A gray wolf at The Wild Animal Sanctuary in Keenesburg, Colorado in 2007. Andy Cross / The Denver Post via Getty Images
The voters of Colorado have made history by electing to reintroduce gray wolves to the state.
<p>The opponents of Proposition 114, as the measure was called, conceded Thursday, <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/2020/11/colorado-approves-gray-wolf-reintroduction/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">National Geographic reported</a>. As of that afternoon, the plan to reintroduce wolves had 1,495,523 votes for and 1,475,235 against with 90 percent of the votes counted. However, the remaining 10 percent were all from pro-wolf areas.</p><p>The proposition's victory marks the first time the decision to reintroduce an <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/animals/" target="_self">animal</a> species has been made at the ballot box. It also comes exactly one week after the Trump administration <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-administration-gray-wolves-protection-2648559353.html" target="_self">announced</a> it would remove <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species-act" target="_self">Endangered Species Act</a> protections for gray wolves in the lower 48 states.</p>
<p>"This is a great victory for wolves coming on the heels of Trump's illegal action to remove federal protection, and it will help restore the natural balance in Colorado's Rocky Mountains," <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) senior <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation" target="_self">conservation</a> advocate Michael Robinson said in a press release. "The people of the Colorado have helped turn the page on a brutal chapter of our history that saw wolves exterminated across the West."</p>
<div id="2d6e9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a33ea4499054a4921f3a6a6987336985"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1324452705558056962" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">WE DID IT! Together, our pack has passed Prop 114 to bring the gray wolf home to Colorado and restore our natural b… https://t.co/bAhoQ7ZNfj</div> — Vote YES on 114 - #RestoreTheHowl (@Vote YES on 114 - #RestoreTheHowl)<a href="https://twitter.com/RockyMtnWolf/statuses/1324452705558056962">1604609106.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Gray wolves once roamed across most of the U.S., but hunting and trapping almost drove them to extinction by the start of the twentieth century, National Geographic pointed out. Colorado became the first Rocky Mountain state to put a bounty on wolves in 1869, and the last wolf in the state was killed in 1945, according to the CBD.</p><p>Wolves were granted Endangered Species Act protections in the 1970s and were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park and Idaho in 1995 and 1996, according to National Geographic. From there, they have spread to Montana, Washington State, Oregon and northern California. However, they have not recovered their historic range and remain missing from states like Maine, Utah and Colorado, which is one reason why scientists argued the Trump administration's decision to delist wolves was premature.</p><p>Now, the wolves are coming back to Colorado. Proposition 114 tasks Colorado Parks and Wildlife with making a plan to reintroduce wolves to the area west of the Continental Divide no later than Dec. 31, 2023, according to the CBD.</p>
<p>Supporters of wolf reintroduction argue that wolves play an important role in Western ecosystems, National Geographic pointed out. They help to manage deer and elk populations, boost smaller predators like foxes by competing with and killing coyotes and provide food for scavengers including wolverines and bears.</p><p>"Wolves evolved in the western United States for hundreds of thousands of years with their prey," former state biologist and environmental advocate Gary Skiba told <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/29/should-wolves-be-brought-back-to-colorado-a-rancher-and-a-biologist-have-their-say/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Colorado Public Radio</a>. "As a result of that, we've seen improved environmental conditions, at least partly because of wolves in Yellowstone. I won't say entirely, but partly. We won't probably see the same thing exactly in Colorado, but wolves were part of how the ecosystems function. We think we need to have that back."</p><p>The opposition to the measure has been led by farmers, ranchers and hunters who are worried about the impact of wolves on livestock and game, <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2020/11/05/colorado-voters-approve-gray-wolf-reintroducton/" target="_blank">The Colorado Sun explained</a>. Since Proposition 114 had more support in urban areas of Colorado, its opponents argued that the people voting for it were not the ones who would have to live with the new neighbors.</p>
<p>"All along, our opposition campaign was led by those who would be directly impacted by this measure, including real Coloradans, sportsmen, farmers and ranchers, outdoor enthusiasts, and more," Patrick Pratt, the spokesman of the anti-reintroduction group Coloradans Protecting Wildlife, said in a statement reported by The Colorado Sun.</p><p>But Rob Edward of the pro-reintroduction Rocky Mountain Wolf Action Fund said the divide was not so clear cut. He pointed to five counties on the Wester Slope, where wolves will be introduced, who voted for the measure.</p><p>"We would not be having this conversation today had it not been for people on the Western Slope voting for wolves," he told The Colorado Sun.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Will Colorado Bring Back Wolves? It's Up to Voters - EcoWatch ›
- Four Environmental Fights on the 2020 Ballot - EcoWatch ›
- Oppose Welfare Ranching, Not Wolves - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Smoke from the East Troublesome fire in Colorado on Oct. 22, 2020. RubyT / Flickr
Thousands of homes were evacuated Wednesday after a Colorado wildfire exploded in size, growing at a rate of 6,000 acres per hour.
<p>The East Troublesome fire had been burning since Oct. 14, but suddenly took off Wednesday in a more erratic manner than even worst-case-scenario predictions had anticipated, Grand County Sheriff Brett Schroetlin said, as <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2020/10/22/east-troublesome-fire-grand-lake-destruction/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">The Colorado Sun reported</a>. The fire had grown to 125,600 acres by Thursday morning and 170,163 acres by Thursday evening, making it the second-largest wildfire in Colorado history. It is only five percent contained, according to <a href="https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/7242/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">InciWeb</a>.</p><p>"The growth that you see on this fire is unheard of," Schroetlin said during a Thursday press conference reported by <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/10/22/926838887/colorado-fire-grows-by-over-100-000-acres-in-1-day-hits-rocky-mountain-national-" target="_blank">NPR</a>. "We plan for the worst. This is the worst of the worst of the worst. And no matter how we look at it, we can't control Mother Nature."</p>
<div id="85e11" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3577a8e0d4e8a731bf0b62ac772fc8c1"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1319181412315107333" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Heartbreaking video of homes burning in the #EastTroublesomeFire overnight. Listening to scanners right now and fir… https://t.co/y82wWnmchu</div> — Emily Allen (@Emily Allen)<a href="https://twitter.com/EmilyAReports/statuses/1319181412315107333">1603352332.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Schroetlin said Thursday morning that there was "lots of structure loss," according to The Colorado Sun, though no official tally of damage has been reported. As many as five people were unaccounted for by Thursday evening. However, there have been no reports of deaths or injuries.</p><p>The fast-moving fire was first driven by high winds into the town of Grand Lake Wednesday night, <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/22/grand-county-braces-for-another-large-growth-day-for-the-east-troublesome-fire/" target="_blank">Colorado Public Radio (CPR) reported</a>.</p><p>"It was basically out of a movie," retired newscaster Ernie Bjorkman told CPR. "It was a firestorm in downtown Grand Lake. Smoke and embers flying around. It was just a chaotic scene. We locked the door and said, 'hopefully, house, we'll see you when we get back.' "</p><p>As of Thursday, town manager John Crone told CPR that the town's historic Grand Lake Lodge and downtown area had not burned.</p><p>The fire then crossed the Continental Divide by 1:15 pm Thursday, according to The Colorado Sun. It also entered Rocky Mountain National Park, forcing it to close.</p>
<div id="0784c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="083c554cdc624bc22b52ef91e2646fb9"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1319357789836353544" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Latest satellite info shows increased fire intensity on the #EastTroublesomeFire early this afternoon. The fire has… https://t.co/GZC77SWXqB</div> — NWS Boulder (@NWS Boulder)<a href="https://twitter.com/NWSBoulder/statuses/1319357789836353544">1603394384.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The flames also menaced the park gateway town of Estes Park, filling it with smoke Thursday morning.</p><p>"The air quality has just decreased to a level that's almost unsafe to go outside," resident Alec Rogers told CPR.</p><p>Estes Park was also put under an evacuation order Thursday, and traffic stalled as people tried to leave.</p>
<div id="93884" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="87faed3af4a1f8c5665138a79cb37558"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1319381273757028375" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">PHOTOS: The sky has gone from yellow to orange. There is a long line of cars waiting to leave Estes Park.… https://t.co/tsKRcONrNk</div> — Matthew Jonas (@Matthew Jonas)<a href="https://twitter.com/photojmatthew/statuses/1319381273757028375">1603399983.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>However, incident commander Noel Livingston said Thursday that a cold front had checked the fire somewhat as it burned inside Rocky Mountain National Park and that it was no longer headed towards Estes Park, The Colorado Sun reported.</p><p>The concern is now that the fire will merge with the Cameron Peak fire, the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/colorado-wildfire-cameron-peak-2648215765.html" target="_self">largest fire in Colorado history</a>, which is burning only 10 to 12 miles away. Livingston said he thought a merger was unlikely, but not impossible.</p><p>"This year has been one of those years when low-potential events seem to be happening with high frequency," Livingston said, as The Colorado Sun reported.</p><p>Officials are hopeful that snow forecast for this weekend will help them to get the fire under control, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/22/us/colorado-evacuations-west-coast-fires/index.html" target="_blank">CNN reported</a>.</p>
<p>The rapid growth of the East Troublesome fire is only the latest development to scorch the fire-weary Western U.S. this year. Its explosion to the second-largest fire in state history means that three of Colorado's five largest fires have now ignited in 2020.</p><p>The fire was driven quickly east by a combination of high winds, dry air and the fuel provided by lodgepole pines killed by beetles, InciWeb said. However, the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a> is creating ideal conditions for fire across the West. Almost all of Colorado was experiencing <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" target="_self">drought</a> by the end of September, according to NPR. Fire scientists told <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/us/colorado-wildfires.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">The New York Times</a> that fires burning so close to winter in Colorado show how the season has grown because of changing conditions.</p><p>"People have built and developed in these areas without recognizing the hazard they're in, and climate change is notching that up every year," University of Montana fire ecologist Philip Higuera told The New York Times. "It has me concerned for communities across the West that are in increasingly flammable landscapes."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Colorado Wildfire Forces 1,000 to Evacuate - EcoWatch ›
- Colorado Battles Largest Wildfire in State History - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A wolf chases magpies and ravens from an elk carcass in Yellowstone National Park. Jim Peaco / NPS, CC by 4.0
By Rebecca Niemiec and Kevin Crooks
Colorado voters will decide on Nov. 3 whether the state should reintroduce gray wolves (Canis lupus) after a nearly 80-year absence. Ballot Proposition 114 would require the state to develop and oversee a science-based plan to restore wolves, focused in Western Colorado and initiated by the end of 2023.
<p>Restoring wolves is a contentious topic that taps into diverse values and passions. Indeed, much of the conflict surrounding wolves isn't human versus animal, but human versus human.</p><p>Creating environments that allow humans and carnivores to thrive and that minimize social conflict is a global challenge. Examples include <a href="https://theconversation.com/black-bears-adapt-to-life-near-humans-by-burning-the-midnight-oil-118899" target="_blank">black bears</a> and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/bears-become-more-nocturnal-to-survive-1.5636570" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">grizzly bears</a> in North America, <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-09-05/mountain-lions-on-the-streets-chilean-capital-sees-big-cat-influx-amid-lockdown" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pumas</a> in North and South America, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/26/harmless-or-vicious-hunter-the-uneasy-return-of-europes-wolves" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wolves</a> in Europe, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204320" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lions</a> in Africa and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/01/over-1000-people-killed-india-humans-wildlife-territories-meet" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">tigers</a> in India.</p><p>As researchers who study the <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=1h72-2oAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">social</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mZNYgLcAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ecological</a> dimensions of <a href="https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/centerforhumancarnivorecoexistence/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">human-carnivore coexistence</a>, we see the vote on Proposition 114 as a catalyst for broader discussions about carnivore conservation and management. In our view, the best way to find workable solutions is to include people <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QppmBszEF6zsNnhBJ7Q2-pSWRR-Zx_ln/view" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">representing all sides of the issue</a> in shared decision-making.</p>
Back by Popular Demand?
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUzOTQxNy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNzI4NTkyMX0.BeRR61CH6a-TWwSw1p4kmng4x4tXRaSMKyTRHKIHmOw/img.jpg?width=980" id="1f7fe" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="339e3443dc63f3be06e24a82f0b37a03" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />Gray wolves once roamed much of North America, but hunting, trapping and poisoning in the 19th and 20th centuries greatly reduced their numbers. Living with Wolves, CC BY-ND
<p>For thousands of years before white settlers pushed west, gray wolves ranged throughout the area that is now Colorado, from the Western Slope and Front Range of the Rocky Mountains into the Eastern Plains. As the region was settled, government agencies started <a href="https://mhs.mt.gov/research/collections/newspapers/extra/wolves" target="_blank">paying bounties</a> for wolves and other predators that were seen as threats to livestock and game. By the 1940s, shooting, trapping and poisoning had systematically eradicated wolves from Colorado.</p><p>In recent decades a few lone wolves migrated to Colorado from adjacent states, but were killed or simply disappeared. Then, starting in 2019, a pack of up to six wolves and a separate lone wolf were sighted in northern Colorado. Recent media reports indicate that some of these wolves may have been <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/09/colorado-wolves-may-have-been-killed-in-wyoming/" target="_blank">shot and killed along the Wyoming-Colorado border</a>.</p><p>Several scientific studies have concluded that Colorado can still <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolves-in-colorado-history-and-status-8-007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">support a self-sustaining, viable wolf population</a>. Wolves can live successfully in many types of habitats where there is enough prey and where humans will tolerate them.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9aec767b3325e364a8605524504f95ab"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wTx_jqpqqfU?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>Today gray wolves are <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolf-policy-8-008/" target="_blank">protected in Colorado as an endangered species</a>. However, they have no legal protection in most of Wyoming, where they can be killed on sight. This makes it challenging for wolves to migrate from the Yellowstone region, where they were <a href="https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolf-restoration.htm" target="_blank">reintroduced in the mid-1990s</a>, through Wyoming into Colorado.</p><p>The only other adjoining states with resident wolf populations are Arizona and New Mexico, where the endangered subspecies of Mexican gray wolf was reintroduced starting in the 1990s. But <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolf-policy-8-008/" target="_blank">federal policy requires</a> that wolves leaving the reintroduction zone be recaptured and returned to it. Ultimately, then, if Coloradans want to bring wolves back, having wildlife biologists reintroduce them is the most likely route.</p><p>Proposition 114 was placed on the ballot through a citizen initiative led by <a href="https://www.wolfactionfund.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the Rocky Mountain Wolf Action Fund</a>. It asserts that gray wolves are endangered in Colorado; were historically an essential part of Colorado's wildlands, but were exterminated by humans; and will <a href="https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/reintroduction-and-management-gray-wolves" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">help restore ecological balance</a> if they are reintroduced.</p><p>Wolves are predators at the top of the food chain. Studies from <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/ecological-effects-of-wolves-8-005/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">national parks</a> suggest that wolves' presence can produce ecological effects that ripple through ecosystems. But science also tells us that such impacts are difficult to predict outside of national parks, including in Colorado.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUzOTQzMC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNzM1MjI5M30.tx5g8Nrc4xdmdXgnCdoCmgZKlygX7Gz4haMwOjYKAZo/img.jpg?width=980" id="2c229" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="544f8509acef11a0615aff9380916aea" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
A wolf chases magpies and ravens from an elk carcass in Yellowstone National Park. NPS/Jim Peaco, CC BY
Clashing Values
<p>Proposition 114 has strong support in Colorado. <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/public-perspectives-on-wolves-and-wolf-reintroduction-8-004/" target="_blank">Statewide surveys </a> conducted by phone, by mail and online over the past two decades have found that 66% to 84% of respondents supported reintroducing wolves. This support is consistent across different regions of the state and diverse demographic groups.</p><p>In a <a href="https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9074" target="_blank">survey of Colorado residents</a> that we conducted in 2019, the prospect that wolves could contribute to a balanced ecosystem was the most commonly cited reason for supporting reintroduction. Other arguments included people's cultural and emotional connections to wolves, and <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/moral-arguments-related-to-wolf-restoration-and-management-8-011/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">moral arguments</a> that restoring a species humans had eradicated was the right thing to do.</p><p>While overall public support is strong, over half of Colorado's 64 counties have passed <a href="https://www.drovers.com/article/wolf-reintroduction-ballot-colorado" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">resolutions against restoring wolves</a>. Many ranching and hunting associations are actively campaigning against the ballot measure.</p><p>In our 2019 study, we found that media coverage in the state focused more strongly on <a href="https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9074" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">perceived negative impacts</a> associated with wolf reintroduction than on beneficial effects. Surveys show that resident concerns include threats to <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolves-and-human-safety-8-003/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">human safety and pets</a>; <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolves-and-livestock-8-010/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wolf attacks on livestock</a>; and the potential for wolves to <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/wolves-big-game-and-hunting-8-001/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reduce deer and elk populations</a>, threatening hunting opportunities.</p>Who Decides?
<p>This measure is the first giving voters in the U.S. an opportunity to weigh in on bringing back a native species. Addressing the issue through a ballot measure adds a unique twist to public and media discussions about wolves.</p><p>Supporters call it a democratic way to ensure that the <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/29/should-wolves-be-brought-back-to-colorado-a-rancher-and-a-biologist-have-their-say/" target="_blank">public's values are recognized</a>. They also argue that voters are deciding only whether wolves should be reintroduced, while allowing experts at the <a href="https://cpw.state.co.us/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">state wildlife agency</a> to create a reintroduction plan <a href="https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/election/howl-you-vote-wolf-advocates-opponents-ask-colorado/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">based on the best available science</a>.</p><div id="4c11f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dec8674441e02372e50b796d848e4130"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1316474105315483649" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">According to a recent poll of 900 demographically representative likely voters, two-thirds supported “restoring wol… https://t.co/74LMG1PYtW</div> — High Country News (@High Country News)<a href="https://twitter.com/highcountrynews/statuses/1316474105315483649">1602706860.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Opponents assert that wildlife management decisions should be <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/29/should-wolves-be-brought-back-to-colorado-a-rancher-and-a-biologist-have-their-say/" target="_blank">left to state experts</a>. As some critics note, the <a href="https://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/Commission.aspx" target="_blank">Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission</a> has decided <a href="https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/CON-Wolf-Management.aspx/" target="_blank">against wolf reintroduction four times</a>, most recently in 2016. The commission is a citizen board appointed by the governor and made up of sportspersons, agricultural producers, recreationists and nonconsumptive wildlife organizations. Opponents also point out that people who do not support reintroducing wolves, such as ranchers, will bear a disproportionate share of the costs.</p><p>These arguments reflect deeper power dynamics that influence wildlife management across the U.S. Many wildlife agencies tend to represent people and organizations who believe wildlife should be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13493" target="_blank">managed for human benefit</a>, particularly hunting and other consumptive uses.</p><p>These agencies receive much of their funding from <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-better-conserve-wildlife-consider-all-kinds-of-animals-not-just-the-ones-we-hunt-58556" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hunting and fishing license fees</a>. And people who believe wildlife should be managed to benefit humans tend to support using lethal methods to control wolves and other carnivores. They also are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1617138112001173" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more likely to oppose reintroducing them</a> where they have been eradicated.</p><p>However, <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-hunting-declines-efforts-grow-to-broaden-the-funding-base-for-wildlife-conservation-105792" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">support for this view is declining</a>. A growing share of Americans believe humans should coexist with carnivores and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13493" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">oppose managing them primarily for human benefit</a>. But because agency decisions don't always reflect these increasingly popular values, people who advocate coexisting with nature are seeking a greater say via the ballot box.</p>
Finding Consensus
<p>Studies suggest that ballot initiatives like 114 will <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.07.032" target="_blank">become more common</a> as public values toward wildlife change and more diverse groups seek to influence wildlife management. For us, the key question is how to recognize and incorporate these differing values as agencies make decisions.</p><p>Research drawing on insights from <a href="https://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/people-predators/dialogue-and-social-conflict-about-wolves-8-009/" target="_blank">psychology, political science and sociology</a> suggests that it is critical to run<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QppmBszEF6zsNnhBJ7Q2-pSWRR-Zx_ln/view" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> truly participatory processes</a> that engage government agencies and people who have a stake in the issue in shared decision-making. Fostering dialogue between groups that value wildlife differently can build empathy and mutual understanding and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.015" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">foster compromise</a>. Broadening the conversation in this way is essential for coexisting with carnivores with minimal impacts on predators and people.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Four Environmental Fights on the 2020 Ballot - EcoWatch ›
- Conservation Groups Challenge Kill-at-Will Policy for Wyoming ... ›
- Oppose Welfare Ranching, Not Wolves - EcoWatch ›
- Colorado Votes to Reintroduce Wolves, Approving Historic Ballot Initiative - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Heavy Smoke rises from the Cameron Peak fire as it continues to burn on Oct. 5, 2020 in Larimer County near Fort Collins, Colorado. Helen H. Richardson / MediaNews Group / The Denver Post via Getty Images
For the second time this year, Colorado is battling the largest wildfire in state history.
<p>Strong winds pushed the Cameron Peak fire 17 miles to the east Tuesday and Wednesday, <a href="https://wildfiretoday.com/2020/10/14/strong-winds-push-cameron-peak-fire-east-prompting-more-evacuations/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Wildfire Today reported</a>. It burned more than 20,000 acres in a single day, swelling to 158,300 acres by 7:30 p.m. Wednesday and placing at least nine new areas under evacuation orders, the <a href="https://eu.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/10/14/largest-wildfire-colorado-history-cameron-peak-fire/3659545001/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Fort Collins Coloradoan reported</a>.</p>
<div id="76933" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7d898cedb438dfd8534d4f496549ca2b"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1316578050574897153" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Here is the #CameronPeakFire map created with data from the multi mission aircraft (MMA) flight earlier today. Th… https://t.co/PQanYpzbyT</div> — Canyon Lakes Ranger RD (@Canyon Lakes Ranger RD)<a href="https://twitter.com/usfsclrd/statuses/1316578050574897153">1602731642.0</a></blockquote></div>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUyMDA2OS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MDk2MjgxMX0.kIfbtaRMKrM71wvz48H6dVC8P4GP5U0buEVJr3V3Vbo/img.png?width=980" id="89059" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4833a1292ec73bbdc9abcc80faf7ed51" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>"This really was almost an epic day for doing evacuations and again, for everybody that's been moved, I know it's extremely difficult," officials said Wednesday night, as <a href="https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/10/14/cameron-peak-fire-largest-wildfire-colorado-history/" target="_blank">CBS4 Denver reported</a>. "We do know that we lost structures today and for anybody who is impacted, you know, our heart goes out to you."<br></p><p>One family lost two cabins they owned in the Buckhorn Canyon area.</p><p>"The materials is one thing," Parker Hutchinson told CBS4 Denver. "But the amount of family heirlooms and just the memories of that area, they've been burned."</p><p>Despite these individual tragedies, Larimer County Sheriff Justin Smith said the day could have been even worse.</p><p>"We have no reported injuries, no deaths, a lot fewer structures were impacted that we truly anticipated based on what we saw with that said, there's certainly a lot of folks that got hit," he said, as <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/14/cameron-peak-fire-spreads-quickly-into-more-populated-areas/" target="_blank">Colorado Public Radio reported</a>.</p>
<div id="f67b3" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ab50c11f23a7fdd3176e6fc537d96ed2"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1316443792988352522" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Time lapse sent by a colleague (with permission to share), taken near the mouth of the Big Thompson canyon… https://t.co/phRPfP4sAs</div> — Russ Schumacher (@Russ Schumacher)<a href="https://twitter.com/russ_schumacher/statuses/1316443792988352522">1602699633.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The Cameron Peak fire has been burning since Aug. 13 in the Arapahoe and Roosevelt National Forest. It has persisted despite a snowstorm in early September and more snow on Sunday, fueled by high winds and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" target="_self">drought</a>. It had already destroyed or damaged 99 structures before exploding Tuesday, and officials said conditions were still too dangerous to assess the total number of buildings impacted in the last 24 hours. It is now 56 percent contained and more than 1,000 people are fighting it.</p><p>The fire is burning to the west of Fort Collins, but Smith said he did not think the flames would reach that more populous area or the nearby city of Loveland because they are protected by bodies of water and a lack of the heavy timber that feeds the flames.</p><p>The two largest fires in Colorado history both ignited this year. The Cameron Peak fire unseated the Pine Gulch fire, which burned 139,007 acres over the summer and held the record for only 48 days.</p>
<p>The ten largest fires in Colorado history all took place in the last 20 years, and seven took place in the last 10, according to figures reported by the Fort Collins Coloradoan.</p><p>As of August, 2020 was Colorado's third driest year on record and twelfth warmest, according to <a href="https://www.cpr.org/2020/08/20/colorado-wildfires-climate-change-drought-snowpack/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Colorado Public Radio</a>. Almost a fourth of the state is experiencing extreme drought. These fire-fueling conditions are in line with what scientists say the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a> will do to the state.</p><p>"What we're seeing here is indicative of the fact that when the hot, dry years come around, they're hotter than most of the time when they've occurred in the past," state climatologist Russ Schumacher told Colorado Public Radio. "And that's pretty well in line with what climate projections have been saying for some time."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Colorado Wildfire Forces 1,000 to Evacuate - EcoWatch ›
- Colorado Wildfire Grows by 6,000 Acres an Hour - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Public health officials in Colorado are urging the public to be vigilant after a squirrel tested positive for bubonic plague. Courtney McGough / Flickr
The plague has recently seen an uptick in cases, and the World Health Organization has categorized it as a re-emerging disease. That's why public health officials in Colorado are urging people to be vigilant after a squirrel tested positive for bubonic plague.
<p>The squirrel was found in the town of Morrison, west of Denver. Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) officials announced the discovery of the plague-infected squirrel in <a href="https://www.jeffco.us/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=1275" target="_blank">a statement</a> over the weekend. It's the first case of plague in the county, according to the statement, as <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bubonic-plague-colorado-squirrels-test-positive/" target="_blank">CBS News</a> reported.</p><p>"Plague is an infectious disease caused by the bacteria Yersinia pestis, and can be contracted by humans and household animals if proper precautions are not taken," officials from JCPH said in the statement.</p>
<p>The county was prompted to test the squirrels after someone in Morrison reported seeing at least 15 dead squirrels around the town. Officials tested one, and since it was positive for bubonic plague, they expect others to be infected, according to CBS News.</p><p>The disease has been around for centuries and is responsible for the deadliest pandemic in human history. An estimated 50 million people in Europe died during the Black Death pandemic of the Middle Ages. JCPH warns the public that it can infect both humans and animals if proper precautions are not taken, according to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/us/bubonic-plague-squirrel-scn-trnd/index.html" target="_blank">CNN</a>.</p><p>Every year, there are approximately 1,000 to 2,000 reported cases, but that is likely an undercounted number as there are many unreported cases, according to the WHO, as CNN reported. The U.S. reports up to a few dozen cases every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Two people died in Colorado from the plague in 2015, according to CNN.</p>
<p>Rodents are the main vector of plague transmission from animals to humans, but the disease can also be passed on through flea bites or from person to person. People can be infected from direct contact with blood or tissues of infected animals such as a cough or a bite, according to <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/squirrel-tests-positive-bubonic-plague-colorado/story?id=71769840" target="_blank">ABC News</a>.</p><p>That danger hit home on the other side of the world this week when a teenage boy in Mongolia died from bubonic plague after eating a marmot, according to a separate report from <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/15/asia/mongolia-plague-death-scli-intl/index.html" target="_blank">CNN</a>.</p><p>Marmots are large ground squirrels, a type of rodent, that have historically been linked to plague outbreaks in the region. Tests confirmed the teenager had contracted bubonic plague and authorities imposed quarantine measures in the Tugrug district of Gobi-Altai province, according to CNN.</p><p>The quarantine began on Sunday, but so far the 15 people authorities isolated who came into contact with the teenager have all been healthy.</p>
<p>JCPH warned pet owners that cats are highly susceptible to the plague from things like flea bites, a rodent scratch or bite, and ingesting an infected rodent. Cats can die if not treated quickly with antibiotics after contact with the plague. Dogs, on the other hand, are far less likely to pick up the plague. However, they can contract it through fleabites, according to ABC News.</p><p>In its statement, JCPH recommended several precautions to protect against the plague, including eliminating sources of food and shelter for wild animals, avoiding sick or dead wild animals and rodents, and consulting with vets about flea and tick control, as CBS News reported</p><p>"Risk for getting plague is extremely low as long as precautions are taken," the statement said.</p><p>The statement also added that plague symptoms include sudden onset of high fever, chills, headache, nausea and extreme pain and swelling of lymph nodes, which could occur within two to seven days after exposure to the bacteria.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Bubonic Plague Case Confirmed in China's Inner Mongolia ... ›
- Black Death Is Back! Two Cases of Plague Confirmed in China ›
- Melting Ice Could Unleash Deadly Bacteria Lain Dormant for Millennia ›
- California’s First Plague Case in 5 Years Is a Reminder to Protect Yourself Outdoors - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
More than 1,000 people were told to evacuate their homes when a wildfire ignited in the foothills west of Denver Monday, Colorado Public Radio reported.
<p><br/></p>
<p>The Elephant Butte Fire sparked in Evergreen, Colorado around 2:30 p.m., <a href="https://kdvr.com/news/local/elephant-butte-fire-in-evergreen-what-we-know/" target="_blank">KDVR reported</a>. As of Tuesday morning, it had spread to 50 acres and was zero percent contained, the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office tweeted.</p>
<div id="ee717" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c382c3bf5156f3c108c5b46303ead1d1"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1283030707460354051" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Day 2 Update on the #ElephantButteFire Fire is still at 50 acres in size with zero containment. No evacuation order… https://t.co/1BF7UMdl6f</div> — Jeffco Sheriff (@Jeffco Sheriff)<a href="https://twitter.com/jeffcosheriffco/statuses/1283030707460354051">1594733332.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>One of the families forced to evacuate Monday told <a href="https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/07/13/elephant-butte-fire-lincoln-family/" target="_blank">CBS4</a> the land they fled had been in the family for 100 years.</p><p>"It's completely made out of wood. It's a 104-year-old house. I've lived there all my life," teenager Aidan Lincoln told CBS4. "It's been there since before my dad was born. It means a lot to my family."</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Right now we’re at 700 homes evacuated in the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ElephantButte?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ElephantButte</a> fire in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Evergreen?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Evergreen</a>. I talked with a 17 year old who was in tears believing his family home has gone up.<br>Latest on <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSDenver?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CBSDenver</a> <a href="https://t.co/EAhaVawPN4">pic.twitter.com/EAhaVawPN4</a></p>— Alan Gionet (@AlanGTV) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlanGTV/status/1282824359397208067?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>Lincoln feared the family home had caught fire, but the sheriff's office says no homes have been lost. Fire officials also said no one had been injured as of 6:30 p.m. Monday, <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/13/evergreen-wildfire-elephant-butte-fire/" target="_blank">The Denver Post reported</a>.</p><p>The fire is burning in the Upper Bear Creek Road and Overlook Trail area, according to Evergreen Fire Rescue. The evacuation area initially covered a five-mile radius and around 250 homes but was later increased to cover around 1,000 homes. The Elk Meadow and Alderfer/Three Sisters parks were also both closed because of the blaze.</p>
<div id="e2b09" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e665c6f540754d83a6eb94ba8f6e04fa"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1282818933762875393" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Elk Meadow and Alderfer/Three Sisters Parks are both CLOSED due to the #elephantbuttefire #jeffco @efr_co https://t.co/nyHki32PjB</div> — Jeffco Sheriff (@Jeffco Sheriff)<a href="https://twitter.com/jeffcosheriffco/statuses/1282818933762875393">1594682842.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>There were more than 100 people fighting the fire Monday and at least three air tankers and several helicopters, Colorado Public Radio reported.</p>
<div id="ab90e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d20a60932bf9aa3d5c9336d1c31edb57"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1282863366071914496" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Though these images were taken about an hour ago, they give you a different perspective of what the… https://t.co/Rcvn7TtlCQ</div> — Jeffco Sheriff (@Jeffco Sheriff)<a href="https://twitter.com/jeffcosheriffco/statuses/1282863366071914496">1594693435.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Monday's weather made battling the flames more difficult. Firefighters on the ground had to pause in their efforts a little before 7 p.m. Monday because of lightning in the area, and wind pushed the fire up into the treetops of one ridge. There was a little rainfall, but it proved disappointing.</p><p>"Unfortunately the rain didn't help as much as we hoped," the sheriff's office wrote on Facebook, as Colorado Public Radio reported.</p><p>Conditions are expected to be more favorable Tuesday because of a cold front, KDVR reported.</p><p>The immediate cause of the fire is under investigation, according to The Denver Post. However, the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a> has helped to increase the size and frequency of wildfires in the Western U.S. Of the more than 40,000 fires that burned from Colorado to California between 1950 and 2017, 61 percent ignited in the last two decades, according to the <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2830/six-trends-to-know-about-fire-season-in-the-western-us/" target="_blank">National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)</a>. At the same time, global temperatures have gotten hotter, encouraging ideal fire conditions like high temperatures and dry air.</p><p>"Those fire conditions all fall under weather and climate," NASA Langley Research Center wildfire expert Amber Soja said. "The weather will change as Earth warms, and we're seeing that happen."</p><p>Before the Elephant Butte Fire ignited, Jefferson County had implemented a burn ban because of hot, dry weather, Colorado Public Radio reported.</p>
<p><em>Correction: An earlier version of this article attributed a quote to the sheriff's office on Twitter. The quote was posted on Facebook.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- 29 Wildfires Blaze Across the West, Fueled by Drought and Wind ... ›
- Large Wildfires Scorch Forests in Drought-Stricken Southwest ... ›
- Colorado Battles Largest Wildfire in State History - EcoWatch ›
- Colorado Wildfire Grows by 6,000 Acres an Hour - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Across the country, millions of people live within half a mile of fracking sites, like this one in Frederick, Colorado. milehightraveler / Getty Images
By Emily Pontecorvo and Naveena Sadasivam
On a spring weekend morning a few weeks ago, Judy Kelly stepped outside of her house in Broomfield, Colorado, to grab the newspaper when her nose perked up. It smelled like something was burning.
<p><br/></p>
<p>Kelly, who's 73, lives in an upscale, 55-and-up retirement community called Anthem Ranch, which sits below the foothills of the Rocky Mountains. The 1,300-home development is manicured and quiet, with green lawns and landscaped roads that flower out into smaller cul-de-sacs. Its active residents enjoy their own private fitness center, pool, movie theater, and more than 90 clubs that meet in a central community center. But about a quarter of a mile away from the southern border of this retirement dreamland sits a circle of fortress-like walls that enclose the Livingston fracking site, which contains 18 wells owned by Extraction Oil and Gas.</p><p>Kelly is among <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vLyFee6vdXi_uaZliyDRYTkdKP1wmHoE/view" target="_blank">more than 200</a> Broomfield residents who have submitted complaints to the city since November, reporting chemical smells and symptoms like headaches, burning eyes, and nosebleeds that they believe are caused by oil and gas activity in the area.<span></span></p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzI0MDUwMC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MjUxNTQzMn0.RVnAakHo_HY7Zn933bFrr_AMoraKwiNnqoH98oIbTkQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="fc523" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="906f763cc7878ec90aea69f45896cd18" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
An excerpt from an email sent to the city by a resident concerned about the Livingston fracking site.
<p>When she notified the city about the smell that morning, she was told that a city inspector had been on the site already and nothing was wrong. But Kelly was on high alert. Just a few days earlier, Extraction had begun "flowback," a part of the fracking process that is <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2019/10/17/oil-and-gas-drilling-health-impacts-colorado/" target="_blank">associated with</a> <a href="https://garfield-county.com/air-quality/files/sites/33/2019/06/Garfield-County-CSU-Final-Report-presentation-06_16.pdf" target="_blank">some of the highest emission</a> rates of carcinogenic chemicals like benzene. Even under normal circumstances, flowback scared Kelly, who had followed the devastation in neighboring Weld County when one of Extraction's wells <a href="https://www.hcn.org/issues/50.18/energy-industry-how-site-workers-and-firefighters-responding-to-a-2017-natural-gas-explosion-in-windsor-colorado-narrowly-avoided-disaster" target="_blank">exploded</a> during the process in 2017, causing a major fire and injuring a worker. Kelly and her husband, who has pulmonary interstitial fibrosis, a lung disease, had planned on leaving town to stay with their son when flowback at Livingston began.</p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic threw a wrench in those plans. On March 25, when Colorado Governor Jared Polis issued a statewide stay-at-home order to stop the coronavirus's spread, Kelly and her neighbors were suddenly trapped, trying to avoid one health hazard while worrying about being exposed to another. After all, fracking <a href="https://grist.org/energy/coronavirus-has-states-hitting-pause-except-when-it-comes-to-oil-and-gas-drilling/" target="_blank">remained a "critical" business</a>, according to the state.</p><p>"Where am I going to go?" Kelly asked. "I can't go to a hotel. I can't risk that with my husband. I have nowhere to go now."</p><p>Kelly's dilemma is not unique. Across the country, <a href="https://oilandgasthreatmap.com/threat-map/" target="_blank">millions of people</a> live within half a mile of fracking sites and other oil and gas activity and are exposed to a slew of toxic chemicals in their day-to-day lives. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6616936/" target="_blank">Researchers have found</a> that those living close to fracking are more likely to suffer from cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses — the very underlying conditions that make them more vulnerable to the most severe outcomes from COVID-19. While many residents may have found ways to seek respite from these toxic emissions during normal times — whether it was working or going to school elsewhere, or simply moving in with friends and family during the most intense periods of activity — those options went out the window when state governors began announcing stay-at-home orders.</p><p>For its part, Extraction says that Anthem Ranch residents have nothing to worry about. The company did not respond to Grist's detailed list of questions, but in legal filings and public testimony it has stated that the new technology it uses for flowback has been shown to keep emissions far below the levels associated with traditional techniques. In a complaint filed in a Colorado court, the company's lawyers said that the "anxiety and stress" experienced by Broomfield residents was "self-induced."</p>
Broomfield vs. Extraction
<p>The unsettling bind that the stay-at-home order put many residents in was not lost on Laurie Anderson, a Broomfield city councilwoman who lives just half a mile from the fracking site in another neighborhood called Anthem Highlands. The night Governor Polis' order came down, a special meeting of the city council was scheduled to <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/10m9nX3vilG4IEOl0zJdfMsKIZz68jte8/view" target="_blank">discuss</a> the potential dangers of work continuing at the Livingston site during the pandemic. The council decided to draft a proposal ordering Extraction to postpone flowback — a process where the chemical-laden water used to fracture open the shale flows back to the surface and must be collected, treated, and disposed of — until the stay-at-home order was lifted.</p><p>"The thought was to protect these residents, to delay flowback, understanding that it has to happen because they've already fracked these wells," said Anderson, who is also an organizer for Moms Clean Air Force, a national advocacy group that fights polluters. "It was only going to delay them for a couple weeks."</p><p>Of particular concern was Anthem Ranch, where the median age is 70 years old. The city's public health staff drafted up an order and included <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vLyFee6vdXi_uaZliyDRYTkdKP1wmHoE/view" target="_blank">data</a> showing that people over 65 are more susceptible to COVID-19 complications, that the top symptom reported by older Broomfield residents in the city's <a href="https://broomfield.org/2842/File-an-Immediate-Concern" target="_blank">oil and gas complaint system</a> was "anxiety/stress," and that stress and anxiety are linked to poor health outcomes in general.</p><p>But two days later, before the council could discuss the draft proposal, Extraction headed them off at the pass. The company secured a temporary restraining order from the Seventeenth Judicial District Court in Colorado, which prohibited the city from halting or delaying its operations. According to court documents, Extraction alleged that the city was acting in bad faith, trying to "shut down Extraction's operations not because they pose any real health risk, but because they are unpopular." Then, on March 30, the company filed an official complaint with the district court against the city, seeking damages for a breach of contract.</p><p>It's true that this was far from the first time Broomfield had tried to interfere with Extraction's … extraction. The city has battled the company at every stage of the drilling process in response to complaints from residents about odors, health symptoms, and <a href="https://www.kunc.org/post/broomfield-tried-limiting-oil-and-gas-noise-now-company-pushing-back-0#stream/0" target="_blank">noise</a>.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzI0MDUwOC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMjcxNTc5OH0.tq-Dc7C2szR3mE0MrYLfio6FLQkNxWLmV20ArQ4zwJg/img.jpg?width=980" id="534dc" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="674f50ef2de67f27aca1a58936eb425e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
An excerpt from an email sent to the city by a resident concerned about the Livingston fracking site.
<p>Several times the city has contacted the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), a state regulatory body, to address those complaints. According to Megan Castle, a COGCC spokesperson, the agency intervened once in response to a noise issue and a second time to request the company swap drilling fluids which were causing odor complaints. Castle said the agency has conducted additional noise monitoring and did not find that the site was out of compliance with state regulations.<br></p><p>Andrew Bare, a spokesperson for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, said that the nature of some of the complaints — such as odors that would likely have dissipated by the time inspectors reached the site — made taking action against Extraction "difficult." Bare said that the agency sent a mobile air monitoring lab to the site in response to residents' concerns and that the lab will remain near the Livingston site for at least another two weeks.</p><p>In legal documents, Extraction claims it has gone above and beyond the best management practices required by its operating agreement with the city, including investing more than $250 million on a "Next Generation Flowback" system to reduce emissions during the <a href="https://broomfield.org/DocumentCenter/View/29674/Current-Broomfield-Project-Schedule---10-31-19?bidId=" target="_blank">two to three months</a> flowback is expected to last. At the public meeting last month, representatives from the company <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-SOMCErjKsJtHr3mjeBesrKqbwDzvMSt/view" target="_blank">explained</a> to the council that instead of storing and processing the flowback fluid on site, the company would ship it via pipeline to a facility in Weld County. They asserted that the design eliminates "99.9 percent of emissions" and significantly reduces the duration of the flowback phase. Later at the meeting, Barbara Ganong, a petroleum engineer who was hired by the city as a consultant, asserted that Extraction's decision to pipe fracking fluids offsite represented a "paradigm shift."</p><p>Air quality experts hired by the city gave a <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_N4HobIw7JMmHlD9r0kZnLPSjZnKoASR/view" target="_blank">presentation</a> showing that without this new closed system, emissions during flowback could have been 31 times higher than during fracking. Still, when they measured emissions during flowback at another Extraction well in a less populated part of town, they said emissions were still double those during fracking, even with the new system.</p>
<p>Broomfield residents interviewed by Grist were not reassured by Extraction's new technology. Kelly said the company told Broomfield that it was using the latest technology in every step of the process so far, but that the city has nevertheless had to step in multiple times after residents complained of noise and health symptoms.</p><p>"They've done nothing to make me feel like I can trust them and trust what they say," said Elizabeth Lario, who lives with her husband and daughter in the Wildgrass neighborhood a little less than a mile south of the Livingston site. Lario said she and her family have experienced migraines, nose bleeds, stress and anxiety, and throat irritation since drilling began last summer.</p><p>Broomfield fought the company's restraining order, and on April 6, the same judge who originally issued the temporary order agreed to dissolve it. He found that it was granted too soon, considering the city had not even officially taken action to delay or halt Extraction's operations yet. But the judge also issued a warning: If Broomfield exercised its regulatory powers in a way that was "arbitrary and capricious and not rationally related to combating the spread of COVID-19," it would be back where it started, facing more legal action from Extraction.</p><p>The judge's warning created a new problem for Broomfield: The city's order was designed to protect public health, but it had nothing to do with preventing the spread of the virus.</p><p>Two days after the judge dissolved the restraining order, the city council finally put its public health order to a vote, but by that point, it had become harder to justify. Anderson and other city council members tried to rewrite the order in a way that didn't flout the judge's ruling. If they did, they thought Extraction was likely to take them to court again and the restraining order might be reinstated.</p><p>"I kept thinking we'll find a way forward," said Anderson. "But sometime between that Tuesday and Wednesday it became clear that there just wasn't a way forward that wouldn't result in a legal battle."</p><p>Ultimately, Anderson and the majority of the council voted the public health order down 9 to 1.</p><p>It was a devastating blow for Kelly and some other residents. As a member of the League of Oil and Gas Impacted Coloradans, a nonprofit representing community groups and residents affected by fracking, Kelly has been at the forefront of the battle with Extraction, and in the past, the city has taken bold action to protect residents. While her home is about a mile from the Livingston site, she said she's most worried about some of her neighbors who are as close as a quarter-mile from the site.</p><p>"People that I've gotten to know over the last … almost seven years, who I really care about, are very close to it," she said. "And it scares me to death."</p>
‘Why Didn’t You Protect Us?’
<p>Leading up to that final vote, the city council was flooded with emails begging them to forge ahead with the public health order. After it decided to drop the issue, community members were on edge. Kelly said she understands why the city did what it did. But others are incredibly frustrated with the outcome. "I get so many calls from people that say, 'why didn't you protect us?'" she said. "They're so concerned about their health that they would have rather seen us in court."</p><p>One concern is what residents will do in case there is an emergency, like a major emissions release or an explosion like the one in Weld County. The Broomfield police department has told families that live within a half-mile of the site to keep a bag packed in case an evacuation is necessary. But Elizabeth Lario is not sure where her family would go. Under normal circumstances, the city's emergency shelter is its recreation center, but as long as social distancing is necessary, that no longer feels like a safe option. "The evacuation plan is to wait and hear what the evacuation plan is," Lario said.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzI0MDU1Mi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMDg5MjEzMn0.JG28Mziva9UU324p428TQ1zzphopRnHpBOfc0Og5bdY/img.jpg?width=980" id="6d77a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2470d4f20b48740b060fc1e459495de4" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
An excerpt from an email sent to the city by a resident concerned about the Livingston fracking site.
<p>On April 13, the Broomfield Office of Emergency Management held a telephone town hall to present evacuation instructions. Residents told Grist that instructions on where they should go were not very clear, and that the evacuation plan was fluid depending on the scale of emergency and the status of the pandemic. "It was a plan left in chaos, in my opinion, that fortunately hasn't had to be used," said Anderson.</p><p>The Broomfield police department told Grist that it uses a cell phone alert system for emergency notification. An "Emergency Management Update" powerpoint created by the department instructs residents to "follow the instructions you receive" and monitor the situation on the city's social media accounts. In the case of an evacuation, it says to go to the home of a family member or friend — and to go to the recreation center only if needed. The department advises that residents who do elect to evacuate to the recreation center remain in their cars "if quarantined/isolated."</p><p>Not all of Broomfield's citizens are worried about the fracking site. In fact, some actively opposed the city's idea to delay Extraction's work. Anderson said there had been pressure from residents who felt that the city was already wasting too many public dollars on its clashes with the company, and worried that another lawsuit could bankrupt the city. A former council member <a href="https://westernwire.net/broomfield-criticized-for-oil-and-gas-witch-hunt/" target="_blank">accused</a> the city of conducting a witch hunt.<br></p><p>Broomfield has indeed spent a significant amount of money on oil and gas oversight, including hiring additional personnel, outside counsel, and consultants. It has also deployed systems to monitor air quality and noise. The Broomfield Enterprise, a local newspaper, <a href="https://www.broomfieldenterprise.com/2020/01/10/broomfield-to-consider-emergency-noise-ordinance-2/" target="_blank">reported</a> that the city spent $1.8 million in 2018, $1.5 million in 2019, and is expected to spend $3.1 million this year just on oil and gas-related personnel and programs. The city has approved approximately <a href="https://www.broomfieldenterprise.com/2019/12/23/broomfield-air-quality-monitoring-contract-updated/" target="_blank">$1.5 million</a> for air quality monitoring contracts in 2020 alone.</p><p>Broomfield's <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CqZGbwWaZgVMWnTpC1BYfJ1FtcjDlnkp/view" target="_blank">air monitoring system</a> is impressive, given that it's a city of only about 70,000 people. The city currently has 11 new sensors set up to monitor emissions, as well as two mobile air quality laboratories and <a href="https://engr.source.colostate.edu/to-monitor-air-quality-scientists-chase-methane-plumes-in-dead-of-night/" target="_blank">a mobile "plume tracker"</a> — a Chevy Tahoe equipped to measure real-time methane concentrations in the air — from Colorado State University that will be deployed periodically. The city's sensors do not measure the specific amount of benzene and other harmful compounds in the air, but they set off "triggers" to take an air sample any time they register a spike in emissions.</p><p>Anderson hopes that collecting this data will give the town a clearer picture of the public health risks fracking poses to residential communities. She said that part of the reason the town's order was abandoned was due to a lack of data showing that flowback would put residents at greater risk. Now they are collecting that data — but by the time any potential harms come into focus, it will be too late. Residents will have been exposed.</p><p>"This community feels like guinea pigs, and I'm right there with them," she said. "We're doing things that we don't have the data to show that it's safe."</p>
<p class=""><em>This story originally appeared in</em> <a href="https://grist.org/" target="_blank"><em>Grist </em></a><em>and is republished here as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Governor Undermines Climate Action Plan in Colorado - EcoWatch ›
- A Must Read Account of Fracking Colorado - EcoWatch ›
- Trump Advances Fracking on Colorado Public Land - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The Denver Zoo may be closed to visitors to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus, but, for the animals inside, life goes on.
<p>This is especially the case for the zoo's <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/lions" target="_self">lion</a> pride, which welcomed two new members Thursday, April 23, the zoo <a href="https://denverzoo.org/zootales/a-new-pair-in-the-pride/?CMPID=?utm_source=_FB_&utm_medium=_SOCIAL_&utm_campaign=_AC" target="_blank">announced Tuesday</a>. The new cubs were born to mother and father Kamara and Tobias, who are both four years old.</p><p>"We're seeing a lot of positive signs that things are going well, and will continue to keep a close eye on [Kamara] and the cubs in these critical first days and weeks," Assistant Curator of Predators Matt Lenyo said.</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f96eccaf46b561e843b73461dc794a6e"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yjBZ5RDUHWk?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>The births come little less than a year after the zoo welcomed another lion cub named Tatu, <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2020/04/28/denver-zoo-lion-cubs-video/" target="_blank">The Denver Post reported</a>. Tatu is also the child of Tobias, meaning he now has two half-siblings. (Their sexes are still unknown.) His mother is Kamara's mother, Neliah, and his birth is now helping the new mom care for her own cubs.</p><p>"We are watching Kamara closely to make sure she's showing appropriate maternal behaviors, like nursing and grooming," Lenyo said. "She learned a lot by watching Neliah and interacting with Tatu last year, which really prepared her to be a mom."</p><p>The cubs' birth is good news for lion <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation" target="_self">conservation</a>. African lions have decreased by fifty percent since 1994, <a href="https://wildnet.org/" target="_blank">Wildlife Conservation Network</a> (WCN) told <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conservation/2019/07/where-lions-once-ruled-they-are-now-quietly-disappearing" target="_blank">National Geographic</a>. While they once roamed almost the entire African continent, they are now absent from 94 percent of their historic range and are considered <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/15951/115130419" target="_blank">vulnerable</a> by the <a href="https://www.iucn.org/" target="_blank">International Union for Conservation of Nature</a>. The primary threats to their survival are loss of prey and habitat, as well as <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/poaching" target="_self">poaching</a>.</p>
<p>"Lions are truly one of the world's universal icons, and they are quietly slipping away," WCN director of conservation programs Paul Thomson told National Geographic.</p><p>The new cubs' birth is part of an effort to combat this trend. Tobias, their father, was moved to the Denver Zoo in 2018 from Buffalo in the hope that he would mate with Kamara and Neliah, the zoo said. The move was recommended by the Lion Species Survival Plan, a plan for ensuring healthy, genetically diverse lion populations in zoos belonging to the <a href="https://www.aza.org/" target="_blank">Association of Zoos and Aquariums</a> (AZA).</p><p>"Kamara and Tobias were a very genetically valuable match," General Curator Emily Insalaco said in the birth announcement. "And these cubs are an important contribution to the species' population in AZA facilities, and will help inspire visitors to learn more about their wild cousins."</p>
<p>While the zoo isn't receiving visitors right now, the cubs won't know the difference. They will be secluded with their mother for two months to give them time to connect with her and meet the rest of the pack, which also includes an unrelated seven-year-old female named Sabi.</p><p>You can still follow the cubs remotely via the zoo's <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DenverZoo/" target="_blank">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DenverZoo" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzlJHwWxz2INhrSbLlK4xRQ" target="_blank">YouTube</a> and <a href="https://www.instagram.com/denverzoo/?hl=en" target="_blank">Instagram</a> accounts.</p>
Read More
Show Less
A large fracking operation with Mount Meeker and Longs Peak looming in the background on December 28, 2017 in Loveland, Colorado. Helen H. Richardson / The Denver Post / Getty Images
by Andrea Germanos
The Trump administration on Friday released a new land use plan for southwestern Colorado that community and conservation advocacy groups warn is a "dangerous" pathway towards increased fossil fuel extraction that makes no "climate, ecological, or economic sense."
<p>Published officially Friday in the <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/10/2020-07316/notice-of-availability-of-the-record-of-decision-for-the-uncompahgre-field-office-approved-resource" target="_blank">Federal Register</a>, the Bureau of Land Management's "Approved Resource Management Plan" for the Uncompahgre Field Office affects 675,800 acres of public lands and 971,220 acres of federal mineral estate and spans six counties. It gives a 20-year blueprint for how the land can be used for purposes such as oil and gas drilling as well as livestock grazing, and was issued by the Interior Department over objections raised in public comments.</p><p>The advocacy groups opposed to the plan <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/trump-administration-plan-expands-fossil-fuel-extraction-across-southwestern-colorado-2020-04-09/" target="_blank">say</a> that expanding fracking in the region over the next decades will not only add fuel to the planetary climate crisis, but will also adversely impact local organic agriculture and endangered species.</p><p>"This plan, unconscionable as the connections between fossil fuel emissions and global climate change become clearer every day, has the potential to exponentially increase greenhouse gas pollution in the region over the next decade, when we need to be drastically reducing emissions," said Melissa Hornbein with the Western Environmental Law Center.</p>
<p>According to the groups,</p><blockquote>The plan would allow fracking on more than half of the 675,000 acres of public land and almost a million acres of federal minerals that it covers, and coal extraction on another 371,000 acres. The BLM's environmental impact analysis fails to tally direct and indirect climate pollution that would result from fossil fuel production.<br></blockquote><p>According to Natasha Léger, executive director of Citizens for a Healthy Community, the plan is "exactly the type of federal action that is responsible for accelerating climate and environmental degradation, which cannot be allowed to stand if we have any hope of protecting present and future generations, rare and irreplaceable ecosystems like the North Fork, and meeting Colorado's goals for a clean and renewable energy future."</p><p>The new plan sets up a clash between Colorado's new law calling for a halving of carbon emissions by 2030 and what the advocacy groups say could be a 2,300% increase over the next decade in climate pollution as a result of the BLM's proposal for increased oil and gas extraction.</p><p>"Ultimately," said Rebecca Fischer, climate and energy program attorney for WildEarth Guardians, "the Trump administration is testing Colorado's commitment to its new climate law, and its success depends on the state stepping up to defend bold climate action."</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/10/trump-advances-climate-doom-massive-fracking-expansion-federal-lands-colorado" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Fracking Fight Continues in Colorado - EcoWatch ›
- A Must Read Account of Fracking Colorado - EcoWatch ›
- 2020 Elections Will Determine Which Party Dominates Public Land Debates - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Colorado River Has Lost 1.5 Billion Tons of Water to the Climate Crisis, 'Severe Water Shortages' May Follow
21 February
Climate
Horseshoe Bend (seen above) is a horseshoe-shaped meander of the Colorado River in Page, Arizona. didier.camus / Flickr / public domain
Millions of people rely on the Colorado River, but the climate crisis is causing the river to dry up, putting many at risk of "severe water shortages," according to new research, as The Guardian reported.
<p>Longer periods of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" rel="noopener noreferrer">drought</a> and rising temperatures have decreased the river's annual flow by 20 percent compared to the last century. The researchers, who published their study in <a href="https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/02/19/science.aay9187" target="_blank">Science</a>, say that global heating has caused mountain snowpacks that feed the river to disappear, which leads to increased evaporation, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/02/20/climate-change-has-stolen-more-than-billion-tons-water-wests-most-vital-river/" target="_blank">The Washington Post reported</a>.</p>
<p>"That's the thing I found most fascinating about this study," lead author Chris Milly of the U.S. Geological Survey said to <a href="https://www.knau.org/post/study-colorado-river-s-flow-decreases-9-percent-every-degree-warming" target="_blank">KNAU</a>. "As the snow cover dwindles due to warming, it's reflecting less sunlight back to the atmosphere. So the basin's absorbing more sunlight. That sunlight is powering evaporation out of the basin. Now when that evaporation—the water is taken out of the basin due to the evaporation, there's less water flowing down the river to the 40 million people that are waiting for it."</p>
<p>Snow and ice reflect sunlight back away from the Earth's surface, a phenomenon known as the albedo effect. The loss of snow and ice means the Earth absorbs more heat.</p>
<p>Milly and his research partner, Krista A. Dunne, found that for every degree Celsius of warming, the river's flow decreases 9.3 percent. Recent studies have confirmed that the river's steady decreased flow since 2000 is due to rising temperatures. The decline has amounted to 1.5 billion tons of missing water, equal to the annual water consumption of 10 million Americans, as The Washington Post reported.</p>
<p>About 40 million people live along the Colorado and it supports nearly $1 trillion in economic activity each year and provides 16 million jobs. Its waters cover a wide expanse, according to The Washington Post. Its waters are channeled as far away as California's Imperial Valley and central Arizona, where its used to irrigate crops, as well as across the Rockies to supply <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drinking-water">drinking water</a> for Colorado's biggest cities. The Colorado feeds the two largest water reserves in the U.S., Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Lake Mead supplies Las Vegas with almost all of its water, as The Guardian reported. The huge reservoir formed by the Hoover Dam has dropped to levels not seen since the 1960s.</p>
<p>So far the world has heated up by about 1 degree Celsius over pre-industrial times, but it is on course to rise 3 degrees Celsius by the end of the century unless emissions are drastically cut, as The Guardian reported. For the Colorado River this means, an "increasing risk of severe water shortages," the study says. Increased rainfall will not offset the loss in reflective snow. </p>
<p>"This has important implications for water users and managers alike," Brad Udall, a senior scientist at Colorado State University and an expert on water supplies in the west who was not involved in the research said, as The Guardian reported. "More broadly, these results tell us that we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as soon as we possible can. We've wasted nearly 30 years bickering over the science. The science is crystal clear – we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions immediately."</p>
<p>Andrew Mueller, general manager for the Colorado River District, who was not involved in the study, wrote in an email to The Washington Post that the new findings provide "confirmation of significantly grim indicators about future flow in the Colorado River."</p>
<p>He added that the amount of water that would disappear with another 1 degree C temperature rise is nearly five times what Las Vegas uses each year. "A decline in flows of this magnitude will present a significant challenge to all inhabitants in the Colorado River Basin."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Unprecedented Colorado River Water Shortage Could Be Declared ... ›
- Remarkable Drop in Colorado River Water Use Sign of Climate Adaptation - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A zero-emission electric car in Vail, Colorado on July 31. Sharon Hahn Darlin / CC BY 2.0
By Simon Mui
States across the country are stepping up to make clean cars cheaper and easier to find. Colorado's Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) voted Friday to adopt a Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) program that will increase the availability of electric vehicles in the state, improve air quality and increase transportation affordability.
<p>In doing so, Colorado joins together with ten other states that have already adopted ZEV programs and follows up on its adoption of state <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/simon-mui/colorado-moves-adopt-clean-car-standards" target="_blank">clean car requirements</a> limiting emissions of greenhouse gases and criteria pollutants from all new passenger vehicles. All told, 30% of the U.S. vehicle market is now covered by a ZEV program.</p><p>The adoption is the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/climate/trump-governors-clean-car-rules.html" target="_blank">latest rebuff</a> to the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/" rel="noopener noreferrer">Trump</a> administration's proposed rollback to federal clean car standards, which Consumer Reports <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/08/07/trumps-rollback-fuel-economy-standards-could-cost-americans-460-billion-consumer" target="_blank">estimates</a> will cost U.S. consumers $460 billion more at the gas pump. Governors from <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/climate/trump-governors-clean-car-rules.html" target="_blank">24 states</a>, including Colorado's Jared Polis, now oppose the rollback.</p><p>NRDC — as part of the broader Environmental Coalition that includes Western Resource Advocates, Environmental Defense Fund, Southwest Energy Efficiency Project and Sierra Club — provided comments supporting strong ZEV standards as good for the environment, good for consumers and good for Colorado. Some of the other supporting parties included the Environmental Justice Coalition, Colorado Communities for Climate Action representing 25 local governments and the Local Government Coalition.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMDU3ODQ0OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMTI5NjkzOH0.Nt3soMj4MmW8W4CDhKm5y6VQd9Y24DXw0LcYumOXiQc/img.jpg?width=980" id="986df" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="64d4ced1ccc8a9d4919792107b6722b0" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Environmental Coalition's expert witnesses (Shannon Baker-Barnstetter, Chuck Shulock, Aaron Kressig, Gwen Farnsworth, John German, Chet France, Tom Bloomfield, Sarah Keane). Right to Left.
<p>Coloradans and people across the country are excited about clean cars. They're passionate about clean air, having more electric vehicle options at dealerships and reducing their contributions to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>. Here are three things that will happen in Colorado as a result of the ZEV program:</p>
<h3>Consumers Will Have More Electric Vehicle Options at Dealerships</h3><p>If we want more clean cars on the road, automakers will need to make more clean cars available to Colorado consumers. Period. While automakers offer 41 EVs in the U.S., it turns out Coloradans are not being provided with these choices. Based on a survey of all dealership inventories, a Denver customer would only be able to find 24 out of those 41 models. That number drops to just 16 models available in Fort Collins, seven in Colorado Springs, three in Pueblo and just two models in Grand Junction. Consumers face an EV desert in Colorado.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMDU3ODQ1Mi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNzE3MDIzMX0.p1y_CiuO2yyDQMnVGMrbN0iVMZ0NoYGF6z4WxAL37Nw/img.png?width=980" id="d0d0b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="498f7ba582f4b53cd09dec41c88b66d5" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Source: Dealership inventory from Cars.com with assistance by NESCAUM.
<p>A look at automakers' current advertising in Colorado reflects a similar story. Most automakers spent virtually nothing in Colorado on EV advertising or education for consumers compared to the tens of millions spent annually for gas-guzzling models they sell. Nissan appears to be a standout based on the data, but unfortunately, they are the lone exception rather than the rule.<br></p><p>With the adoption of the ZEV program, 4 to 5% of the vehicles that automakers deliver for sale to dealers would need to be EVs by 2025. We note that the sales level reflects the Commission's adoption of an alternative proposal developed by the Colorado Department of Energy and Department of Transportation, the Auto Alliance of Manufacturers and Global Automakers that provides a significantly easier path to meeting the original proposal, which would have required 7 to 8% sales by 2025.</p><p>While some automakers such as Nissan, BMW and Volvo are already exceeding the more modest 2025 requirements as of 2018, other automakers are far behind and not even making EVs available in Colorado, despite making them available elsewhere. Colorado's adoption will help push all automakers, especially laggards, to do more and will set up the state for even higher volumes after 2025.</p>
<h3>Less Carbon Pollution and Improved Air Quality</h3><p>Throughout the hearings, state government representatives, the Regional Air Quality Council and residents suffering from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution" rel="noopener noreferrer">air pollution</a> testified on the need to move toward electric transportation to help address air quality problems in Colorado, particularly in the <a href="https://coloradosun.com/2019/06/03/colorado-air-pollution-terrible-but-improving/" target="_blank">Front Range</a>. One of the benefits of the program is avoiding vehicles with internal combustion engines. EVs are the only technology that, once on the road, is projected to get cleaner over time as the electricity grid gets cleaner in Colorado. By comparison, emission controls from internal combustion engines can suffer from the impacts of deterioration, malfunction or even tampering — these events can lead to "super-emitters" on the road that emit 2 to 4 times more emissions when on the road than they are supposed to emit. EVs bypass this problem entirely because they don't have any tailpipe emissions.</p><p>All told, if EVs reach about 8% sales in Colorado, carbon pollution would be conservatively reduced by an estimated 2.2 million metric tons through model year 2030. Smog-forming pollutants would also be reduced.</p>
<h3>All Consumers Benefit From EVs</h3><p>Both primary and secondary buyers of EVs stand to see significant economic benefits from the ZEV program. With battery prices continuing to drop rapidly, the costs of EVs are projected to reach initial, up-front cost parity with gasoline internal combustion engines between 2024 and 2029 depending on the vehicle class, according to a study by <a href="https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ev_Colorado_cost_2020_20190613.pdf" target="_blank">ICCT</a>. In terms of lifetime vehicle savings, EV drivers are expected to save between $3,200 and $12,000 depending on the vehicle class. Those savings are largely driven by significant reductions in fuel and maintenance costs.</p><p>Accelerating EV adoption with the ZEV program will benefit not only EV drivers but all residents in the form of downward pressure on rates. Two studies by MJ Bradley and Associates, commissioned by NRDC, show that adoption of EVs will lead to improved utilization of the electricity grid, especially since most EV charging occurs at night when there is spare capacity on the grid. An assessment of utility revenues in California from EV charging shows EV customers contribute much more to the grid than they cost from the grid. Regulated utilities are required to return that additional revenue to all utility customers in the form of lower rates and bills, as my colleague has blogged on <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/max-baumhefner/electric-vehicles-are-driving-rates-down" target="_blank">here</a>. A second study by MJ Bradley projects <a href="https://mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/CO_PEV_CB_Analysis_FINAL_13apr17.pdf" target="_blank">similar results</a> for Colorado as it ramps up its EV fleet.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMDU3ODQ2MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMjI2MDM4M30.DcFdlEEWgGJ7CHY3-DKRCK__GL4kJe4RZRU89JCGhOk/img.jpg?width=980" id="e2484" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8ba85422e830e0e799f07e7c78fee6a7" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<p>Clean cars mean cleaner air, which means fewer ozone days, easier breathing for Coloradans and a meaningful reduction in pollutants that contribute to climate change. But we won't see as much of these benefits without more zero-emission vehicles on the road. A Colorado ZEV program will have a meaningful impact by ensuring all automakers start making more EV products available to consumers.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why Aren't School Buses Electric? These Coloradans Are Sick of Diesel <a href="https://t.co/wEb5Dla1R2">https://t.co/wEb5Dla1R2</a></p>— Enviro Voter Project (@Enviro_Voter) <a href="https://twitter.com/Enviro_Voter/status/1071106522233626624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 7, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p><em>Simon Mui is a senior scientist in the Climate & Clean Energy program with the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Natural Resources Defense Council</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Emma Bray of Denver, a plaintiff on the youth-led climate lawsuit, Martinez v. COGCC. @youthvgov / Twitter
Colorado's oil and gas industry breathed a sigh of relief on Monday after the state's highest court overturned a lower court decision that said state regulators must consider public health and the environment in permitting oil and gas production.
The unanimous ruling was a disappointment for the teenage plaintiffs, including high-profile climate activist Xiuhtezcatl Martinez, who led the closely watched lawsuit against the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC).
<p>
"To know that the judges in the highest court of my state believe that the interests of the oil and gas industry come before the public health, safety and welfare of my fellow Coloradans is shameful," the 18-year-old from Boulder said in a
<a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2019/01/14/co-supreme-court-hands-another-victory-oil-and-gas-industry" target="_blank">press release</a>.
</p><p>
"But," Martinez added, "I want you all to know that this fight for climate justice is far from over. My fellow plaintiffs, youth around the world, and I will continue to stand up for our right to a healthy future."
</p><p>
<span></span>The lawsuit—backed by <a href="https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org" target="_blank">Our Children's Trust</a>, the same non-profit supporting the young plaintiffs in the landmark federal lawsuit <em><a href="https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/us/federal-lawsuit" target="_blank">Juliana v. United States</a></em>—was originally filed in November 2013 on behalf of seven young Coloradans who are all members of the Boulder-based youth group <a href="https://www.earthguardians.org/" target="_blank">Earth Guardians</a>.
</p><p>
They demanded that the COGCC refuse oil and gas development permits "unless the best available science demonstrates, and an independent, third-party organization confirms, that drilling can occur in a manner that does not cumulatively, with other actions, impair Colorado's atmosphere, water, wildlife, and land resources, does not adversely impact human health, and does not contribute to
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/6-colorado-teenagers-file-appeal-in-fracking-and-climate-lawsuit-1891078043.html" target="_blank">climate change</a>."
</p><p>
Ultimately, as
<a href="https://coloradosun.com/2019/01/15/colorado-supreme-court-martinez-oil-gas-explained/" target="_blank">the Colorado Sun</a> noted, the activists were hoping to stamp out Colorado's oil and gas activities and prompt a "state-wide ban on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fracking">fracking</a>," as then-13-year-old Martinez <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsEhlK2tccE&feature=youtu.be&t=46" target="_blank">explained</a>.</p><p>
Instead, Justice Richard Gabriel ruled Monday that
<a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2016/title-34/oil-and-natural-gas/article-60/section-34-60-102/" target="_blank">current state law</a> requires <span></span>regulators to balance oil and gas development with protecting public health, the environment and wildlife.
</p><p>
The decision states:
</p><blockquote>
"[T]he pertinent provisions make clear that the Commission is required (1) to foster the development of oil and gas resources, protecting and enforcing the rights of owners and producers, and (2) in doing so, to prevent and mitigate significant adverse environmental impacts to the extent necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare, but only after taking into consideration cost-effectiveness and technical feasibility."
</blockquote><p>
Basically, the ruling upholds the "Colorado way of doing business," Dan Haley, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said as quoted by <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2019/01/14/colorado-supreme-court-oil-gas-martinez-decision/" target="_blank">The Denver Post</a>.
</p><p>
He added that under state law, the COGCC's regulations for the oil and natural gas industry are the most extensive and stringent in the country.
</p><p>
For fracking opponents, it's the law itself that's the problem. Julia Olson, the executive director of Our Children's Trust and co-counsel for the youth plaintiffs, <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2019/01/14/co-supreme-court-hands-another-victory-oil-and-gas-industry" target="_blank">stated</a> that the Supreme Court's interpretation of the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Act makes it clear that the rule should be "amended or set aside as unconstitutional" as it allows "unfettered discretion to promote Colorado's dangerous and pervasive oil and gas development at the expense of the people."
</p><p>
Undeterred by the ruling, State House Speaker KC Becker said she will work to change Colorado law so the fossil fuel industry will do more to protect public health and the environment, as reported by <a href="https://www.cpr.org/news/story/colorado-supreme-court-finds-for-state-regulators-in-martinez-oil-and-gas-case" target="_blank">Colorado Public Radio</a>.
</p><p>
"It puts the decision back into the hands of lawmakers to take action and we are committed to addressing this concern this legislative session," <a href="https://twitter.com/kcbecker/status/1084900168061804544" target="_blank">Becker</a> also tweeted.
</p><p>
In an online <a href="https://www.colorado.gov/governor/news/gov-polis-responds-colorado-supreme-court%E2%80%99s-decision" target="_blank">statement</a>, new Gov. Jared Polis—who <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/colorado-governor-polis-renewable-energy-2618515156.html">wants to</a> transition Colorado to 100 percent <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy" target="_self">renewable energy</a> by 2040—said he was "disappointed" by the court's ruling.
</p><p>
He noted, "it only highlights the need to work with the Legislature and the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission to more safely develop our state's natural resources and protect our citizens from harm."
</p><p>
The plaintiffs also remain optimistic.
</p><p>
<span></span>"The last couple years have proven that youth have the opportunity to be heard in the courts and the community. Not a single person, company or corporation can silence the young generation's voices," Emma Bray, 19-year-old plaintiff from Denver, said in a press release. "We will continue the fight for our Earth and our future, despite the mountains we need to climb and the setbacks that we will overcome. Regardless of the court's decision in our case, the fight will continue."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="7cd5b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="EUZQL11576662586"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="857744933872185349" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">3,000 Wells Shut Down in Colorado After Fatal House Explosion https://t.co/1itEkcKDEX @EcoWatch</div> — DeSmogBlog (@DeSmogBlog)<a href="https://twitter.com/DeSmogBlog/statuses/857744933872185349">1493337303.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less