by Ken Midkiff

There has been a lead smelter inHerculaneum, Missouri for over a century.A small town located on the Mississippi

River about 20 miles south of St. Louis, all that isvisible from I–55 is the towering smokestack of thesmelter owned by the Doe Run Company. JoachimCreek runs through the sleepy community, windingin and out among the trees, eventually finding itsway to the Big River.

However, all is not well in Herculaneum. Foras many decades as the lead smelter has existed,the community and its children have felt theimpacts of emissions from the smelter’ssmokestack.

Lead is a basic element. It is toxic to humanswhen it reaches a certain level in the system. Itcauses developmental problems in children – theyounger the exposure, the more problems thatoccur. Adults are also at risk when exposed to highlevels.

The Herculaneum smelter, the largest in theworld, creates such high levels. And the blood leadlevels in children, as determined by health studiesby the Missouri Department of Health and thefederal Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, have reached levels that health and devel-opment are impaired. Other substances spewedfrom the smelter and placed in a slag heap areequally troubling: cadmium, arsenic, copper, nickeland zinc, to name a few.

The health studies found that the blood leadlevels in children had reached levels that causedconsiderable harm.The Center for Disease Controlrecommends that any child with a blood lead levelof more than 10 micrograms per deciliter (somehealth professionals assert that any amount of leadis cause for concern) should receive medical atten-tion. There were forty children in the area with lev-els of more than 10, eight with more than 20, andtwo with levels greater than 30. From a report:“The average level of lead in the blood was 12

micrograms per deciliter for children and toddlersliving within 1.5 miles of the smelter.”

A consent decree, signed by theEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA), theMissouri Department of Natural Resources(MODNR), and the Doe Run Company notesthat, “The conditions present at the facility maypresent an imminent and substantial endanger-ment to the public health, welfare or the environ-ment.” This document, effective May 29, 2001,notes that the problem is caused by lead in thesoils from airborne releases of lead particles fromthe Herculaneum smelter.

In short, there is a very real health problemand the agencies in charge of protecting the publichealth have confirmed this. But, the action by thesesame agencies has been too little, too late.

Rather than taking the steps to control theemissions, and prevent further endangerment ofthe public health, the EPA and MODNR haveessentially signed–off on giving the companyanother five years (or more) to come into compli-ance with the federal Clean Air Act. This inactionwas taken in spite of the fact that this smelter hasbeen in violation of the Clear Air Act since its

continued on page 2...Never–ending story?

by Alan Journet

Richard Kinder formerly of Cape Girardeau,and currently CEO of Kinder–MorganIncorporated (K–MI), has enjoyed adulato-

ry publicity recently in several money magazines.His company, which owns thousands of miles ofpipeline carrying energy fuels through much of thenation, has recently expanded its holdings bymerging and acquiring thousands of more miles.

Whether it is just the run of business, or isdesigned to demonstrate to the “Home Town”folks that he really has hit the big time, Kinder’sK–MI is trying to move into Cape County, but notjust with a pipeline. In this project K–MI plans tobuild and operate an electrical power generatingplant situated in the southwest corner of the county.

The plant would be located just three milesfrom a pumping station on the newly acquiredK–MI gas pipeline that runs through Marble Hill.It is also adjacent to a regional AmerenUEsub–station that is part of the main power gridserving many lower mid–western states. The plan isto construct a power plant that burns natural gasdelivered by the K–MI pipeline and pump the gen-erated power into the nearby grid.

To drive the plant, large quantities of waterwill be pulled from six wells for cooling the jet tur-bines. To assess the adequacy of local water supply,exploratory wells were drilled and run on a 100acre property on County Road U purchased fromthe Aarens family (though as of this writing, thecontract has yet to be honored by K–MI–—they

have yet to pay for the land on which they are nowdrilling). The site is immediately adjacent to thefamily farm of Alvin and Nora Seabaugh. Whenthe exploratory well was drilled and pumping com-menced in mid–May, a huge plug of prime farm-land on the Seabaugh property measuring approxi-mately 30 feet in diameter slumped some 25 feetdirectly downwards. An extensive series of cracksalso appeared in the surrounding terrain, with gap-ing holes opening up to a foot wide and more thantwo feet deep. These cracks appear to run in con-centric circles around the initial sunken plug andpose a threat of future land slippage; they occupyseveral acres of the Seabaugh farm.

K–MI instantly fenced the hole and planteddozens of pink flags around the area marking the

VOLUME 33 • NUMBER 4 S E P T E M B E R / O C TOBER 2001

One Earth One Chance

For the latest updates, visit us on the web:http://www.sierraclub.org/chapters/mo/

The Hole: Coincidence or Wa rn i n g ?

The Herculaneum Lead Smelter — ANever–Ending Story ?

continued on page 10...The Hole

The Ozark Sierran is pub-lished six times a year by theOzark Chapter of the SierraClub. Annual dues of SierraClub members pay for subscription to this publication. Non-members may subscribe for $15 per year.Items for publication: Contact Keet Kopecky via E-mail atkkopecky@kc.rr.com or phone (816)966-9544, PRIOR TOSENDING, for information on how to submit articles. The editors reserve the right to edit articles! Material may beedited for length, content, or clarity. It is our job to help youcommunicate. If you have strong creative ownership of yourwriting, and wish to review your edited article before publication,consider your deadline 10 days prior to the published deadline.With notice, we will be happy to work with you. Reproduction quality photographs (prints) or artwork are dearlywelcome. Pleeease: send us photos...

The published deadline is thereal, honest-to-goodness,drop-dead deadline—not acouple of days or a week

later! Submissions received after the deadline are subject to thepossibility they won’t appear in the issue: you will feel bad andwe will feel bad. Call us nasty, but we are determined thisnewsletter will come out on time!The OZARK SIERRAN is produced on a Macintosh computer, sowe strongly prefer to receive material electronically (E-mail), oron a Mac or PC disk (3.5“), WITH A HARD COPY OF THE TEXT.Typed articles are also OK (must be received a few days beforethe deadline). All submissions must include name, address, andphone number of the author. If you want your submissionreturned (including your disk), please include a SASE.H a rd-working, All-volunteer Editorial and Production Staff : K e e tK o p e c k y, E d i t o r ; Bob Sherrick, Layout and P ro d u c t i o n .

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 12

C h a p t e r E x e c u t i v e C o m m i t t e eA T L A R G E :

Keet Kopecky, Chapter Chair, SC Council Delegate9211 Olmstead, Kansas City, MO 64138,kkopecky@kc.rr.com,(816)966-9544Andrew Gondzur, Vice Chair4037 McDonald Ave., St. Louis, MO 63116(314)772-8810Gale Burrus, Secretary9828 Willow Avenue, #1A, Kansas City, MO 64134 gburrus@att.net, (816)763-5120Herschel Asner10381 Oxford Hill Drive, St. Louis, MO 63146 (314)991-3450Gina DeBarthe2036 James Downey Rd., Independence, MO 64057 (816)383-6497 or (816)257-1198Wallace McMullen2805 Mohawk Dr., Jefferson City, MO 65101 mcmulw@sockets.net, (573)636-6067Tom Moran, Political ChairColumbia, MOtomvmoran@yahoo.com, (573)442-6955Caroline Pufalt, Conservation Chair13415 Land-O-Woods, #3, St. Louis, MO 63141 (314)878-3165

G R O U P R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S

Eastern Missouri Group: Cheryl Hammond, 12231 Hillcrest, Maryland Heights, MO 63043 (314)291-5907Osage Group: vacantThomas Hart Benton Group: Dan Fuller7400 E. 235th St., Peculiar, MO 64078 (816)779-7284Trail of Tears Group: Brian Alworth2826 Whitener St., Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 (573)334-7978

COMMITTEE CHAIRS

Education Chair: Leslie Lihouleslielihou@postnet.com

Fundraising Chair: Doris Sherrick10807 E. 205th St., Peculiar, MO 64078 (816)779-6708

Legal Chair: Deferred Gifts Officer: Roger Hershey18308 Hanthorne Drive, Independence, MO 64057 (816)795-7533

Legislative Chair: Roy C. Hengerson,2201 Weathered Rock Rd., Jefferson City, MO.65101, (573)635-8066,

Membership Chair: Cheryl Hammond, 12231 Hillcrest, Maryland Heights, MO 63043 (314)291-5907

Newsletter Editor: Keet Kopecky,9211 Olmstead, Kansas City, MO 64138kkopecky@kc.rr.com,(816)966-9544

Transportation Chair: Ron McLinden3236 Coleman Rd., Kansas City, MO 64111 (816)931-0498

Treasurer: Jim NybergP.O. Box 50401, Clayton, MO 63105 (314)725-0767

Website Chair: Wallace McMullen2805 Mohawk Dr., Jefferson City, MO 65101 mcmulw@sockets.net, (573)636-6067S t a ff G R O U P R E P R E S E N T A -T I V E S

Ken Midkiff, Program Director,ken.midkiff@prodigy.net

Terri Folsom, Chapter CoordinatorCarla Klein, Global Warming Campaign OrganizerSheila Siegal, Floodplain/Wetlands Organizer

1007 N. College, Suite 1, Columbia, MO 65201 (573)815-9250 voice/answering machine (573)442-7051 FAX/modem (800)628-5333 Water Quality Hotline

C h apter O f fice Sta f f

inception in 1968, in violation of the NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards, and in spite ofthe fact that the health of several generations havebeen impaired.

There have been previous such inactions byEPA and MODNR — all promising to bring thecompany under control and to protect the publichealth. But when the Doe Run Company couldn’tor wouldn’t meet the provisions of consentdecrees or State Implementation Plans, compli-ance plans were re–negotiated, and extensionsgranted.

In a meeting of area citizens in mid–July, thefrustration and despair surfaced and erupted.They relayed their health problems and that oftheir children. State and federal officials in atten-dance were berated (with considerable use ofexpletives) by about 40 residents who demandedaccountability: “We are sick and tired of delaysand excuses – when are you people going to dosomething?”

Good question..

Never–ending story ?. . . . . .continued from page 1

The Ozark Chapter Hires aFloodplain / Wetlands Org a n i z e r

Sheila Haar Siegel, the new Floodplain / Wetlands Organizer for theEastern Missouri Group of the Missouri Ozark Chapter, was born and raisedin Breese, Illinois. While growing up on her family’s farm, she observed andappreciated the natural balance of living things and began learning moreabout environmental issues in college. A former writer, public relations, anddevelopment professional, Sheila has worked for businesses and non–profitsthroughout the St. Louis area, including the University of Missouri – St.Louis, the Women’s Crisis Center of Metro East, SIDS Resources, and FamilyHospice of Belleville Area. She is a member of the Kaskaskia Group of theSierra Club.

Sheila also contributes her time to the TEC / Quest program, St.Teresa’s Parish, Belleville Diocese Youth Ministry Planning Team, BigBrothers/Big Sisters of Southwestern Illinois, and the Optimist Club inShiloh, Illinois, where she lives with her husband, Michael, in a small commu-nity on land bordered by a lake, agricultural fields, and a garden — all ofwhich she counts among her many inspirations. “Working for the Sierra Clubgives me the possibility to represent environmental issues in a way I’ve alwaysdreamed of,” she says. “This new position allows me to educate and mobilizecitizens on the loss and degradation of some of our area’s most precious, andoften overlooked, natural resources — floodplains and wetlands.”

by Wallace McMullen

Last January Governor Holden appointed atask force to examine the major energyquestions confronting the state. He asked

the task force to provide:lRecommendations for long–term energy pol-

icy in time for action by the next session ofthe General Assembly.

lA clearer understanding of Missouri–specificissues of energy supplies and demand.

lRecommendations to enhance Missouri’senergy supplies and increase energy efficien-cy.

lAn action plan for Missouri–specificresearch, development and economic oppor-tunities related to energy technology; includ-ing the best practices from other states.

lThe impact of energy policy on Missouri’senvironment.The task force has held a number of hear-

ings to gather input on these questions.Our Sierra Club Ozark Chapter has consid-

ered this a very important process. The issues thistask force is dealing with will have enormousimpact on the environment and the economy ofMissouri. We have made significant efforts to pro-vide input to the process. Our Global Warmingstaffer, Carla Klein, has attended all the hearings.Carla Klein and Wallace McMullen testified at theJune 15 hearing in Springfield. Ron McLindenspoke at the July 13 task force hearing in CapeGirardeau.

Hopefully, the task force will provide recom-mendations which will begin to move Missouriaway from its heavy reliance on burning fossil fuelfor electricity and transportation. We have clearand strong convictions about what should bedone to create energy policies which will improveMissouri’s energy future. The ideas we have rec-ommended are stated in the excerpts below fromthe testimony by the Sierra members who haverepresented the Ozark Chapter: Carla, Wallace,and Ron. Sierra Club members will want to payclose attention to this task force and its recom-mendations. As we stated to the members of thetask force, they are dealing with issues that willhave a major impact on how polluted or clean ourfuture will be, and on how prosperous or eco-nomically depressed our future will be.

Excerpts from Carla Klein’s talk:lIf we make the right energy choices today,

we can have cleaner air, less global warmingpollution, more vibrant public lands and rea-sonably priced power far into the future.Unfortunately, the energy plans put forth bythe majority of energy suppliers and produc-ers at last month’s task force meeting willnot accomplish these goals. Their plansfocused on the wrong choices — to producemore coal, oil, gas and nuclear power — withinsufficient emphasis on energy efficiencyand cleaner alternatives.

lWe have a multitude of energy choices at ourdisposal and when I heard expressions like“home grown” energy, “true investments inour future” and “the need to diversify ourenergy supply” I was very encouraged. Later,

I was disappointed to find out that the homegrown diversified energy sources beingreferred to meant nothing more than burn-ing more coal.There was no mention ofclean renewable energy or using energy–effi-cient technology as a major tool to reduceenergy consumption. The energy choices putforth for Missouri seemed to be focused ononly those options that harm our publichealth and the environment.

lWe can all appreciate that businesses need tomake a profit and that in order to stay com-petitive they must try to keep costs down.The problem is the real cost of using cheap,dirty energy is not being addressed.

lTwo of the most polluting forms of energyused in the state of Missouri come from theburning of fossil fuels; the coal we burn forenergy production and the gasoline we burnfor transportation. I would like for the mem-bers of the task force to fully consider theharmful effects of theses energy sources onour health and the environment and weighthis evidence in determining the best choicesfor Missouri’s energy future.

lNo other source of pollution causes as manyadverse health effects as coal–burning powerplants. Coal is America’s dirtiest energysource and also our largest—generating 52percent of the nation’s electricity andaccounting for 85% of Missouri’s electricity.Coal–burning power plants are the singlebiggest source of industrial air pollution.Coal produces pollution when it is mined,transported, burned and when the wastefrom burning is disposed.

lPollution from electric power plants kills30,000 Americans ever y year, includingapproximately 900 people in Missouri and454 in St. Louis. These numbers place St.Louis eighth in a ranking of metropolitanareas for premature deaths caused by powerplant pollution. More people die as a resultof the pollution from power plants than fromdrunk driving or homicides every year.

lTransportation is the second largest globalwarming pollutant in the state. According tothe Department of Natural Resources, trans-portation was the largest consumer of energyin the state of Missouri in 1990—accountingfor 41% of energy consumption. Each gallonof gas burned pumps 28 pounds of CO2 intothe atmosphere. Studies show that Missouri’scars are less efficient than the national aver-age. In 1990, Missouri automobiles averaged19 miles per gallon compared to 21 milesper gallon nationwide.

lHumans, through our energy use activities,are having a global impact. If we continue atour current rates the warming of our planetwill adversely affect every aspect of the worldwe leave to our children. The impacts fromour energy demands indeed are far reachingand the decision making process mustinclude these environmental and healththreats.

lAs we continue to see the build-up of green-house gases in our atmosphere and the

long–term impacts we are imposing onfuture generations we must demand that weuse our energy more efficiently.

Excerpts from Wallace McMullen’spresentation:lWe want an energy system that does not pol-

lute the air, cause global warming, or gener-ate toxic radioactive waste as an integral partof generating electricity.

lThe existing market structure is a major fail-ure in that the health, environmental andother external costs are not included in theprice of electricity or gasoline. Along withother barriers, this makes it difficult forrenewable energy to compete, and dampensinterest in energy efficiency.

lWe need to work for an electricity system wecan live with — one that is clean, non–pol-luting, and doesn’t damage the climate.

lCompared to oil and coal, renewable energyproduces tiny amounts of the pollutants thatpresently impair the health of people,degrade our lakes and forests, lower cropyields, and damage buildings, bridges, andother structures. Of course, renewable energydoesn’t produce greenhouse gases.

lThe existing market structure assigns nocosts to health and environmental damages,but the costs to the citizens of our state arevery real.

lThe “supply side” approach — buildinglarge new electricity generating stations — istypically the slowest, most costly, and mostenvironmentally damaging way to generatemore power. The state needs adequate ener-gy resources in the future to maintain ahealthy economy, but we can have the mostpositive effect by pursuing efficiency andrenewable sources.

lI exhort this distinguished panel to makerecommendations which go beyond tinkeringaround the edges, and I hope that our cur-rent administration will undertake vigorousleadership on these issues.

lI have a series of specific proposals for yourconsideration, pertaining primarily to the useof solar power, wind power, and energy effi-ciency. These recommendations can be cate-gorized into three broad classifications ofaction:

1. Let’s build the energy system we want inour future.

2. We need the state government to expandits role as an active actor.

3. We need to clear away barriers that blockthe adoption of efficiency and renewables.

lSince we need to aggressively pursue a betterenergy system, I suggest we should:

wSubsidize clean power. Implement a “DirtyPower” charge on electricity fromcoal–fired power plants, and use it to subsi-dize electricity produced by wind or photo-voltaic generation.If sufficient wind or photovoltaic electricityis not being commercially produced in thestate to use up the subsidy, then it shouldbe used each year for installing photovolta-ic generation for state facilities, which will

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 13

The Sierra Club Makes Presentations toG o v e rn o r’s Energy Policy Task Forc e

continued on page 4........Energy Task Force

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 14

reduce the state’s electricity bill and boostthe photovoltaic industry in Missouri at thesame time.I suggest a good rate for this carbon taxwould be the same rate as the nucleardecommissioning fee that we all pay in theurban areas of the state: 0.02¢/Kwh.Thereis considerable poetic justice in requiring apayment to offset dirty generation of thesame magnitude as the fee for thelong–term costs of a radioactive generatingfacility. This is relatively a pretty tinyamount per customer—it would add only$.08 (8¢) to a typical monthly residentialbill, assuming usage of 400 Kwh permonth. But it would aggregate to at least$6 million per year, enough to have a realimpact.We already have franchise fees, decommis-sioning charges, utility taxes, and othersuch charges added to every customer’selectric bill in the state. Adding anothersmall charge would be just a minimaladministrative task for the electric utilitiesand electric co–ops. This would be charg-ing dirty coal–fired generation a little extrafor their undesirable external costs andsubsidizing the generation system we want,which is eminently good public policy.

wPursue renewable manufacturing. Missourishould actively pursue photovoltaic (PV)equipment and fuel cell manufacturers witheconomic incentives. Chicago recentlylanded a major manufacturer of photo-voltaic equipment, Spire Solar, whichdeveloped a new plant in a brownfield areabecause the city guaranteed to purchase aquantity of photovoltaic panels each year,which are to be used on public schools,museums, and public buildings.This type of economic development shouldbe actively pursued by the Department ofEconomic Development and the DNR. Thefinancial resources in my first recommen-dation could help provide the economicincentives—other state programs such asTax Incremental Financing, and theFederal Brownfield Programs ought to beapplicable. If existing state programs areinsufficient, recommending a relativelysmall amount of General Revenue to sup-port such programs could generate a greatdeal of investment.

lPay more attention to energy issues. We needexpanded support for DNR’s Energy Centerand more status for the work that they do—itshould be given a larger role in dealing withthe issues that this task force is addressing.The staff there have spent years looking intothese questions, and have developed consid-erable expertise in how the energy problemsof the state might be effectively addressed.We recommend an economist specializing inenergy issues be added to the staff of theEnergy Center, and that the DNR EnergyCenter be given a higher profile role in thepolicy development process of Gover norHolden’s Administration, with sufficientfunding to support this important work.

Excerpts from Ron McLinden’stestimony:lI believe the work of this task force is of

strategic importance. I believe that what is atstake is nothing less than Missouri’s futureeconomic security. And I believe our eco-nomic security depends as much on energyefficiency as it does on access to energy sup-plies.

lEnergy and Resource Efficiency—If we areto remain competitive in a global economywe must become more resource efficient.wThe idea of resource efficiency is described

at length in a recent book, NaturalCapitalism, by Paul Hawken and Hunterand Amory Lovins. A central premise oftheir book is that nature and natural sys-tems are part of the capital that the humaneconomy relies on, and that while we takecare to protect the other forms of capitalthat we use—land, labor, equipment—wehave not fully recognized the need to pre-serve “natural capital” that we take forgranted.

wNature and natural systems provide servicesto our economy worth some $36 trillionper year, nearly as much as the $39 trillionestimated annual output of the globalhuman economy. Just one example of a ser-vice provided by natural systems is thecycle by which water evaporates, is trans-ported by air currents, and falls back uponthe earth to water forests and grasslandsand crops. What would be the cost if wehad to find and distribute that water with-out the assistance of this natural cycle?

wEfficiency is a strategy that fits hand inglove with all of the other energy strategiesthat you are likely to recommend— assur-ing supply, alternative fuels, and renewablesources.

wIt’s imperative that we make our economyas energy and resource efficient as possible.The good news, according to the authors,is that we can reduce our energy needs toone fourth what we use now—maybe evenone tenth—if we will think more holisticallyabout our needs and how we meet them.

wConsuming more energy doesn’t guaranteeus a stronger economy, or a higher stan-dard of living, or more satisfying lives.Perhaps that’s worth repeating: Consumingmore energy doesn’t guarantee us astronger economy, or a higher standard ofliving, or more satisfying lives. In fact, con-suming more energy than we really needmight actually put our economy at risk andresult in a lower standard of living and lesssatisfying lives for future generations.

wA major goal of our society should be toreduce our use of energy—and of otherresources—while maintaining or enhancingour overall quality of life.

lThe Energy Implications of Urban Sprawl—Iwant to talk now about an element of oureconomy that’s a particular interest of mine,the physical structure—the geographic layout—of our economy. I’m talking about the pat-tern of development of our cities and towns.In plain language I’m talking about urbansprawl.wSprawl is characterized as relatively low

density development that has its varioustypes of land use separated from oneanother, and that as a result is highlydependent on motorized transportation.Nearly every city and town in Missouri that

is not actually shriveling up is sprawling.wDuring the years since the energy crisis of

the 1970’s, the American economy hasmade significant advances in improving theenergy efficiency of its industrial processes,of its buildings, and of its vehicles. Thoseare all things that are more or less withinthe control of private enterprise—withsome occasional nudging from government,such as CAFE standards for motor vehi-cles.

wIronically, our economy tends to operate asif the principles of efficiency apply onlywithin the boundaries of individual privateenterprises. Meanwhile, out in the publicrealm we have been making our human set-tlements less efficient, more energy depen-dent. In fact, the energy savings from ourmore efficient industrial processes, build-ings, and vehicles are almost cancelled outby the inefficiencies we continue to buildinto our cities and towns.

wConsider a few statistics:1. The St. Louis metro area populationgrew 35 percent between1950 and 1990.Meanwhile the urbanized land area grewmore than 350 percent, ten times as fast.That’s a lot of extra distance we’ve beenputting between ourselves.2. The transportation consequences are justwhat you’d expect. During the 21 yearsbetween 1969 and 1990, the U.S. popula-tion grew by 21 percent. But during thatperiod the number of miles driven byhousehold vehicles—the vehicles that youand I own—grew by 82 percent, four timesas fast.3. Here in Missouri, MoDOT reports thatvehicle travel has been growing evenfaster—8 times as fast as population.

wThe transportation component of sprawl isone of its more troublesome characteristics.Sprawl makes it hard to do almost anythingwithout getting in a car. Consider whereyou shop for groceries. If you also need toget something across the street from thegrocery store, can you walk there, or doyou drive? Is it safe to walk anywhere? Cankids walk or ride a bike to school? Or tosoccer practice? The affluence that has putseveral cars in every driveway has been dev-astating to our public transit systems. Andthe changes in development patterns—withnew jobs in the suburbs and low–incomepeople still living in the urban core—meansthat a lot of low–wage workers have to ridethe bus an hour or two ever y morning andever y evening, making two or three trans-fers in the process, just to get to work.

wContinued growth at the edges of our citiesand towns is costly, especially when itoccurs at a faster rate than populationgrowth. Such physical expansion of a townrequires new roads, new water and sewerlines, new electric and phone and gas andcable lines, and new fire stations andschools and libraries. All of us pay formuch of this new infrastructure.Yes, theremight be a utility connection fee or a devel-opment impact fee, but such fees usuallydon’t pay the full cost.

wConsider roads. If I choose to drive to workinstead of taking the bus, I make my threemile commute over existing city streets—

E n e rgy Task Forc e. . . . . .continued from page 3

by Dave Bedan

On June 11, 2001, Ameren DevelopmentCompany, a subsidiary of St. Louis basedAmeren Corporation, announced that it

had filed a request with the Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission (FERC) for a preliminarypermit that would pave the way for an evaluationon whether to build a new pumped–storagehydroelectric plant.The site for the plant would bein Reynolds County on Church Mountain and onTaum Sauk Creek between Taum Sauk MountainState Park and Johnson Shut–ins State Park.Thenortheast one fourth of Church Mountain isowned by the Missouri Department of NaturalResources as part of Taum Sauk State Park. Forthose who are familiar with area, this new projectwould be a few miles south of AmerenUE’sexisting pumped–storage hydroelectric plant onProffit Mountain.

The $100,000,000 project would level off thetop of Church Mountain to build an upperreservoir and dam up Taum Sauk Creek to build alower reservoir. Pipes and turbines would connectthe reservoirs. On summer nights, during periodsof low demand for electricity, water would bepumped from the lower reservoir to the upperreservoir. During the day, when demand is at itspeak, water would be run back down to generateelectricity. The capacity of the generating plantcould be as much as 770 megawatts of electricity.However, these plants generate at a net loss ofelectricity, feasible only because of periods of peak

air conditioning demands.The two reservoirs, generating plant, roads

and pipelines could directly impact about 500acres in this scenic area of the St. FrancisMountains, the oldest part of the Ozarks. Thismonstrosity would loom high over the Taum Saukvalley and be visible from almost every open

vantage point on the Taum Sauk section of theOzark Trail. Besides being a major intrusion uponthe scenic integrity of the park, the project woulddirectly impact Taum Sauk Creek, a permanent,crystal clear headwater stream coursing 5.5 milesthrough Taum Sauk State Park. The watershed isnearly completely protected in state parkownership. The stream is designated for its aquaticsignificance both as a Natural Area and asOutstanding State Resource Waters.

The project would require about eight yearsto construct. Ameren wants to determine by late2002 or early 2003 whether to build the project.But there will be several regulatory requirementsthat should allow for public input. I would assumethat, because of the need for a FERC permit, thisproject would require an Environmental ImpactStatement (EIS) under the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA). Building thelower reservoir would also require a 404 permitfrom the Corps of Engineers. And the dams wouldrequire dam safety permits from DNR. And sincethe Missouri Clean Water Commission hasdesignated Taum Sauk Creek as Outstanding StateResource Waters, those special water qualityregulations might afford it additional protection.The regulations state that these waters shall receivespecial protection against any degradation inquality. Also, the entire park, including the easternflanks of Church Mountain, is designated by thestate as the St. Francois Mountain LandscapeNatural Area — the largest in the state..

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 15

A m e re n U E ’s Pump Storage Project Threatens State Parks

streets that were built and maintained usingprimarily a tax on real estate. But if I moveto a new house in exurbia, I suddenly expectto make my 25 mile commute at a speed of65 or 70 miles per hour on a very expensivehighway that has costly bridges and inter-changes in place of simple intersections withstop signs.

wAnd we keep doing it. One of the most sig-nificant factors in contributing to sprawl isan unwritten MoDOT policy that they don’teven realize they have. Their policy is thatthey will do their utmost to provide highwaycapacity to meet the needs of all themotorists that can be expected to presentthemselves on the state highway system. Andthe expectation that this policy will continuefuels the sprawl cycle. The result is ineffi-cient settlement patterns, and that doesn’tcontribute to a competitive state economy.

wMoDOT’s most recent estimate of trans-portation needs concludes that they need$1.5 billion in new revenue each year tomeet those needs. The General Assemblyhas balked at the idea of increasing taxes, soMoDOT is having to make tough decisions.Fortunately, they are choosing to preserveexisting roads and bridges as their first pri-ority. Eventually that will help rein in urbansprawl, so maybe it’s not such a bad thingMoDOT can’t afford all the roads peoplewant.

wMissouri needs to address its urban growthissues in a very deliberate manner — not justto assure that our cities remain viable placesfor human habitation and economic activity,but to preserve them for their ver y energy effi-ciency. An urban center that has good publictransit, that has stores and shops and services

available within a short walk or bike trip of itscitizens — such an urban center can attractpeople for whom the “suburban dream” hascome to look more like a nightmare of longcommutes, congested streets, and rising taxes.

wWe need to support the renaissance of oururban centers. So I was glad to hear GovernorHolden say a year ago that he intends to for-mulate Missouri’s first comprehensive urbanpolicy.

lRecommendations — I have just a few recom-mendations to make to you as you write yourreport.

1. I recommend that you take seriously theworld economy, and the global factors thatwill affect us in the future. I outlined someof them, at least as I see them. Humankindfaces unprecedented challenges — globalwarming, for instance — and we disregardthem at our peril.

2. I recommend that you place the highestpossible priority on promoting energy effi-ciency. Whether you accept any of my con-cerns or not, there simply is no risk in mak-ing Missouri a more energy and resourceefficient state.

3. I recommend that you support formation ofa Missouri partnership for energy efficiencyto carry the message that “energy efficiencypays” to every town in the state. Such apartnership might have the Departments ofNatural Resources and EconomicDevelopment working with business associa-tions and chambers of commerce to improveenergy efficiency. My hope is that this mes-sage would be conveyed with a passion thatborders on evangelism.

4. I recommend that you support formation ofa permanent coalition of organizations towork on energy policies and programs. Thiswould be consistent with one of theGovernor’s platform commitments, to revi-talize the Missouri Energy FuturesCoalition.

5. I recommend that you give the strongestpossible support for an inter–agency body todevelop policies and programs to make ourwhole economy more efficient by encourag-ing Smart Growth principles in our citiesand towns.

lConclusion — We need to free our economyand our communities from the current builtenvironment that requires us to be dependenton motor vehicles to get from life activity tolife activity — school, work, play, culture, andshopping.We need to evolve away from thatdominant pattern and toward cities and townsthat require less energy by design. Gandhionce said, “There’s more to life than increas-ing the speed of it.”We need to move beyondthe “bigger/faster/more is better” mind–setthat underlies so much of our economy, andmove toward an economy that meets ourphysical needs while serving the higher pur-poses of life that we typically look to religionand philosophy to define. The task is great.The stakes are great. We must begin.

Wallace can be reached at mcmulw@socket.net..

Save TAUM

SAUK

Creek

by Gina DeBarthe

Recent research has demonstrated the manybenefits of breast-feeding. In fact theAmerican Academy of Pediatrics now

recommends breast milk for at least the first year.Breast-feeding has been shown to reduce earinfections, colds and other illness and diseases,including childhood leukemia. It also reduces thechances of an infant dying from Sudden InfantDeath Syndrome. The benefits also extend to themother as she, too, has a reduced chance ofdeveloping ovarian cancer and pre–menopausalbreast cancer. One thing about breast-feeding thatis less emphasized is the environmental benefit.Yes, breast milk is environmentally–friendly!

Breast milk requires no packaging. Treesdon’t need to be cut down to make cardboard

and aluminumdoesn’t need to bemined andprocessed. Everythree million babiesthat are bottle-feduse 450 million cansof formula requiring70,000 tons ofmetal.

Breast-feedingeliminates the need

for shipping from a factory to a store to thehome. So you don’t have to worry about addingmore global warming carbon dioxide to theatmosphere. (Maybe the President shouldencourage breast-feeding as a way to reducecarbon dioxide emissions.)

No animals are exploited in themanufacture of breast milk. There are noconfined animal feeding operations filled withcows, producing waste that ends up pollutingnearby streams.

Lastly, breast-feeding helps curb populationgrowth. Breast-feeding suppresses ovulation forvarying lengths of time and reduces a woman’sfer tility accordingly. In cultures where breast-feeding is the norm, the average age betweensiblings is four years; due in part to suppressionof ovulation and in part to discouragement ofsexual intercourse while the mother is breast-feeding.

Now, here is the best part: not only is breastmilk the most nutritionally complete food forinfants, and not only is it environmentallyfriendly, it is free! Even if you are an adoptiveparent you, too, can breast-feed. Just contact yourlocal La Leche League for more information.Gina can be reached at: GMDebarthe@aol.com..

B reast-feeding and the Enviro n m e n t

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 16

by Ron McLinden

If you’re like me, you probably rememberhaving “story problems” in math class. Onesuch problem might read as follows. “You

need to fill a bathtub, but you don’t have a plug.The faucet has a flow rate of two gallons perminute, and the open drain has a flow rate of onegallon per minute. How many minutes will it taketo get 20 gallons of water in the tub?” Theanswer, of course, is that you have a net gain ofone gallon per minute, so it will take 20 minutesto get 20 gallons in the tub. During that time youwill have also lost 20 gallons down the opendrain.

In real life nobody would think of trying tofill a tub without doing something—anything—toplug the drain.

But oddly enough, it seems that right herein real life there actually are people who want todo essentially just that: fill the tub without firstplugging the leak.

Consider a few examples:lNational energy policy. The

Administration’s current proposal doesindeed include some provisions and incen-tives for energy conservation. But whencompared to the measures to increase energysupply, they tend to be relatively token mea-sures. And a lot of them might not be thereat all but for the insistence of ordinary citi-zens who understand that reducing our useof energy should be a prerequisite before wetalk about increasing supply. Instead ofembracing energy efficiency, Administrationofficials still tend to talk about conservation,pooh–poohing it as virtuous but inadequate.The potential for energy efficiency is largelyoverlooked, even in the face of the fact thatefficiency is a bottom–line business value—as All–American as baseball and apple pieand stock options for CEO’s.

lSurface transportation policy. In spite ofgrowing evidence—and even admission onthe part of highway engineers—that we inthe U.S. cannot build our way out of trafficcongestion, we still have people who want tovastly expand our highway systems. There’s anagging fear, perhaps, that to do otherwise

would be to admit that we made bad deci-sions half a century ago when we allowedstreetcar tracks all over the United States tobe ripped up.

lLight rail vs highways. By the time youread this, the votes will have long since beencounted in Kansas City on a half–cent salestax proposal to build the first 24 miles of alight rail transit system for the city. Criticshad pointed out that it would have carriedonly one percent of the region’s citizens andwould have had little or no impact on trafficcongestion. Their pronouncementsappeared to have assumed that light rail’sbenefits would have been limited to whatwould have happened during the first monthof operation. In reality, light rail should notbe expected to have great immediate bene-fits. Instead, it should be viewed as a strate-gic investment that a city makes in order tocreate and reinforce a strong and vibranturban corridor that will attract many of thecitizens—Seinfeld generation andempty–nesters alike—who have experiencedthis kind of living elsewhere and actuallyprefer it. Over a period of 10 or 20 years theimpact would be more people living andworking in an urban corridor where they canmeet most of their daily needs without hav-ing to get into a car. There will still be con-gestion after construction of a light rail sys-tem, of course, but far less than there mightbe otherwise. And the urban center will be amuch more exciting and visitor friendlyplace in the bargain.

lMaterial consumption. How many of usconsume things that we really don’t need—or things we don’t need in the form in whichwe consume them? One of my favoriteexamples is soft drinks. (I am not innocenthere, and I’m quite willing to admit to mytransgressions.) Our bodies need water,along with nutrients.We experience the needfor water as thirst. But when we are thirsty,do we drink a glass of water from the tap?More often than not the typical Americangoes to the refrigerator or a vending machineand gets a cold, industrially processed,sweetened, carbonated beverage, usually

packaged in a disposable container. We’vebeen indoctrinated to believe that “BeverageX” is the answer to the problem of thirst.

lElectricity. With at least three major elec-tric generating plants on the drawing boardsfor Missouri—and the Bush Administration’sestimate of the need for well over 1000 newplants in the next couple of decades—itmakes sense to re–examine how we use elec-tricity. Electronic communication requireselectricity. Almost everything else, however,can use some other form of energy. Energylosses associated with electricity—trans-portation of coal, heat losses during the gen-eration process, losses over the transmissionlines—all add up, and they call into questionwhether an energy source like natural gaswould be more efficiently used directly inheating and cooling than to power electric“peaking” plants. At a recent meeting of theMissouri Energy Policy Task Force a repre-sentative of a gas utility made precisely thatpoint. In addition, a lot of energy uses inbuildings can be reduced by simply design-ing the building more carefully in the firstplace.Yes, the architect or engineer has totake a bit more care, but the payoff usuallycomes in the form of lower operating costsover the life of the building, and often eventhe ability to save on initial costs bydown–sizing the heating and air conditioningsystems that have to be installed.Years ago there was a Jerry Lewis movie

entitled Don’t Raise the Bridge, Lower the River.I’ve never seen the movie—in fact, I’ve beenadvised that it’s not worth seeing—but I’vealways loved that title. It implies so clearly thatthere are different ways of approaching aproblem.

We need to re–define a lot of our“problems” if we’re going to meet the needs ofthe 6.1 billion current human inhabitants ofourplanet—and if we’re going to do so in a waythat more equitably distributes the resources ofthe planet among our global neighbors.

Failure to do so will be folly.You can reach Ron at Ron_McLinden@kcmo.org..

Plug the Tub, Reduce the Need, Lower the River

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 17

by Alan Journet

“Conservation is Conservative” is morethan an idle phrase; it is the tradename under which REP America

operates. For many years the leadership of theRepublican Party (both at the federal and statelevels) has given the clear impression that theyconsider that environmental and human healthprotection are not issues about which their partyshould care. As a result, they have abdicated theseareas, leaving them to the Democratic Party—sometimes more by default than as a result ofpositive actions on the part of the latter. However,the Republican Party does, indeed, contain somemembers with a more enlightened and sensitiveview than is possessed by its leadership when itcomes to issues of critical importance to SierraClub members. These folks have joined under thebanner of Republicans for EnvironmentalProtection—hence REP America which offers thedisclaimer that it is an independent organizationthat has no affiliation with the Republican NationalCommittee or any state or local political party.Thedefection of Senator Jim Jeffords from theRepublican Party should serve as a warning to theRepublican Party leaders that they are out of stepwith many rank and file members within theirparty.

Echoing the views of many environmentalists,the REP America brochure states, “Conservation isas American as Apple Pie. But, too often, theenvironment suffers from partisan bickering.” Thegroup regrets that self–proclaimed conservativeshave labeled environmental protection a “liberalcause” leaving “liberals to lay claim to theenvironment as a private political preserve.”

A recent brochure quotes Republican leadersat the forefront of the conservation movement,using them to illustrate the principle that this is nota partisan issue. Not surprisingly, TheodoreRoosevelt is one of the more quoted of these:“Conservation is a great moral issue, for it involvesthe patriotic duty of insuring the safety andcontinuity of the nation. When I hear of thedestruction of a species, I feel just as if the worksof some great writer had perished.”

The list of conservation–minded Republicanleaders includes:

lPresident Abraham Lincoln who protectedYosemite Valley (1864).

lPresident Ulysses S. Grant who signed a billestablishing Yellowstone National Park (1872).

lPresident Benjamin Harrison who signed theForest Reserve Act (1891).

lPresident Theodore Roosevelt who establishedPelican Island as the first National WildlifeRefuge (1903) and established the GrandCanyon in 1908 as one of his 18 Monuments.

lThe Republican Congress of 1906 which gavepresidents the authority to designate NationalMonuments.

lPresident Herbert Hoover who established thesecond Grand Canyon National Monument in1932.

lPresident Eisenhower who protected theArctic National Wildlife refuge in 1960.

lThe list continues to the Presidency ofRichard M. Nixon, which saw the establish-ment of the Clean Air Act setting auto emis-sion limits and standards for cleaning up theair, the National Environmental Policy Actrequiring federal agencies to study the envi-ronmental impact of projects and examinesless harmful alternatives, the EnvironmentalPesticide Control Act authorizing health andenvironmental standards for farm chemicals,and the Endangered Species Act mandatingscience–based actions to prevent the extinc-tion of wildlife. Nixon stated in 1970 “The1970’s must be the years when America paysits debt to the past by reclaiming the purity ofits air, its waters, and our living environment.It is literally now or never.”The loss of conservation as a Republican

issue seems to have occurred during the Presidencyof Ronald Reagan, and especially the term of hisInterior Secretary, James Watt. Evidently bothRepublican leaders failed to see the connectionbetween a healthy environment and a strongeconomy. The Newt Gingrich–led resurgence inRepublicanism in Congress followed the Reaganview. It was not until 1995 that Newt Gingrichhimself finally realized the error of his ways whenhe stated “We blew it. Give us low marks. Wemessed up on the environment.”

However, despite the ascendance of theReagan forces and their anti–environmental views,a core of Republicans with environmental concernscontinued to hold office. Even President GeorgeH.W. Bush signed Clean Air Act re–authorizationin 1990. Meanwhile during the period 1995–1999,when the Republican–led Congress mounted allmanner of assaults on the environment throughsuch actions as anti–environmental riders attachedto funding bills, a small group of representatives,led by Rep. Sherwood Boehlert led the resistance.

REP America lists the worst ideas of theseanti–environmental years as:

l“Riders”—unpopular bills tacked on to“must–pass” legislation to cripple EPA andother environmental programs.

lProhibiting EPA from studying climatechange science.

lExemption of national forest logging fromenvironmental laws.

lA commission to close national parks.

lFederalization of local land–usedecision–making.

lRollbacks in clean water standards.

lWeakening of the Endangered Species Act.

lTaxpayer subsidies for timber, mining, andgrazing on public lands.

lLegalization of chemicals that harm the pro-tective ozone layer.

lRepeal of 1990 Clean Air Act.

lBlocking efforts to increase vehicle fuel effi-ciency.What the REP America group recognizes is

that our natural resources constitute the NaturalCapital from which our economic health flows.Conservatism, therefore, demands that these

resources be subjected to wise stewardship; thisdoes not include the plunder and mismanagementof these resources for short–term economic profit.

The group identifies the following currentissues as critical:

lThe growing scientific consensus that climatechange is real and present, and must beaddressed.

lThe increasing rate of species extinctions.

lThe vast number of persistent chemicalsintroduced into the environment, many ofwhich interfere with vital life processes byserving, for example, as “endocrine disrup-tors.”REP America offers a series of conservative

solutions for environmental issues, many of whichare coincident with the views of those in theenvironmental community:

Wildlife and Resource Management:

lAbolition of subsidies for logging, mining, andgrazing on public lands.

lAn end to wasteful and harmful road buildingon federal lands and permanent protection ofroadless areas.

lFull funding for the Land And WaterConservation Fund, half going to state andlocalities.

lIncentives for brownfields reclamation andwildlife conservation on private property.

Clean, Efficient Energy:

lEnd all forms of fossil fuel subsidies andstrengthen efficiency standards for vehicles,lighting, appliances, and motors.

lProvide tax credits for buildings and equip-ment that exceed energy efficiency standards.

lConvert federal fleets to hybrid and alterna-tive fuel vehicles. Use solar and wind power atfederal facilities.

lDevelop a fair, effective carbon trading systemfor real reductions in greenhouse gas emis-sions.

Learning from Nature:

lIncrease research into bio–based and“bio–mimicking” design and manufacturing.

lPhase out persistent, bio–accumulative toxins;clean up hazardous waste sites.

lSet a precautionary standard requiring safetytesting before chemicals are marketed.

lReform regulatory structures to set high stan-dards, encourage innovation, and preventenvironmental harm before it occurs.Over the last few decades it has become

increasingly difficult for environmentalists to findmembers of the Republican Party that they canendorse. It is for this reason that organizationssuch as the non–partisan League of ConservationVoters have frequently found themselves endorsinga vast number of Democratic candidates but fewRepublicans. However the platform articulated byREP America constitutes an illuminatingdocument. Clearly, environmentalists have much incommon with this group. From amongst theirmembership we undoubtedly will find manypoliticians who we can comfortably endorse. Formore information, you might wish to contactmarREP@aol.com or http://www.repamerica.org/You can reach Alan at ajournet@biology.semo.edu.

C o n s e rvation is Conservative (Not allRepublicans are Anti–enviro n m e n t a l )

My Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Address _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

City / State _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ZIP _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

■ Check enclosed (made payable to “Sierra Club”) Phone (optional) __________________________________

Please charge my ■ MasterCard ■ VISA E-Mail (optional) ________________________________

Cardholder Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Card Number _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Expiration Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Contributions, gifts or dues to the Sierra Club are not tax deductible; they support our effective, citizen-based advocacy and lobbying efforts.Yourdues include $7.50 for a subscription to SIERRA magazine and $1.00 for your Chapter newsletter.

■Yes, I want to join! I want to help safeguard our precious natural heritage. My payment isenclosed.

M E M B E R S H I P C A T E G O R I E SINDIVIDUAL JOINT

INTRODUCTORY ...... ■ $25REGULAR .................... ■ $39 .......... ■ $47SUPPORTING .............. ■ $75 .......... ■ $100CONTRIBUTING ........ ■ $150 ........ ■ $175LIFE .............................. ■ $1000 ...... ■ $1250SENIOR ........................ ■ $24 .......... ■ $32STUDENT .................... ■ $24 .......... ■ $32LIMITED INCOME .... ■ $24 .......... ■ $32

Humans have a choice whenit comes to protecting theland. Nature doesn’t.Won't you join the Sierra Club, and add your voice to themany thousands who want to ensure that our nation'sunique natural heritage is protected?Join the Club and receive a FREE SierraClub Weekender Bag!

F94QW 13 6 0 0

Sign check and mail to: P. O. B ox 52968,B o u l d e r, CO 80322-2968

8Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 1

Replace your most fre-quently used incandes-cent bulbs with compactfluorescent lights.

Compact fluorescentlight bulbs use onlyabout a third as muchelectricity as standardincan-

descents. Andthough the bulbsare more expensiveto buy, a compactfluorescent will eas-ily pay for itself by lasting up to tentimes longer than regular bulbs.

Save money and the envi-ronment, join the Sierra Club

EnergyEcotips

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 19

Your Letters Are Urgently NeededOnce again our National Forests need your

help! You can help ensure that our last wild forestsare protected for future generations, not loggedfor short–term profit.The Bush Administration ismoving to sacrifice the last wild areas of ourNational Forests to clear–cut logging, roadbuild-ing, and other destructive activities. In January2001, former President Clinton finalized the WildForest Protection Plan to protect nearly 60 millionacres of unspoiled National Forests.This plan wasthe direct result of a tremendous outpouring ofpublic support from more than one millionAmericans including hundreds of thousands ofSierra Club members. Yet the Bush Administrationis ignoring public sentiment and moving to kill therule and its protections. You can help turn backthese attacks by writing a letter to the ForestService.

Our National Forests already contain morethan nine times more miles of roads than ourcountry’s interstate highway system. The WildForest Protection Plan is a national policy to pro-tect the last wild areas in our National Forestsfrom damaging activities. But the BushAdministration wants to put these managementdecisions back in the hands of individual forestsupervisors, leaving our last wild forests vulnerableto being chipped away at, forest by forest, timbersale by timber sale.

The Bush Administration is accepting publiccomments from now through September 10th.Please address your individual letters to Forest

Service Chief Dale Bosworth. Following are somepoints to address in your letters. Please personal-ize letters with information about why you valuewild forests: such as for hiking, camping, photog-raphy, hunting, fishing, sources of clean water,places to enjoy quiet, and study ecology. Also,please add information about National Foreststhat you have visited. Finally, please remember toinclude your name and address.Thanks for yourhelp!

lI oppose any changes to the Roadless AreaConservation Rule as published in theFederal Register on January 12, 2001. Pleasefully and immediately implement this land-mark conservation rule on all NationalForests, including Alaska’s Tongass.

lThe last wild roadless areas of our NationalForests should be protected because theypurify our drinking water, provide our fami-

lies with places to hike, hunt, fish, and camp,and give homes to fish and wildlife, includingendangered species like grizzly bear andsalmon.

lThe current rule already contains provisionsto address wildfires and forest health.

lI believe it is critical to have national guide-lines for roadless areas, and I oppose modify-ing the rule to allow forest–by–forest deci-sions on whether to log, build roads in, orotherwise develop these pristine areas.

lOver half of our national forest lands arealready open to logging, mining, roadbuildingand other development.The 58.5 millionacres protected by the roadless rule shouldremain protected from logging and otherdestructive activities.

lPlease count this as an official comment onthe Advanced Notice of ProposedRulemaking.

ADDRESS INFORMATION:Please send letters directly to the Forest

Service at:USDA—Forest Service — CATAttention: Roadless ANPR CommentsP.O. Box 221090, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84122

Or, send e–mail to roadless_anpr@fs.fed.usOr, send a fax to 1(801)296–4090,

Attention: Roadless ANPR Comments.You can also send a letter to the Forest

Service through the Sierra Club’s Action webpageat http://whistler.sierraclub.org:8080/takeaction/wildlands/index4.jsp..

Bush Administration Takes Aim at Our Last Wild Fore s t s

by Daniel Lazare

reviewed by Cheryl Hammond

Henry Ford stated, “The modern city is themost unlovely and artificial sight thisplanet affords. The ultimate solution is to

abandon it.We shall solve the city problem byleaving the city.” With Henry Ford’s help, modernAmerica has, indeed, abandoned the city.

Daniel Lazare has written a very readablebook which explores the devastating effects of theautomobile on cities and has comprehensivelyanswered the question posed in the book subtitle.He also explores in depth the hostility of reformersand progressives to cities and how these reformersencouraged government policies to move peopleaway from city cores. He explains the social andeconomic consequences of America’s move to thesuburbs.

At the beginning of the 20th century, efficientorganization of industry was inconceivable withoutconcentration of activity in cities. Urbandemographer Adna Weber predicted cities wouldcontinue to grow and any other alternative was“too remote to be predicted.” How limited are ourpowers to see into the future!

Henry Ford, an ordinary mechanic with noformal training, not only built an industrial empire,but created a transformation of our social,economic, and physical landscape.

The automobile easily shoved other modes oftransport off the road. It gave ordinary individualstremendous motive power, but created immense

costs. Soon streets had to be widened andsidewalks narrowed to make room for more cars.Trolley riders suffered the congestion due toautomobiles just as much as those in the cars.Already in 1907 traffic fatalities reached more than700 annually in New York City alone.

Three–fourths of the fatalities were children whostill thought it was safe to play in the streets.

As early as 1913, travel writers were notingthe traffic paralysis in city after city. The wonderfulefficiency of the cities began to decline. Forexample, bridges accommodated fewer and fewerpersons per day as automobile usage increased.Cars took up ten to twenty times the space perpassenger as a trolley.

Automobiles are a poor fit for cities. AsAmericans have switched to car transport, theyhave moved out of the cites and moved to locationswhich better fit the automobile.

A century ago, no urban planner spent amoment thinking about how to draw people intothe city. The city was overflowing with jobs andpeople. In fact, social workers and reformers wroteof the benefits of decentralizing the populationaway from the cities, drawing inspiration fromThomas Jefferson’s agrarian ideal. Jefferson’sinfluence was so strong then and today that we canoverlook that the early founders of this country hadother ideals besides Jefferson’s. For example, theNew England Puritans required colonists to settlein compact communities surrounding a church.

Today, our government–built highwaysystems continue to support automobiledependence and create more areas where no othermeans of transport is practical. Lazare does nothave many good solutions, but his well researchedstudy will help us find the answers.

America’s Undeclared War, Daniel Lazare,published by Harcourt, copyright 2001.E–mail Cheryl Hammond at info@todaydata.com..

A m e ri c a ’s Undeclared War — W h at ’s Killing Our Cities and How WeCan Stop It

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 11 0

cracks, and without comment or seeking permis-sion, they posted the area with “No Trespassing”signs. K–MI has since argued that the appearanceof the hole at the time of well operation was just acoincidence. Maybe to conceal the evidence, andmaybe so they would appear to be good neighbors,K–MI offered to apply a band–aid solution, and fillthe hole. According to DNR, however, sinkholessuch as this are almost always man–made events;filling rarely prevents recurrence.

K–MI and State Senator Peter Kinder, a rela-tive (though distant), have been trying to persuadethe Governor and the Missouri Department ofNatural Resources to undermine, minimize, orignore air quality regulations. However, the initialair emission permit application filed by K–MI wasreturned by the DNR–DEQ (Division ofEnvironmental Quality) as unacceptable.Apparently, K–MI argued that, since the powerplant would be burning natural gas, it should bepermitted to operate free of controls. Furthermore,the company argued that Missouri should not beallowed to enforce its own clean air regulationssince these are more stringent than the minimalfederal EPA regulations. Apparently, when stateregulations are inferior to federal regulations, cor-porations want the “one size fits all” federal regula-tions that they whine about much of the time. Ofcourse, other power plants constructed in Missourihave met the state requirements. The K–MI claimwas made despite the acknowledgement that, ifoperated as planned, the facility would releasesome 500 tons of smog–inducing oxides of nitro-gen (NOx) and carbon (COx) into the air ofSoutheast Missouri per year. These gases wouldinevitably drift northeast in the prevailing windsand pollute the air of the only local urban centersof Cape Girardeau and Jackson.

Rather than install cleaning devices (catalyticscrubbers) one suggestion proposed by DNR, inorder to meet their air pollution requirementsK–MI may elect to operate the plant for fewerhours. This option allows them to evade what theyclaim is the prohibitive expense of installing pollu-tion controls. However the proposal additionallycalls for installation of a back–up diesel generatorthat the application claims would only be operatedduring emergencies.These are much more serioussources of air pollutants than is the natural gas.

In July, Kinder Morgan filed an administra-tive appeal with the Missouri Air ConservationCommission, challenging the DNR staff denial oftheir permit application. Meanwhile,MODNR–DEQ recently issued a Notice ofViolation to Kinder Morgan because the company

began construction (drilling wells) prior to theissuance of an air permit. MODNR also was con-cerned that “contracts related to the supply ofelectricity from this plant” might be in violation ofconstruction permit rules.

A major concern regarding this project is itsrelation to the push for energy de–regulation inMissouri—a proposal also driven by SenatorKinder. Should this happen, the concern is thatthe energy industry will be able to manipulate sup-ply in order to fabricate shortages and create an

energy emergency. Energy companies couldthen use this trumped up emergency as abasis for demanding reduction in the enforce-ment of environmental regulations—just ashas been the case both in California andnationally with the Bush–Cheney drive toincrease polluting energy production. If thiswere to occur, K–MI potentially could thenoperate the plant at full capacity, pumpingout all the noxious gases it defined in its ini-tial permit application—and more! As anIndependent Power Producer, K–MI is notbound by regulations imposed on utility com-panies by the Public Service Commission, theagency that determines the rates that utilitiesmay charge. The interest of IPP companies issolely in profit, a goal that is more easilyachieved under energy de–regulation.

As proposed, the plant would have avoracious appetite for water since it would require2,800 gallons per minute (approximately one and ahalf million gallons over a 10 hour shift—for com-parison, the Missouri discharge at Boonevilleunder low flow conditions is approximately 50 mil-lion gallons per minute).When test–wells wereoperated, the water table in the immediate vicinitydropped 6 – 9 feet. Unfortunately, according toMissouri law, there is no penalty or impedi-ment should an individual or company lowerthe water table and leave high and dry thedrinking or irrigation wells of neighbors. As ofthis writing, Kinder–Morgan has not submit-ted a permit request to allow the discharge ofthe volume of heated wastewater that it willbe generating, presumably to flow overlandinto the Whitewater River, and thence to aDiversion Channel and the Mississippi River.

It should also be recognized that thetransformation of prime agricultural land intoan industrial facility is one sad consequenceof this kind of “industrial development.”Thisconstitutes another step towards urban sprawlin Southeast Missouri. Of course, urbansprawl and the loss of agricultural land todevelopment usually occur in small bites, andonly become recognized as a problem whenthere is but little land left to bite. Although CapeGirardeau County already has a designated indus-trial area, with access to power grids and naturalgas pipelines, apparently K–MI does not own thesepipelines. The threat that this power plant might bethe first step towards urban sprawl and creation ofanother polluting industrial park on what is nowprime agricultural land in Southwestern CapeCounty concerns local residents.

One local fear is that this single electricalgenerator represents no more than a demonstra-tion project to entice other power companies intothe area. These would also use the K–MI pipelinegas supply, deplete the underground water supply,release wastewater, and further pollute the air ofSoutheast Missouri. This concern is fed by therealization that K–MI is not really a power genera-tion company so much as a gas pipeline company.

If a single plant poses a threat to the local andregional environment, one can only imagine whateffect multiple plants would have.

The potential local benefits to the powerplant have been considerably exaggerated. Thoughthe plant will, indeed, generate electricity to be fedinto the power grid in Cape County, current plansare for this to be sold out of state, in fact inOklahoma. Meanwhile, the claim that the plantwould generate many local construction jobs overthe short term is negated because the contractedconstruction company is committed to serving as anon–union site. Local unions are thereforeopposed to the project since it can only undercutthe conditions of standards and benefits that theyhave worked to achieve in the region over theyears. Indeed, its track record suggests that thisconstruction company imports the labor it needsfrom out of state when there are too few skilledlaborers in the immediate area, as is the case here.Finally, it has been claimed that the operationalplant will provide a couple of dozen technical andmanagement jobs—but again, these will most likelybe imported from elsewhere.

Your Ozark Chapter has urged both SteveMahfood, DNR Director, and Governor BobHolden not to succumb to political or economicpressure exerted either by Kinder–Morgan execu-tives, or their local champion, State Senator PeterKinder. Through Freedom of Information provi-sions, we have obtained copies of DNR documentspertaining to the application and its rejection. Weare also cooperating with local opponents torequest that a project assessment be undertaken byDNR giving due recognition to the range of poten-tial environmental hazards that not just one, butpotentially up to five such plants could impose onthe region.

Please address your concerns to:Roger Randolph, Director of Air Pollution

Program, and/orSteven Mahfood, DirectorDept. of Natural ResourcesP.O. Box 176Jefferson City, MO 651021(800)334–6946 (press 0 for operator)Governor Bob Holden Missouri Capital Building Room 216P.O. Box 720Jefferson City, MO 65102–0720(573)751–3222 Ask for Patrick Lynn(573)751–1495 fax

Reach Alan at ajournet@biology.semo.edu..

The Hole. . . . . .continued from page 1

When exploratory drilling was completed Kinder–Morgan deserted thesite, leaving a mess of drums and garbage.

Photo by Mathew Kieffer

The hole, about 30 feet in diameter and 20 feet in depth, is nowsurrounded by the Seabaugh soybean crop.When the rains came, itboth filled and expanded due to the collapse inwards of unstable walls.

Photo by Alan Journet

Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 11 1

Oct. 26–28 (Fri–Sun) Ozark Highlands Trail, Ft.Smith, AR. We'll hike the first section of thisstrenuous cross–country trail, 18.7 miles fromLake Fort Smith State Park to White RockMountain. Scott Hoober (816)561–0575,scott@hoober.net.

Oct. 13 (Sat, 7 am) Canoeing in the Ozarks. Meet at theCape Girardeau Public Library to carpool. Bring a lunch. Jan(573)243-3730.

Trail of Tears Gro u p

O u t i n g s C o n t i n u e d

by Sheila Haar Siegel

Let’s face it. No one wants to see a replay ofthe Flood of 1993. That’s why I hope you’llbe as excited as I am to learn that the Sierra

Club is taking a leading role in stopping poorlyplanned developments by launching aFloodplain/Wetland Campaign in the St. Louisarea. I know you, like me, want to protect ourarea’s floodplains and wetlands. The intrinsic valueof these natural areas is beyond compare.Floodplains and wetlands purify our water, cleanour rivers and lakes, control soil erosion, providefish and wildlife habitat, provide recreationalopportunities, protect us from floods, and are animportant key to a healthy economy. Workingtogether, you and I will make this campaign a suc-cess!

The focus of the Floodplain/WetlandCampaign is to address the sprawling develop-ments in the Missouri River floodplain and wet-land areas in St. Louis and St. Charles Counties.First and foremost, the campaign will raise publicawareness of the impact of projects, including leveeconstruction and subsequent development, in theMissouri River floodplain. Equally important, thecampaign will raise demand for a region wideEnvironmental Impact Statement by the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers to address the cumulativeimpacts of all levee projects along the river corr i-dor. But, time is of the essence!

As you may know, in many cases, levee con-struction has encouraged floodplain development.Much of the damage from the Flood of 1993 wasfully predictable, not from weather, but from pub-lic policies that had encouraged intensive land use,such as commercial, residential, and industrialdevelopment, along our region’s rivers and streams.Though the product of extreme weather, the GreatFlood was also the result of thousands of seeminglyunrelated decisions to increase the rate at whichwater moves off the surface of the land towardtowns and cities downstream. By itself, a singledecision to drain and till a farm field, fill a wetlandor build a parking lot has little measurable impacton flooding. But when combined with thousands ofsimilar decisions over decades, the impact can bedevastating.

The Army Corps of Engineers, the federalagency that gives out permits to fill wetlands, haverecognized the far–reaching implications of leveeconstruction, wetland destruction, and the subse-quent land use changes. A Corps of Engineers offi-cial has been quoted as saying, “It is clear to manyobservers of floodplain management issues thatflood protection projects do encourage additionaldevelopment of floodplains.”Yet, as I’m writingyou today, levees are being constructed or raised toa higher level, wetlands are being filled, and flood-plains are being developed at an alarming rate inthe St. Louis area. Some of the levee projects, hap-

pening this very minute, include the Howard Bend/ Maryland Heights 500–year levee, Chesterfield /Monarch 500–year levee, St. Peters TIF levee, andL–15 levee.

Throughout the campaign, I will be educat-ing the public about floodplain and wetland issuesthrough media outlets, presentations, and commu-nity fairs and events. I will also be creating demandfor accountability of government agencies and pub-lic officials. And, I know you’ll want to be a partof this!

That’s why I’m asking you to do two thingsright now:

Call or write Maryland Heights’ Mayor andCity Council members. One of the most urgentcampaign issues is the fast moving MarylandHeights / Howard Bend Levee District andplanned commercial / industrial development. Tellthem, “The planned, massive development in theMaryland Heights bottoms will heighten the dan-gers and impacts of flooding in communities alongthe river, destroy wetlands, and wildlife habitat andplace innocent residents in harms way. Not onlyare residents along the Missouri River threatenedby this type of development, but inner–city com-munities are being thwarted by businesses movingto outlying areas, waterfowl groups are left withouthabitat, and consequently wildlife, for hunting pur-poses. All of us, as taxpayers, are paying highertaxes due to increased infrastructure costs.”

Contact them at:Michael O’Brien, MayorRichard Goldberg, Ward OneMike Moeller, Ward TwoJudy Barnett, Ward TwoMark Mierkowski, Ward ThreeDan Johnson, Ward ThreeNorman Rhea,Ward FourDan Fitzgerald, Ward Four(Name of elected official)City of Maryland Heights212 Millwell DriveMaryland Heights, MO 63043(314) 291-6550Write a letter to our elected officials asking

the Corps of Engineers to conduct a cumulative, orbasin–wide, Environmental Impact Statement forthe St. Louis region. This small but critical stepwill help protect area floodplains and wetlandsfrom destruction. (Tip: handwritten letters garnerthe most attention from public officials and gov-ernment agencies).

You can include these points in your letter:nA basin-wide Environmental Impact

Statement should be prepared that takes intoconsideration all the impacts from the variousprojects proposed within the Missouri RiverBasin.

nWhile one levee may make little or no differ-ence in hydrological impacts on a basin–wide

basis, levees lined up on each side of the riverfrom the US 40–I 64 bridge to the confluencewould have major impacts on the floodplain,riparian zones, wetlands, and the hydrologywithin the river banks.

nThe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers shouldnot be examining the impacts of one leveewithout ascertaining what the impacts of thatlevee will be combined with all the other lev-ees under consideration (or under construc-tion) in the St. Charles/St. Louis Countiesarea.Send your letter to:Col. Michael MurrowDistrict EngineerU.S. Army Corps of Engineers1222 Spruce StreetSt. Louis, MO 63103-2833Governor Bob HoldenMissouri Capitol BuildingRoom 216, P.O. Box 720Jefferson City, MO 65102(573)751-3222Senator Jean CarnahanThomas F. Eagleton Federal CourthouseSuite 23.360111 S.Tenth StreetSt. Louis, MO 63102(314)436-3416Representative Todd Akin1023 Executive ParkwaySuite 18St. Louis, MO 63141(314)878-0513Representative Kenny Hulshof33 E. BroadwaySuite 280Columbia, MO 65203(573)449-5111Representative Wm. Lacy Clay625 N. Euclid StreetSuite 220St. Louis, MO 63108(314)367-1970It’s that simple! You can also help by writing a

letter to the editors of local and regional newspa-pers, attending your city’s planning and zoningmeetings and writing or calling county officialsabout floodplain development in the St. Louisarea. If you and I don’t let our officials know whatis important to us, who will? In addition, if you areinvolved with or are aware of community groups,schools, government agencies, business associa-tions, or religious organizations that may be inter-ested in a presentation on floodplain / wetlandissues, please let me know. You’ll be so glad youdecided to help!Sheila can be reached at (314) 645-1440 orsheila.haar.siegel@sierraclub.org..

Floodplains and Wetlands Under Assault

Sept. 1–3 (Sat–Mon) Join the annual excursion for threedays of canoeing or sea kayaking on the mightyMississippi River below St. Louis. We may have singalongs if the musical mood strikes. Big beaches, sand barcamping, and breezes. George Behrens (314)821–0247(after 6 pm only).

Sept. 8 (Sat) Highway Cleanup. Please join us for somefun and camaraderie as we pick up litter. You know thosemigratory birds will appreciate it. Diane DuBois,(314)721–0594.

Sept. 15 (Sat) Get your money’s worth with a two for one7–8 mile hike! We’ll start at Millstream Gardens whichoffers scenic overlooks of the shut–ins on the St. FrancisRiver. From there we’ll hike to the Silver Mines area. Here,we’ll do a loop that crosses the dam, a class 2 scramble.Optional, for the less adventurous, is a crossing of the oldhighway D bridge. You won’t want to miss this hike as it isfilled with many breathtaking overlooks. Moderate, with acouple of short but steep hills. Jack Longacre(573)546–5255, or Glenn Wolters (314)845–5859,glenn27@hotmail.com.

Sept. 16 (Sun) Canoe/kayak on the Missouri River closeto St. Louis. Good for those interested in learning to enjoybig rivers. George Behrens (314)821–0247 (after 6 pmonly).

Sept. 21 (Fri) Six mile hike at the Shaw Nature Reserve.Fall on the prairie, frogs in the wetlands. Suzanne Smith(618)281–4762 (after 7:00 pm, week nights only).

Sept. 22–23 (Sat–Sun) Fall canoe trip. Come paddle eitherthe Jack's Fork or Eleven Point River for overnight campingon some beautiful water. Sections to be determined bywater levels. Must have own canoe and equipment. Call JoAerne (314)231–1575 x 6017 or e–mail:jaerne@cpicorp.com or Jim Moody attsoeh16@yahoo.com.

Sept. 22–23 (Sat–Sun) Reenactment of Civil War Battleat Pilot Knob. Weekend of antiques, crafts, and music. Tentcamp at Jakk’s Place and enjoy stories around a campfire.Jack Longacre (573)546–5255, or Glenn Wolters(314)845–5859, Glenn27@Hotmail.com.

Sept. 26 (Wed) Beginner backpackers planning meetingat the club office at 7:30 pm. You need not own anyequipment. We will show and discuss equipment and tellyou where you can borrow, rent or buy equipment. BobGestel (636)296–8975.

Sept. 28–30 (Fri–Sun) Enjoyfall in the Shawnee N.F. ofSouthern Illinois as youhike, bike and/or canoe inthis beautiful area.Sheltered tree houses or tentcamping available at CampOndessonk. Families arewelcome. Reserve by Sept.7. Ted Horn (618)397–9430,or Terry Allen(618)398–1087.

Sept. 29–30 (Sat–Sun) Trailmaintenance on the BlairCreek section of the OzarkTrail. We will camp atHimont and start working at

the North Box and head south. All tools will be furnished.We will have our annual fish fry Saturday night with hushpuppies, cole slaw and dessert. Paul Stupperich(314)429–4352, or Bob Gestel (636)296–8975.

Sept. 29–30 (Sat–Sun) Overnight canoe trip on theCurrent River. A good time to visit this beautiful riverwithout the usual crowds. Enjoy the early fall color inrelative peace and quiet. Families welcome. Toni Armstrong& Richard Spener (314)434–2072.

Oct. 6 (Sat) Enjoy a fall day hike to Taum Sauk StatePark. Some cross country. Hiking distance is 6–8 miles.Limited to 15 people. Paul Stupperich (314)429–4352.

Oct. 7 (Sun) Let's bag Big Buford and behold, from BaldKnob, the beauty of the Belleview Valley below. Our hikeis one–way, seven miles, end–to–end, and basically easyalthough there's a small 600 foot elevation gain at thebeginning. Joe Scotti (314)878–3270, or Wayne Miller(314)569–0094.

Oct. 13 (Sat) Close by"Slurb" hike. Join me for a7.5 mile ramble throughQuailwoods, Meadowlark,Hummingbird and BluebirdParks in Ellisville. I'll thinkyou'll be surprised by thesewooded edens in an areathat might have been arunner–up for the movie TheBurbs. If interested, a Steakn' Shake stop can beincluded in this west countycommunity that wasoriginally settled in 1837.Nancy (636)225–8057.

Oct. 13 (Sat, rain date is Sun) Seed collecting. Enjoy a fallhike at Washington State Park and help collect seeds fromnative grasses to aid our glade restoration efforts. CallSusan Farrington (314)577–9402(voice mail) or (636)583–0948 or e–mail: susanfmo@aol.com.

Oct. 13–14 (Sat–Sun) Beginners backpack trip. We willtake a short hike in to our campsite where we willdemonstrate various types of tents, stoves, and otherequipment. Later, around the campfire, we will talk safety,wilderness travel, and tell wild stories about our past trips.Common commissary on Saturday night. Bob Gestel(636)296–8975.

Oct. 14 (Sun) Day hike. Kaintuck Hollow (Rolla District ofMTNF). 6–8 miles. Hike by Wilkins Spring Pond and anatural tunnel, 175 feet in length. Moderately difficult.Glenn Wolters, (314)845–5859, Glenn27@Hotmail.com.

Oct. 19 (Fri) Fall colors hike. 6–8 miles in the Taum Saukarea (great for fall colors). Suzanne Smith (618)281–4762(after 7:00 pm, week nights only).

Oct. 20 (Sat) Jack Longacre will take us on a special tourof Hawn State Park and Pickle Springs Natural Area. Thisis an intermediate day hike with a limit of 10. Possibledinner afterward. Jack Longacre, (573)546–5255, or GlennWolters (314)845–5859, Glenn27@Hotmail.com.

Oct. 20–21 (Sat–Sun) “We will not be lost. We will justbe exploring.” This backpack trip will take us into one of

the wildest watersheds in Missouri. We will walk about10–12 miles into country not yet explored by the SierraClub. A very worthwhile trip. Experienced hikers with awillingness to get their feet wet are welcome. Limit 10.Paul Stupperich (314)429–4352, or Bob Gestel(636)296–8975.

Oct. 21 (Sun) One day canoe trip on Huzzah or CourtoisCreek. Families welcome. Toni Armstrong & RichardSpener (314)434–2072.

Oct. 27–28 (Sat–Sun) Trail maintenance and HalloweenParty in the Pioneer Forest. Bring your costume and joinin the fun. Party Saturday night with common commissary.Menu suggestions welcome. Paul Stupperich(314)429–4352, or Bob Gestel (636)296–8975.

None submitted.

Sept. 8–9 (Sat–Sun) Kingman Lake Wildlife RefugeCampout, Kingman, KS. Wildlife abounds in the prairie,marsh and woodland surrounding Kingman Lake,considered one of the premier wildlife spots in Kansas.Connie Simmons (316)838–5017.

Sept. 15 (Sat) Apple Picking and Picnic,Weston, MO. Wewill pick apples at Vaughn Orchard and have a picnic atWeston Bend State Park. Ellen Brenneman,(816)523–2944, ebrenn1@hallmark.com.

Sept. 15 (Sat) Konza Prairie Hike, Manhattan, KS. Talloaks, sun–bleached limestone and chiseled hills make thisa hike to remember — not to mention the many varieties ofprairie in the research plots. Anne Tarver (316)832–0634.

Sept. 22 (Sat) Powell Gardens, Kingsville, MO. Come seethe results of their multi–year expansion plan. If you’venever been, you're in for a treat. Lee Ann Googe,(816)453–8558.

Sept. 29–30 (Sat–Sun) Hercules Glades Wilderness,Hilda, MO. A favorite trail on which to start the fallbackpacking season. This is a great trip for beginners. BobWilshire (913)384–6445, rjwilshire@yahoo.com.

Sept. 29–30 (Sat–Sun) Celebrating 25 Years of the LandInstitute, Salina, KS. Yvonne Cather (316)554–7704,wolfalo@juno.com.

Oct. 6 (Sat) Troque Farms, Buckner, MO. Learn about asustainable method of farming from Jack and RennieGraves. Bob & Doris Sherrick (816)779–6708,bjsherrick@aol.com.

Oct. 6–7 (Sat–Sun) Lake Scott Hike & Campout, ScottCity, KS. Hidden within a western Kansas prairie, the parkis a startling oasis of natural springs, deep woodedcanyons and craggy bluffs that is ranked among the top 50state parks in America. Anne Tarver (316)832–0634.

Oct. 11–14 (Thur–Sun) Eagle Rock Loop, Mena, AR. Joinus for a fall backpacking trip in the beautiful OuachitaMountains. Jeff Pierce (913)599–3966, jpierce4@kc.rr.com.

Oct. 20–21 (Sat–Sun) Elk River Hiking Trail,Independence, KS. Outside magazine rates this as the besthike in Kansas. The rock bluffs and ledges are stunning.Bill Cather (316)522–4741, cather@fn.net.

Oct. 20–21 (Sat–Sun) Fall ColorsHike and Float, Central Missouri.We’ll spend Saturday hikingHa–Ha–Tonka State Park andexploring Ozark Caverns at Lake ofthe Ozarks State Park. Sunday willfind us floating the Niangua River.We’ve reserved lodge rooms and tentcamping space for Friday andSaturday nights. You’ll be home by7:30 pm on Sunday. Keet Kopecky(816)966–9544,kkopecky@kc.rr.com.

Thomas Hart Benton Gro u p

Osage Gro u pIn order to participate on one of the Sierra Club’s outings,you will need to sign a liability waiver. If you would like toread a copy of the waiver prior to the outing, please seehttp://www.sierraclub.org/outings/chapter/forms/ or call(415) 977-5630.

In the interests of facilitating the logistics of someoutings, it is customary that participants make carpoolingarrangements. The Sierra Club does not have insurancefor carpooling arrangements and assumes no liability forthem. Carpooling, ride sharing or anything similar isstrictly a private arrangement among the participants.Participants assume the risks associated with this travel.

E a s t e rn Missouri Gro u p

continued on page 11Ozark Sierran September/October ‘ 0 11 2