Switchboard, from NRDC › Melissa Waage's Blog

President's Budget: Chipping Away at Wildlife Killing Funds

40 Days of Prayer Launches Fight for Tennessee's Mountains

Water Quality Study Strikes Another Blow at Myth of Mountaintop Removal "Reclamation"

USDA-Wildlife Services dog killing in Oregon points to deep problems

New music video: A cry from the heart to end mountaintop removal

Public Health dean backs up mountaintop removal research at WVU

Mountain-saving music from 2/3 Goat goes national

WV Governor throws down anti-EPA gauntlet at inauguration

Committee press release redacts existence of mountaintop removal opponents

Community voices stifled in WV mountaintop removal hearing

More overblown mountaintop removal claims in the House of Representatives

BREAKING: Poll finds solid opposition to mountaintop removal in coal states

CNN's mountaintop removal doc garners praise, anger, and everything in between

Join the Twitter conversation about CNN mountaintop removal documentary - this Sunday night

CNN's Soledad O'Brien profiles mountaintop removal - watch this Sunday

2012-02-13T22:09:42Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

USDA's Wildlife Services program has again received cuts in the President's Budget. This could potentially mean that fewer Federal tax dollars will be spent killing wild carnivores for the benefit of private agriculture. The choice is partly in the hands of Wildlife Services and partly up to Congress, which must approve appropriations for next year's Federal spending. Will these budget cuts be targeted, as they should be, at needless wildlife killing?

Maybe these mountain lion kittens can rest a little easier. (Photo: National Park Service)

The President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget proposes a roughly 8% cut to Widlife Services compared to last year. Here are the actual numbers, for all you wildlife wonks:

We've explained before how USDA-Wildlife Services could save a good bit of taxpayer money by changing its approach toward wild carnivores like coyotes, mountain lions, and wolves. Currently, USDA-Wildlife Services kills tens of thousands of predators each year, largely for the benefit of private livestock producers or to artificially boost populations of game species.

This liquidation of predators doesn't happen in a vacuum. These animals play a critical role in the balance of nature. When they're so cavalierly removed from American lands, it can damage entire ecosystems, as my colleague Sylvia Fallon has blogged about here and here. And that's a cost that we all bear, even though it's inflicted in the service of narrow special interests.

Simply put, the Federal government should not be in the business of killing wild carnivores for agribusiness and big game interests. That's why I hope that Wildlife Services targets 2013's anticipated funding cuts at its lethal predator control work, as opposed to cutting spending on some of its other services that actually are in the public interest.

Wildlife Services could also recalibrate its predator control funding towards non-lethal control methods, assisting and educating livestock producers in techniques that support the public interest in healthy ecosystems and wildlife. As NRDC's Whitney Leonard recently described, these techniques exist, are working, and are far more worthy of tax dollars than poorly targeted predator killing.

I also hope that Congressional appropriators stand up to Big Ag's inevitable efforts to squeeze out more funding for wildlife destruction from Congress. Last year, private livestock interests launched a big (and successful) lobbying campaign to preserve their Wildlife Services predator control subsidy. Members of Congress must be held accountable for such short-sighted decisions. Stay tuned. This story is just beginning.

2012-01-10T16:15:15Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Will this be the year that Tennessee becomes the first state to ban mountaintop removal mining? Leaders in the state legislature are once again pressing forward with the Scenic Vistas Protection Act, a bill to end mountaintop removal in the state. And they do not stand alone.

That's because our friends at Tennessee LEAF, a Christian fellowship dedicated to protecting Tennessee's environment, have just wrapped up an incredible organizing effort, featured in yesterday's Nashville Tennessean. They have brought together faith leaders around the state in Forty Days of Prayer for the Mountains, seeking "wisdom and reverence to use the resources of nature so that no one suffers from our abuse of them.”

That is some wisdom that legislators will absolutely need if they are going to cut through the coal industry's obfuscations on MTR in Tennessee. The industry scuttled the Scenic Vistas Protection Act last time it came up, and they're at it again. Naturally, it is a little uncomfortable for industry flaks to go up against faith, conviction, and a common sense message of respect for communities and the environment. So they're resorting to denial and semantic games.

In response to the Forty Days of Prayer, the president of the Tennessee Mining Association absurdly told the Tennessean that "They are praying for West Virginia, not Tennessee, because we don’t do that...We don’t take the tops off of mountains and shove them into valleys.”

That assertion doesn't survive a second of examination. Call it mountaintop removal, crossridge mining, or steep slope mining, but the fundamental act of blasting to remove mountaintops and access coal is very much happening in Tennessee. (United Mountain Defense, LEAF, and Appalachian Voices provide some great background information and documentation.)

It is true that mountaintop removal has not yet been as extensive in Tennessee as in some other parts of Appalachia. That makes it all the more important to pass the Scenic Vistas Protection Act as soon as possible. There's so much left to save, and so much good to be done for communities that rely on the clean water, healthy environment, and quality of life that Tennessee's mountains provide.

Are you a Tennessean? If so, you can join in the effort by sending a message to your state assembly members here.

2011-12-13T17:57:17Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

The Charleston Gazette highlights a new study confirming the long-term water quality impacts of mountaintop removal mining. In the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science (PNAS) this week, a team of Duke University researchers found that contamination from MTR mines is cumulative, and that mine sites abandoned decades ago still continue to contaminate waterways.

The study authors looked at water quality at various points along West Virginia's Mud River, which flows past the massive Hobet mine and many others, and its tributaries. They found that mine waste pollution including selenium and sulfate increased along the river's course as it flowed past more and more MTR sites. In addition, sites supposedly reclaimed decades ago continued to contaminate the river.

Unintentional irony in a sign spotted at the Hobet site. No littering, but what about water contamination that lasts decades?

These findings corroborate the groundbreaking, comprehensive look at the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal published in Science last year. That study, authored by a dozen top scientists across multiple fields, determined that "water-quality degradation caused by mining activities is neither prevented nor corrected during reclamation or mitigation."

Why does this matter? Because it strikes at the heart of the convenient myth of "reclamation." This is the notion that a mountaintop and surrounding ecosystem, once obliterated by mountaintop removal, can be rebuilt and restored to their original state, and/or used for economic development. It is a favorite argument of the coal industry and its political allies for continuing the systematic destruction of the Central Appalachians.

In our 2009 report, "Reclamation FAIL", NRDC and Appalachian Voices showed that over 89% of MTR sites have never been "reclaimed" for economic activity. As for the original biological diversity and environment of these sites, forget about it.

And now we're beginning to learn that it's not only the mountain that never recovers. It's the entire watershed. When we persist in allowing this most destructive method of strip mining, we are damaging resources we can't get back.

2011-12-02T15:11:31Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Yet another family dog has been killed by USDA’s Wildlife Services. Maggie, a border collie who lived with her family in suburban Gresham, Oregon, was strangled by a Wildlife Services trap set to kill nutria, an invasive rodent species. Maggie’s owner looked on in horror, unable to free the dog stuck in a vicious Conibear trap laid just 45 feet from her own backyard.

Oregon-based Predator Defense tells Maggie’s story here and in the video below.

It's important to note that control of nutria, which damage natural ecosystems, is often appropriate and in the public interest. It is certainly a more appropriate use of Wildlife Services' federal funds than killing native carnivores. But lethal, dangerous traps are not the only way to control nutria. This heart-rending case is a small-scale example of how Wildlife Services' emphasis on lethal wildlife control methods and its secretive public relations habits can cause real damage.

Maggie is only one of many pets killed by Wildlife Services traps and poisons. These many stories form a pattern of poor management, secrecy, lack of accountability, and an overemphasis on killing as the go-to-method of wildlife management.

NRDC is chiefly concerned about Wildlife Services’ predator control program, which spends taxpayer dollars to kill tens of thousands of ecologically important carnivores such as wolves, coyotes, and mountain lions each year, primarily for the benefit of private agribusiness.While Maggie’s death was not connected to that particular WS program, it does shed some light on the organizational culture and management style that is causing problems in the predator control program. Specifically:

Over-emphasis on lethal control methods when there are effective non-lethal methods that cause less environmental harm and carry less risk to the public. There are methods for controlling nutria that don't involve setting lethal traps where pets and children may stumble upon them. The agency’s own fact sheet on nutria control describes a number of these methods.

Similarly, non-lethal methods for controlling native carnivores exist and are working. My colleague Whitney Leonard recently toured ranches where private operators have adopted their own non-lethal programs to protect their livestock, and blogged about it here. Why does Wildlife Services so adamantly avoid using these methods?

Lack of accountability to the public and lawmakers.As Brooks Fahy of Predator Defense told me, “If this trap had been set by a private animal control company, there would have been signs up everywhere, and you would have had a trapper going door to door to notify people. Because they know they could get sued.”

USDA Wildlife Services operatives, on the other hand, have good reason to believe they are above the law when it comes to harming local people’s pets. Remember the case of Bella, the dog killed by Wildlife Services poison set out near her home in Texas? The agency has a consistent track record of stonewalling people who lose their pets to WS traps and poisons and avoiding legal responsibility.

This lack of transparency and accountability at the level of individual citizens reflects similar deficits at the national level. When it comes to predator control, records of which private operations receive Wildlife Services assistance, and at what cost, are not available to the public. Sites of specific wildife conflicts are often not disclosed. And the program has been less than forthcoming when asked by members of Congress to explain exactly how it is spending its budget.

The growing roster of pet deaths at the hands of USDA-Wildlife Services is a symptom of an agency in need of reform. The question is whether the agency is open to changing the way it does business.

Want to help stop the killing? Act now and tell USDA to immediately cease using one of its most deadly tools: lethal predator poisons.

2011-12-01T21:57:40Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Earlier this year Music Saves Mountains member band 2/3 Goat started their grassroots fundraising campaign to produce a new video for their mountaintop removal themed song "Stream of Conscience." And they did it! Thanks to everyone's donations, they've just debuted this powerful video, which was featured as a video of the day on AOL Music last week. It's a beautiful piece of work. The band's musical chops, soul-lifting "metrobilly" style, and passion shine through the entire video.

Start a conversation--share this with your friends and family.

2011-11-22T20:15:35Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

The dean of West Virginia University's new School of Public Health is standing up for faculty research on the health impacts of mountaintop removal.

The Charleston Gazette reports that interim founding dean Alan Ducatman expressed support for the work of Michael Hendryx, an associate professor in the university's Department of Community Medicine, at a Rotary Club function yesterday:

...Ducatman said [Hendryx's] mining studies provided solid data and "they have the potential to be very valuable" to lawmakers.

Hendryx, you may remember, has made a splash as co-author of numerous peer-reviewed studies examining the health impacts of mountaintop removal mining. His published work has explored the connections between MTR and coronary heart disease , cancer, low birth weight, birth defects, and more. This research puts the coal industry on the defensive as it pushes to deregulate mountaintop removal.

But recently, one had to wonder whether the WVU administration was getting a little squeamish about this line of inquiry, given the political role of coal in the state and the coal money contributions to the university. Last month, the university tried to distance itself from its faculty's research, asking press to refer to "stud[ies] conducted at WVU" rather than "WVU studies."

There is no suggestion whatsoever that anyone at WVU would attempt to stifle or restrict Hendryx's work. But it is still heartening, and a credit to the institution, to hear an affirmation of this important research and the role of science in solving public health problems.

Dean Ducatman said it best, again as reported by the Gazette:

"You should demand of us that we address the hard questions that affect us locally," Ducatman told members of the Rotary Club of Charleston on Monday. "Science is a process. We shouldn't fear science. We can, we must improve and we shouldn't seek to explain and justify, we should seek to make things better."

2011-11-22T16:03:16Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Great news for Music Saves Mountains member band, 2/3 Goat! The New-York-based act uses "metrobilly" music as a platform to spread the word about mountaintop removal and why it must be stopped. Earlier this year, the group successfully funded a new video on the theme of MTR through grassroots donations.

Now, they're being featured at AOL Music, alongside the likes of Michael Jackson and Daughtry. All this week, you'll be able to stream their new album Stream of Conscience at AOL Music's listening party page.

The new album digs deeply into the theme of an Appalachia under attack but still defiant. And as one reviewer put it, "in the spirit of great socially aware performers from Phil Ochs to Johnny Cash, 2/3 Goat don’t preach: instead, they paint vivid pictures with their songs." It makes for absorbing music that this blogger will definitely be queuing up for the Thanksgiving drive.

Congratulations to this talented and committed group of artists. We can't wait to see what they create next.

2011-11-15T19:20:59Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

This past weekend, Earl Ray Tomblin was inaugurated as Governor of West Virginia.* and he wasn’t bashful about what he feels he’s been put in office to do: buck federal protections for public health and the environment, for the benefit of the coal industry.

In his inauguration speech, Tomblin declared,

“I will fight for our state's coal industry, the backbone of our economy. We will continue to take on the federal government and oppose efforts by the EPA and others to stop production of the most efficient fuel our country knows.”

I guess it’s not too surprising coming from the politician who headlined an anti-regulation coal industry rally at the State Capitol earlier this year and proudly unveiled West Virginia’s new “Friends of Coal” license plate at an industry function in May.

But if I were one of the West Virginians who’s seen their neighbors sickened and their homeplaces fouled by mountaintop removal mining, I’d still be wondering: when will the governor fight for me?

Tomblin has, so far, blown off the science indicating that serious health problems are linked to mountaintop removal activity. Confronted with this summer’s Environmental Research study showing a tie between MTR and birth defect rates, he told the Charleston Gazette, "There's reports every day on something causing some kind of illness."

I know, right? Cigarettes…asbestos…E. coli...toxic mine waste in the air and water…it’s always something, isn’t it?

West Virginia’s mountain defenders don’t have any illusions about the likelihood of Tomblin seeing the light. They organized an “Occupy the Governor’s Inauguration” event on the state Capitol grounds to stand up for the federal health and environment protections that Tomblin is so devoted to tearing down.

And this is why it will continue to be so critical to defend strong, well-enforced environmental protections at the federal level. Congressional attacks on EPA regulation of polluters under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and other laws are going to keep coming. And while everyone deserves clean air to breathe and water that's won't make their families sick, not all of us can count on our local elected officials to defend these rights.

*Tomblin had been appointed Acting Governor after Gov. Joe Manchin won a special election to fill Robert Byrd’s seat in the U.S. Senate in 2010. Tomblin won a special election on Oct. 4 and is now finishing out the remainder of the term. He’ll face reelection again in 2012.

2011-09-27T20:40:58Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Yesterday a House Natural Resources subcommittee tried its very hardest not to hear West Virginians' concerns about the destruction and heartbreak of mountaintop removal in their communities. Now the subcommittee leadership is trying to pretend these people don't even exist.

As I blogged previously, the Charleston, WV field hearing was meant to examine "Jobs at Risk: Community Impacts of the Obama Administration’s Effort to Rewrite the Stream Buffer Zone Rule." The lion's share of the witness list weren't impacted community members; they were coal companies and their political allies. Under pressure, the subcommittee tacked on two witnesses with a different point of view: Bo Webb of Coal River Mountain Watch and Maria Gunnoe of the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition.

Well, the committee has issued a press release about the hearing. And it lists every witness and summarizes their testimony--except for Bo and Maria, the only two witnesses who spoke up for the environment and the well being of people in mountaintop removal affected communities. They aren't mentioned at all.

Ironically, this press release makes the hearing look even more unbalanced than it actually was!

In fact, Bo and Maria did have the chance to testify, at the very end of the hearing. And they did so powerfully, focusing on the science pointing towards serious health impacts from MTR, and on the destruction of community and culture that it brings. Thankfully, blogger Jeff Biggers has recorded and highlighted their words for all the world to see over at the Huffington Post.

If you find this omission as offensive as I do, don't hesitate to contact the committee and tell them they can't ignore the people harmed by mountaintop removal in the hope that they'll just go away. As Bo put it yesterday,

To date there are 19 peer reviewed science papers addressing human health in mountaintop removal communities...Science does not allow a choice of preference, what to believe, what not to believe. You either believe in science or choose to put your head in the sand and revert to the dark ages.

2011-09-25T13:35:50Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Will there be any voice at all for health and the environment at the latest dog-and-pony-show House hearing on mountaintop removal regulation?

That’s what community organizers in West Virginia are asking as a House Natural Resources Committee panel gears up for a stage-managed hearing on Interior Department regulation of MTR in Charleston, WV tomorrow.

Entitled "Jobs at Risk: Community Impacts of the Obama Administration’s Effort to Rewrite the Stream Buffer Zone Rule," the hearing is to examine the possible rewrite of a Bush administration gift to the mining industry. In the waning days of the Bush presidency, the Interior Department pushed through a rule change that allows coal companies to dump mountaintop removal mine waste into streams if it’s found to be the cheapest and most convenient disposal option—making life a whole lot easier for such projects.

At a hearing on the community impacts of mountaintop removal regulation, you’d think that members of the communities impacted by MTR would be featured prominently. And I don’t mean coal company CEOs and industry flacks. I mean regular people who live beneath mountaintop removal sites and will have to deal with the long-term environmental and public health consequences. But we’ve seen already that that’s not how it works in the House of Representatives these days. (Recall the lopsided hearings on EPA regulation of MTR in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee this summer.)

Check out the witness list for tomorrow’s hearing in Charleston:

Panel I

The Honorable Earl Ray Tomblin
Governor
West Virginia

Panel II

Thomas L. Clarke
Director
WV Division of Mining and Reclamation
Dept. of Environmental Protection

Bradley C. Lambert
Deputy Director
VA Department of Mines, Minerals & Energy

John Corra
Director
WY Dept. of Environmental Quality

Panel III

Roger Horton
West Virginia Co-Chair
Mountaintop Mining Coalition

Michael Carey
President
Ohio Coal Association

Jason Bostic
West Virginia Coal Association

Katharine Fredriksen
Senior Vice President
Environmental & Regulatory Affairs
CONSOL Energy, Inc.

Bo Webb
Fmr. President/ Current Member
Coal River Mountain Watch

Maria Gunnoe
Community Organizer

Bo Webb and Maria Gunnoe, who speak for impacted communities, are slated to speak at the very end of a hearing stacked with coal industry witnesses and state regulators that can be expected to toe the same industry line. Not to mention West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, who’s made it pretty clear where he stands.

I’m also hearing that the subcommittee will only seat that final panel, including Bo and Maria, “if time allows.”

I have a feeling that community advocates in West Virginia won’t take this one lying down. Watch this page for updates today and tomorrow.

2011-09-22T21:10:35Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

We know that mountaintop removal kills mining jobs. But naturally that didn’t stop the House Government Reform Committee and its anti-regulation chair, Darrell Issa, from making the claim in a recent report that the EPA's lawful and appropriate regulation of mining pollution is "creating massive uncertainty in the coal mining industry, putting jobs in Appalachia at risk, and threatening our domestic energy security in the process."

The Committee’s report was issued in conjunction with today’s hearing on "How Obama's Green Energy Agenda is Killing Jobs.” And it’s a pity that Joe Lovett of Appalachian Mountain Advocates wasn’t at that hearing to set them straight. In July, Lovett delivered testimony in a subcommittee hearing that made a few important points.

The coal industry’s efforts to cut labor costs through more mechanized techniques like mountaintop removal have led to a long-term loss of mining jobs, even as coal production has increased: “In 1948, there were 125,669 coal-mining jobs in West Virginia and 168.589,033 tons of coal mined. In 1978 there were still 62,982 coal mining jobs in West Virginia with only 84,696,048 tons mined. By 2010, however, only 20,452 of these jobs remained despite the fact that coal production had again risen to 144,017,758 tons mined.”
Mountaintop removal does not create jobs: “One of the most common arguments in favor of mountaintop removal mining is that it creates much-needed jobs in economically depressed areas. However a recently published paper by Woods and Gordon, Mountaintop removal and Job Creation: Exploring the Relationship Using Spatial Regression, found no evidence supporting the suggestion that mountaintop removal contributes positively to nearby communities’ employment. In fact, the authors concluded that neither a rise nor decline in employment was found near mountaintop removal mines.”
“Mountaintop removal coal mining costs state budgets more than it generates. Recent studies concluded that coal mining costs Kentucky and West Virginia taxpayers more than it brings into the state – a net loss of more than $100 million annually in Kentucky. These costs include: increased road expenditures, operating mining-specific health and safety systems, supporting training and research and development for the industry, and various tax-breaks and subsidies. This estimate does not include healthcare costs, loss of home values, and the need for water treatment.”

Appalachian residents want strong enforcement of clean water protections, and the majority do not approve of mountaintop removal, according to poll results released just a few weeks ago. So the endless repetition of the faulty, pro-polluter "jobs vs. environment" argument is not having its intended effect. But it still insults our intelligence.

2011-08-16T14:54:06Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Last week a CNN poll found that a 57% majority of Americans oppose mountaintop removal mining.

But what about people living where coal is king? One might assume that the numbers would be different in places most directly affected, economically and environmentally, by the practice.

Well, intriguingly, there is strong opposition to mountaintop removal in states producing MTR coal as well, according to a new poll out today. And listen up, Appalachian lawmakers: it's an issue that people will vote on.

The poll was commissioned by the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and Appalachian Mountain Advocates (formerly known as the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment) and conducted by Lake Research Partners and Bellwether Research and Consulting. It examined public opinion about MTR in Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia and Tennessee.

Key findings include:

A majority of voters in WV, KY, VA, and TN reject mountaintop removal mining:
The number of voters who oppose mountaintop removal dwarfs the number who support it: 57 percent oppose mountaintop removal, and with noticeable intensity (42% strongly oppose), compared to just 20% who support it. Voters who strongly support mountaintop removal mining in these states are a very small minority (at 10%).

Voters across Appalachia want stronger clean water protections from mountaintop removal mining:
In some of the strongest and most surprising data, the poll reveals intense and broad-based support in the heart of Appalachia for fully enforcing, and even more support for increasing, clean water protections to combat the negative impacts of mountaintop removal mining.

The unpopularity of mountaintop removal mining is far-reaching and crosses party lines:
Surprisingly, opposition to the practice crosses typical political boundaries, including 64% of Democrats, 60% of independents and 51% of Republicans.

Voters in all four states mean business:
Those polled are likely to reward public officials who stand strong on clean water protection issues and punish those who act to weaken clean water protections on mountaintop removal mining.

I'm curious about how it may affect the behavior of coal country legislators to learn these results. After all, it's those very legislators who are working the hardest in Congress to dismantle Clean Water Act protections against MTR pollution and weaken the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to regulate it.

The seeds of some public accountability for the attack on clean water do exist in Appalachia. Will they blossom?

2011-08-15T20:05:48Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

CNN’s documentary on mountaintop removal, The Battle for Blair Mountain, aired last night and is burning up the web today. Thanks to everyone who tuned in and followed the conversation on Twitter last night. And thanks to CNN and Soledad O’Brien for sparking this important conversation and responding thoughtfully to criticism of the show.

I was pleased to note that many people following the program and offering their opinions were new to this issue. It’s my hope that these folks had a good chance to take a critical look at the values at stake in the mountaintop removal debate through the online discussion last night.

Meanwhile, longtime activists and followers of the MTR controversy took to the web today to dissect and opine upon the program.

Among the first, and most critical, voices to respond today were author Jeff Biggers and several Appalachian leaders who posted a set of “Dear Soledad” messages at Alternet. Do check them out for yourself, but to summarize, this group felt The Battle for Blair Mountain fell far short of the mark and some are asking CNN to return to West Virginia to tell the rest of the story.

Also today, Kate Sheppard at Mother Jones offered this strong analysis of where CNN went wrong on the jobs issue, the question of human health impacts, and the myth of MTR site reclamation (which NRDC and Appalachian Voices covered in our ‘Reclamation FAIL’ report.)

As I made pretty clear in this blog post, I felt the documentary was incomplete. Its “jobs vs. the environment” frame was forced and just not supported by the facts. And it did not give equal time to people personally harmed by mountaintop removal, compared to its intimate profile of a pro-MTR miner and his wife. Dan Radmacher at Appalachian Mountain Advocates puts it better than I did, writing that "the emotional weight of the piece was centered on Jim and Linda Dials [the miner and his wife].

Ken Ward Jr. at the Charleston Gazette disagreed with that critique in this post surveying the response to the program. He homed in on questions left unasked as the problem with the program, writing,

The problem was most simple. CNN interviewed Art Kirkendoll, who has been a county commissioner in Logan County for 30 years. They let him go on about what God does or doesn’t want done with West Virginia’s mountains.

But they didn’t bother to ask him about the fact that Logan County’s poverty rate is twice the national average, or why the college graduation rate there is one-third of the national average … They didn’t bother to ask him why kids in Logan County don’t deserve more than one option in life.

And then there’s @chrish43, who tweeted, “Instead of deriding Soledad for her documentary, she should be thanked overwhelmingly. Look how she rocketed MTR into the spotlight. Look at the multitude of articles addressing what she didn't have time to in 30 minutes. Fantastic.”

So what did you think?

2011-08-11T14:26:35Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

Despite my initial disappointment at a sneak peek of CNN’s documentary special The Battle for Blair Mountain: Working in America, it's definitely an important springboard for a national conversation on the realities of mountaintop removal. So NRDC and our friends at Appalachian Voices and Earthjustice are joining forces for a live Twitter chat as the show airs this Sunday night.

We urge you to watch as Soledad O’Brien profiles this critical environmental and human rights problem, and invite you to join our conversation online for the full story.

Joining the conversation is easy. Right before the documentary airs Sunday night at 8pm, jump online and sign into Twitter. (If you’re not already on Twitter, don’t worry, creating an account is a breeze.) Then once you’re in, be on the lookout for tweets from @NRDC, @AppVoices, @Earthjustice and @judgethis. It’s really important that all of your tweets include the hashtag #battle4blair. A hashtag is a lot like a search keyword or tag and will help us find your tweets. Not only will we be responding to your comments and questions but other users on Twitter will join in as well.

We’re really excited to hear from everyone so please don’t be shy. We encourage your comments and questions, but please be mindful of others and help us facilitate a civil conversation. And remember, in order for us to find your tweets, please include #battle4blair.

BUDGET AUTHORITY (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)

2011

Enacted

2012

Estimated

2013

Budget

Wildlife Services Total

Wildlife Damage Management

Wildlife Services Methods Development

2011-08-09T16:57:00Z

Melissa Waage, Campaign Director, Washington, DC

CNN’s Soledad O’Brien takes on the mountaintop removal debate this Sunday in a 1-hour documentary special, The Battle for Blair Mountain: Working in America. This presentation brings the issue of mountaintop removal before what may be its largest national audience yet. And that’s why I was disappointed to watch a preview cut of the program and see that CNN missed the opportunity to tell a fuller and more nuanced story about the people and places at stake in the mountaintop removal debate.

It’s pretty significant that a network like CNN and a person like Ms. O’Brien are giving this problem an hour of primetime. It’s also clear that CNN did some strong reporting to craft a story that viewers anywhere in the country will find personal, interesting, and important.

But crucial voices are missing from this piece, and it relies far too heavily on a clunky, over-simplified "us vs. them" theme. Somehow the show manages to acknowledge the facts about mountaintop removal actually killing jobs, yet still shoehorn the story into a factually unsupported "jobs. vs. the environment" frame.

Virtually unheard in The Battle for Blair Mountain are the many people who have been most deeply, personally harmed by mountaintop removal mining, through physical illness, life-threatening flooding, and livelihood-destroying damage to their homeplaces.

Much of the documentary focuses on Jim Dials, a rock truck driver at the Spruce No. 1 Mine site, and his wife, Linda, who represent the “pro-jobs” side of the debate. They wait anxiously for the Environmental Protection Agency’s final decision whether to veto MTR permits for the Spruce Mine, fearful that Jim’s job will be affected.

To represent the “pro-environment” side, the program homes in on the Dials’ neighbor Billy Smutko, who opposes MTR and has suffered property damage from nearby mountaintop mining. And, as the title implies, its centerpiece is this summer’s March on Blair Mountain, in which hundreds of people marched for five days to end MTR and preserve that historic site.

But as good a job as the program does at conveying the sorrow and anger of people whose history and culture is about to be erased by MTR, it misses the many stories of people whose lives have been even more profoundly disrupted by the practice. While the program acknowledges science pointing to serious health impacts, it does not interview people whose health has been seriously harmed.

Similarly, the program acknowledges the potential damage to nearby properities from blasting, water contamination, and coal dust, but does not interview any of the many people who have had their homes significantly damaged or destroyed by mountaintop removal.

Why not spend a few minutes with people like Maria Gunnoe and other victims of life-threatening flooding in Bob White, WV?

Why not get some advice from Bo Webb of the Coal River Valley about local residents sickened by mine impacts or those who’ve lost loved ones to the chronic illnesses increasingly associated with MTR?

The Battle for Blair Mountain would have benefitted from a portrayal of one or more of these people as intimate as its portrayal of the Diels. In short, the interview subjects selected and the way the story is told tend to inaccurately pit MTR as a matter of survival—a job and quality of life—vs. inconvenience or aesthetics.

And in the end, a more fundamental question is left unanswered. Why should Dials’ job depend on a practice that leaves his neighbors sick and their homes flooded? What will people like Dials do as Appalachian coal production inevitably continues to shrink? Even within the context of a one-hour documentary, CNN could have done more to at least raise these questions.

I’m curious to hear what you think about the program. I hope you’ll have a chance to watch it and let us know what you thought in the comments below or at our Facebook page. And if you’re one of the many people who has been more than inconvenienced by mountaintop removal, to put it lightly, we'd like to hear your story too.

The Battle for Blair Mountain: Working in America airs this Sunday, August 14, at 8 pm Eastern on CNN.