species will get listed or that it is warranted to be protected; this litigation is only over whether the federal government failed to respond to the petition in 90 days. Between 2000 and 2009, in just 12 states and the District of Columbia, 14 environmental groups filed 180 federal court complaints to get species listed under the ESA and were paid $11,743,287 in attorneys fees and costs.” The act of responding to lawsuits causes government biologists to spend much less time on conservation work.
An example of this tactic was published recently by Arizona Daily Independent in their article: “Absurd Sue And Settle Lawsuit Launched To Protect Borderlands Moth.” (Link) “Serial litigators, Defenders of Wildlife, Center for Biological Diversity, and Patagonia Area Resource Alliance filed a notice of intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the Patagonia eyed silkmoth under the Endangered Species Act.”
In my opinion, while these enviros are gaming the system for money, their main purpose is to stop development of new mines in the Patagonia Mountains of Southern Arizona. These properties have the potential to become a major source of lead, zinc, and silver, and the only U.S. source of manganese.
See more about the mineral deposits of the Patagonia area:
The other major problem with the Endangered Species Act is that, through bureaucratic bungling and bad science, the ESA is particularly poor at recovering endangered species.
The Heritage Foundation has recently published an assessment of the Endangered Species Act entitled: Correcting Falsely “Recovered” and Wrongly Listed Species and Increasing Accountability and Transparency in the Endangered Species Program by Robert Gordon (Read full report)
Numerous administrative actions should be taken to correct the record of species that are falsely claimed to have “recovered” and that have been declared endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) using erroneous data. It is crucial to improve implementation, accountability, and transparency in the administration of the ESA. The recommendations and information here will help correct the record, provide guidance as to some of the species that may be suitable for delisting on the grounds of data error or extinction, improve the likelihood that future delistings are appropriately categorized, eliminate unnecessary regulations and further waste, and ensure scarce conservation dollars are better spent.
In five years the Endangered Species Act will reach the half-century milestone—and yet only 40 U.S. species have graduated from the program as “recovered,” slightly less than one species per year. If not one more bird, beetle, or bear were added to the list of federally endangered animals and plants and somehow species recovered at 10 times that rate, it would take well over a century and-a-half to work through the current list.
There is, however, no indication that the list of regulated species will stop growing. Even worse, almost half of the “recovered” species—18 of 40— are federally funded fiction. They were never really endangered; like many species that remain on the endangered list, they were mistakes. With all the ESA’s costs and burdens, it should perhaps come as no surprise that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is fabricating success stories to cover up this unsustainable mess and substituting fluff for statutorily required reporting regarding the recovery program.
My opinion: It is time to consider repealing the ESA and replacing it with a more effective system that encourages conservation with positive incentives. ☼
Forest Thinning Needed to Save Water
by Jonathan DuHamel
Dense forests suck up surface and groundwater and dump it into the atmosphere through the process of evapotranspiration. This means that there is less water for other uses.
“There are too many trees in Sierra Nevada forests, say scientists affiliated with the National Science Foundation (NSF) Southern Sierra Critical Zone Observatory (CZO).”
A new study supported by the National Science Foundation published in the journal Ecohydrology (see press release) proclaims “Billions of gallons of water saved by thinning forests.” The study of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California notes that “excessive evapotranspiration may harm a fragile California water system, especially during prolonged, warm droughts.”
The primary methods of good forest thinning are fire and logging.
Forest Service policy exacerbated sound forest management. Remember Smokey the Bear, “only you can prevent forest fires?” But fire is nature’s way of managing forests. Logging was largely reduced for misguided environmental reasons such as saving the spotted owl.
From the NSF study:
“Forest wildfires are often considered disasters,” said Richard Yuretich, director of NSF’s CZO program, which funded the research. “But fire is part of healthy forest ecosystems. By thinning out trees, fires can reduce water stress in forests and ease water shortages during droughts. And by reducing the water used by plants, more rainfall flows into rivers and accumulates in groundwater.”
Using data from CZO measurement towers and U.S. Geological Survey satellites, researchers found that over the period 1990 to 2008, fire-thinned forests saved 3.7 billion gallons of water annually in California’s Kings River Basin and …17 billion gallons of water annually in the American River Basin — water that would otherwise have been lost through evapotranspiration.
Forest thinning has increased in recent decades in an effort to stave off disastrous wildfires fueled by dense forests. This study shows that restoring forests through mechanical thinning or wildfire can also save California billions of gallons of water each year.
Perhaps we should take guidance from the first land managers in North America, the Indians. In my article “The Pristine Myth” I note the following:
Archaeological and anthropological research during the last 25 years or so, shows that much of what we thought was pristine in the Western Hemisphere, even the Amazon rain forest, is actually human-formed landscape created by the first New World inhabitants, the Indians. It seems that American Indians, from North America, Mexico and South America, were the ultimate land managers, and they transformed the land to suit their needs. They constructed the world’s largest gardens.
American Indians built cities and civilizations, cultivated forests and farms, and developed more than half of the crops grown worldwide today. Indians, rather than subsist passively on what wild nature provided, instead survived by cleverly exploiting their environment. Their principal tool was fire. They did not domesticate animals for meat, but instead used fire to change whole ecosystems to raise deer, elk, and bison.
A new study (“Effects of Climate Variability and Accelerated Forest Thinning on Watershed-Scale Runoff in Southwestern USA Ponderosa Pine Forests” published October 22, 2014) conducted by The Nature Conservancy and Northern Arizona University recommends accelerated forest thinning by mechanical means and controlled burns in central and northern Arizona forests. The study estimates that such thinning will increase runoff by about 20 percent, add to our water supply, and make forests more resilient. ☼
States Consider Carbon Dioxide Taxes
By Kenneth Artz
Several state legislatures, including those of Connecticut, Hawaii, and Utah, are considering establishing taxes on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use. The purpose of the tax, typically referred to as a “carbon tax,” is to decrease carbon dioxide emissions in an effort to mitigate climate change.
There are at least two problems inherent to carbon taxes: they hurt the poor and do nothing to prevent future warming, says Tim Benson, a policy analyst at The Heartland Institute.
“Carbon taxes are extremely regressive because low-income families spend proportionally more on energy than higher-income families,” Benson said. “Carbon taxes, like every energy tax, hit poorer families especially hard, which is why nearly every carbon tax bill introduced contains some form of rebate or tax credit for residents in general or low-income households in particular. Carbon tax proposals are a simple though harmful way for legislators to appear to be doing something to combat climate change. Read more
NOAA/NWS document: wind turbines affect weather radar, create false storm impressions
Wind turbines, both tower and blades block radar signals. The spinning blades produce a false Doppler effect that looks like a storm. Read more ☼
How Solar And Wind Are Causing Electricity Prices To Skyrocket
by Michael Schellenberger
Over the last year, the media have published story after story after story about the declining price of solar panels and wind turbines. People who read these stories are understandably left with the impression that the more solar and wind energy we produce, the lower electricity prices will become. And yet that’s not what’s happening. In fact, it’s the opposite.
The reason? Their fundamentally unreliable nature. Both solar and wind produce too much energy when societies don’t need it, and not enough when they do. Solar and wind thus require that natural gas plants, hydro-electric dams, batteries or some other form of reliable power be ready at a moment’s notice to start churning out electricity when the wind stops blowing and the sun stops shining.
And unreliability requires solar- and/or wind-heavy places like Germany, California, and Denmark to pay neighboring nations or states to take their solar and wind energy when they are producing too much of it. Read more ☼
German renewable energy problems
Germany has the highest installed capacity of renewable energy per capita. They also have the highest electricity rates. (See my post: The High Cost of Electricity from Wind and Solar Generation ) Now, the true cost of “green” energy is coming back to bite them. See these two articles:
Germany’s Wind Energy Mess: As Subsidies Expire, Thousands Of Turbines To Shut Down…Environmental Nightmare! ☼
The Connection Between Russia and 2 Green Groups Fighting Fracking in US
by Kevin Mooney
New Yorkers who are missing out on the natural gas revolution could be victims of Russian spy operations that fund popular environmental groups, current and former U.S. government officials and experts on Russia worry.
Natural gas development of the celebrated Marcellus Shale deposits has spurred jobs and other economic growth in neighboring Pennsylvania. But not in New York, which nearly 10 years ago banned the process of hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, to produce natural gas.
Two environmental advocacy groups that successfully lobbied against fracking in New York each received more than $10 million in grants from a foundation in California that got financial support from a Bermuda company congressional investigators linked to the Russians, public documents show.
The environmental groups Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club Foundation received millions of dollars in grants from the San Francisco-based Sea Change Foundation. Read more ☼
CLIMATE MADNESS AND THE NANNY STATE
Penn State’s 98-Year-Old Outing Club Is No Longer Allowed to Go Outside
Students can still play field hockey, rugby, and football at Penn State…but they can no longer enjoy a cave or go scuba diving or even make an outdoor hiking adventure under the guidance of trained student leaders at Penn State. Why? It’s too dangerous to be out of cell phone range. Read more ☼
Campus Craziness: Cornell Course Examines ‘Derangement’ Of ‘Climate Denialism’
A new seminar at Cornell University is determined to shut down “climate denialism,” claiming that there is “mounting evidence” that “global warming is real.” Deranged Authority: The Force of Culture in Climate Change, worth four academic credits, is set to be taught in the Fall 2018 semester by cultural anthropologist Jennifer Carlson. The course description asserts that “climate denialism is on the rise,” suggesting the increase is related to the rise of “reactionary, rightwing [sic] politics in the United States, UK, and Germany.” Read more ☼
UN Says Climate Change Is ‘Single Biggest Threat to Life, Security and Prosperity on Earth’
The United Nations Climate Change Secretariat released its first-ever annual report this week, in which it held up its “Gender Action Plan” as a key to increasing the participation of women in responding to global warming. Read more ☼
Absurd “loss & damage” policy advances at UN’s Bonn climate summit
by David Wojick, Ph.D.
The contentious (and absurd) concept of “loss and damage” compensation for climate change took several steps forward at the Bonn UN climate summit. In addition to a packed two day conference, we now have an established cost estimate.
Loss and damage is diplomatic code for the idea that the developed countries, especially America, should pay the developing countries for the bad things that they attribute to climate change. This includes pretty much all bad weather, plus the supposed effects of sea level rise, and who knows what else.
Here is a clear policy proposal that came up during the conference:
“Resources to offset climate-related losses and damages need to be scaled up and the perpetrators, not the victims, must pay. Serious consideration must be given to solutions like a climate damages tax on fossil fuel extraction or consumption, a climate levy on those sectors that contribute the most to climate change and more impactful carbon pricing schemes. These mechanisms could raise the hundreds of billions of dollars a year that are necessary, could help to reduce the production of greenhouse gases and could be designed to respond faster to immediate or slowly unfurling climate disasters.”
So, for example, a gasoline tax throughout America and the rest of the developed world might be part of the proposed loss and damage compensation picture. I am not making this up.
That this scheme is under serious discussion at UN climate conferences is simply not being reported in the American mainstream media. It is however being widely reported in the developing world, with great enthusiasm. Of course they are all for it. Read more ☼
British schools ditch analog clocks because kids can’t read them
How many children’s songs are there that taught kids how to tell time? Must be hundreds, maybe thousands. But that was before the digital revolution made analog clocks a quaint holdover from the past. In fact, in Great Britain, analog clocks in schools have become useless because kids are unable to read them. Read more ☼
Hawaii Bans Popular Sunscreen Products
Tourists beware – green zealots in the Hawaii legislature have just passed a bill which bans safe, effective sunscreen products. From January 2021, sunscreen products which contain potent ultraviolet blockers oxybenzone and octinoxate will be illegal because the chemicals might harm coral reefs. Read more ☼
Scientists Hope Mammoth ‘De-extinction’ Will Save Earth
Scientists hope to create a genetically engineered elephant-mammoth hybrid and send it to the Arctic to prevent a so-called “methane time-bomb,” which could cause widespread environmental devastation. Scientists fear that the absence of large mammals pressing down and scraping back thick layers of winter snow in the region prevents the cold from penetrating the soil. Combined with warmer summers, the Arctic permafrost is melting. As a result, the frozen soil, packed with leaves and other organic materials that haven’t decayed, will become exposed, releasing carbon into the atmosphere in the form of the greenhouse gasses, carbon dioxide and methane. Read more ☼
Analysis: California’s Solar Panel Mandate Lowers CO2 Emissions by 0.32%
By Elizabeth Harrington
California will mandate solar panels on new homes out of concern for climate change, a policy that will raise prices in the most expensive home market in the country and does little to decrease the state’s carbon footprint. MIT reports: “California estimates that the new rule will cut emissions by 1.4 million metric tons over three years, which is a small fraction of the 440 million tons the state generated in 2015.” Emissions would be reduced by 0.32 percent. Read more ☼
“Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.” —Joseph Story (1833)
“The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams
“…arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside… Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them….” – Thomas Paine
“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them…”- Richard Henry Lee
“The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.” – Noah Webster
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms …disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson
“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.” – George Mason
“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …” – Richard Henry Lee ☼
* * *
1) Support private property rights.
2) Support multiple use management of federal lands for agriculture, livestock grazing, mining, oil and gas production, recreation, timber harvesting and water development activities.
3) Support a balance of environmental responsibility and economic benefit for all Americans by urging that environmental policy be based on good science and sound economic principles.
Newsletters can be viewed online on Jonathan’s Wryheat Blog:
See my essay on climate change:
The Constitution is the real contract with America.
* * *
People for the West – Tucson, Inc.
PO Box 86868
Tucson, AZ 85754-6868
Jonathan DuHamel, President & Editor
Dr. John Forrester, Vice President
Lonni Lees, Associate Editor
People for the West – Tucson, Inc. is an Arizona tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) corporation. Newsletter subscriptions are free.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.