Thursday, November 15, 2012

Veto HR2606 letter postcards to Obama (this week)


                                   Veto HR2606 Protect Your Parks Postcards to Obama

As HR2606 gets ready to arrive on President Obama's desk, some new postcards from park users and NYC citizens get ready to be mailed. In their own words:
1. "It's essential that you veto HR2606, NYC Natural Gas Supply Enhancement Act. Save our wildlife."
2. "Please veto HR2606, the NYC Natural Gas Supply Enhancement Act. It is important, not only for the millions of residents of NYC, but for the country. We must protect the national parks from corporate interests."
3. "Please don't destroy what little natural beauty and public wild areas we have left in NY! Please help our souls which need nourishment more than gas."
4. "I'm writing to request that you please veto HR2606. I don't believe, and Ikm sure many will agree, that a natural gas pipeline should be placed under Gateway National Recreation Area. This land is meant to be preserved for future generations and must be protected."
5."I am writing to ask you to veto HR2606, NYC Natural Gas Enhancement Act. I love Riis beach. It is for the public not gas companies."
6. "Veto HR2606. We need to protect our national parks for people and animals."
7. "President Obama please veto HR2606 and protect our natonal parks. We need real answers to climate change."
8."Our nation and city faces enough environmental problems as is. We certainly don't need to chance our few green spaces. Please veto HR2606."
9. "HR 2606 is a terrrible idea because national parks are for animals, nature and people NOT corporations."

I could go on because literally hundreds have been written. But ten will do for now. In their own words and voices, though it's quite clear to me that no one in power is listening.

 
Just one of the hundreds of postcards Joe collected from park users and NYC citizens against HR2606.  Want to know how many people testified in support of the bill? It's three.


More posts on Rockaway Pipeline through Gateway National Recreation Area, HR2606 and the metering and regulating station in the park at Floyd Bennett Field here

8 comments:

frank@nycg said...

All the politicians think natural gas is a win win. They're reasoning is CO2 emissions and fracking jobs and saying independence from foreign oil on the stump. But you know that.

Add to that the National Recreation Areas are the ugly stepchildren of the National Park system- or in other words, few see them as a national "treasure."

And whamo - no opposition. Sandy may be the best shot at questioning placing any infrastructure at near sea level, although I see that FBF is not in the level A inundation zone.

Anyhoo, those politicians have nothing to worry about as they pass this bill, do they?

Sweetgum Thursday said...

Yes. I know their argument for the gas and I agree with you. Quite frankly the politicians don't give a shit about the park. I did learn today though that I might be able to search through 20 years of ferc documents and not find a single case where they built an m&r IN a park. Next to? Probably. Right in. No. So this bill is breaking ground and not in a good way. This park may be the poor ugly stepchild, but the "laws" that protect it aren't different or seperate from those that protect any other park in nps. Technically its a park with the highest level of protection in the nation. And if what ferc told me is true, they don't build these things in parks with much less protection. Its a winwin allright. For the gas industry that is.

frank@nycg said...

I was specifically thinking of this:

http://articles.mcall.com/2012-10-02/news/mc-ppl-delaware-water-gap-transmission-line-approv-20121002_1_delaware-water-gap-230-kilovolt-line-ppl-s-susquehanna

I think there might be more.

frank@nycg said...

The same has a gas pipeline:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/109-s1310/show

frank@nycg said...

Anyhow, my point is that they see FBF as an industrial site, not a natural one. And even if they did think it was a treasure, you are right, companies want the cheapest, quickest way to infrastructure. Guess where that always is, public land -not private.

I admire your resolve. I wonder if there is any way something of value can be extracted from the profiting gas company if nothing else can be done to stop the pipeline and metering station? Something more than a restored hanger exterior.

Sweetgum Thursday said...

I will take a look at your links, but if the transmission line is the one I am thinking of it 1. Already exists there and is being expaned and 2. The national parks conservation association is actually suing nps along with other groups on that one. Npca here despite two reports, public meetings on the field, and their stand that imapropriate city uses should be removed from the field, has failed to come out against this bill.
I remember reading a great quote by npca on that one which said the national parks weren't here to be utiliy corriders or something similar.

I'm going to have to look at the other link, but the fact is there are other locations for the facility, both on the outskirts of the park and across the belt, and there is no money or deal worth this intrusion. And the whole location for the entire pipeline is bad. If they need to buld it and that is debatable surely there was somewhere besides this park, that beach, this last open space in nyc to put it. Surely there was somewhere more appropriate IF it needs to be built at all.

Sweetgum Thursday said...

Ok frank. The facts are the pipeline there was in fact laid before the area was preserved. This is not the only instance of this. There was not a pipeline through gnra. There was not one under the beach. In fact the only new pipeline proposed for a park under nps that I could find in recent years (but my research isn't exhaustive and I would certainly appreciate info otherwise) was one under a road through denali in alaska. That bill failed twice to pass I think. And there is no excuse at all for the m&r in fb and in that area of fb which is in fact used by the oldest and largest community garden in nyc. The only reason nps wants it there is because restoring those hangars was dangled as a carrot. There were and are alternative sites as there were before anyone ever suggested those hangars as the m&r site.

Sweetgum Thursday said...

Not to mention of course we are in the top top top for visitorship of all of NPS. All of NPS. Even floyd bennett which people think is underused has numbers that swamp other parks. Literally.

Deleware river gap is much bigger. Gateway has more visitors. Because it is here in NYC.