President Trump's decision to withdraw the nation from the Paris Agreement on climate change drew concerns for the National Park System and speculation that more wildfires will flare up in Great Smoky Mountains National Park/NPS file photo
President Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate change accord is drawing criticism from park advocates and businesses tied to national parks, as well as pledges to reduce carbon footprints and praise for states that are focused on renewable energy.
“It’s another setback, essentially. It’s just another indication of the lack of commitment towards addressing climate changes," Kristen Brengel, the vice president for government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association, said Friday. "Parks are the places where people can actually see the visible impacts of climate change. In many of the policy decisions that have been made up until this point, we’re basically pulling back on proactively addressing carbon and promoting dirty energy sources like coal. Not moving forward with the Paris agreement is just another indicator for our lack of commitment for addressing climate change.”
At Vail Resorts, Inc., which manages the Grand Teton Lodge Company that manages properties in Grand Teton National Park as well as a portfolio of ski resorts, Chairman and CEO Rob Katz said the president's decision wouldn't sway the corporation from working to reduce its carbon footprint.
"We are deeply saddened by the decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. As a global company, Vail Resorts believes we have a unique responsibility to protect the incredible natural landscapes and environment that surround our mountain resorts and those across our planet.," he said in a release. "Climate change is a global challenge that requires global cooperation, and it is disheartening to see the United States pull away from working with the other 194 countries that were part of the Agreement. Vail Resorts will redouble our efforts to find significant ways to minimize our carbon footprint through reducing our energy use to help address one of the most serious challenges facing our worldwide community."
At the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, President and CEO Ron Tipton took heart in that "10 of the 14 states that are home to the A.T. have set aggressive renewable energy portfolio goals and others are expected to find the need to take action in the absence of federal leadership. The ATC will continue to develop solid climate change related policy with our recently hired director of Federal and Legislative Policy."
Mr. Tipton cast a dim outlook for how continued climate change would impact the trail that stretches from Maine to Georgia and is used not only by long-distance thru-hikers but by section hikers and those out for a weekend meander or day hike.
"In the coming years visitors will likely have to cope with higher temperatures, dried-up streams and more forest fires similar to the devastating fires in Great Smoky Mountains National Park in 2016," he wrote in a letter to A.T. supporters. "For now, water availability isn’t a vital problem, but if those supplies dry up, it will present an entirely different and punishing challenge for those seeking to enjoy the A.T. During the 2007-2008 drought, portions of the Trail in North Carolina had to be closed — was that an unusual event or a harbinger of the future?"
Back at NPCA, Ms. Brengel said it was good to see that the National Park Service's web pages on climate change remained intact and that the agency was continuing its work to address climate change.
“But this constant pursuit by the administration to look for ways to defund climate research and reduce regulations that protect our air, it’s an extremely disappointing direction to head in and it will have dire consequences," she added. “No one should be proud that we’re pulling out of the Paris Agreement. This is disappointing and disheartening. It’s definitely a sad day for parks.”
Comments
Global warming/climate change is not just based on models. It is also based on actual measurements of global temperature. The modelshave not been horribly wrong. They have been steadily getting better as more data is available and they can be updated. That is, in part, how science works. The idea of global warming is not just based on air temperature measurements across the globe. It predicts that there will be changes in ocean temperature, plants and animals, glacial melting, and much more. Thus it is not only climate scientists who accept that humans are causing a warming of the planet but oceanographers, fisheries biologists, glaciologists, botanists, zoologists, ornithologists, entemologists, and on and on and on. Here is a link to a fairly decent site that deals with the wide world of climate change. https://skepticalscience.com/
Grizz - the fact that temperatures change, oceans rise and fall, plants and animals migrate is undisputed. The issue is, what causes those changes. The alarmist claim it is primarily or largely due to CO2 emmissions. They have made predictions based on that theory. The predictions have been horribly wrong. The scientific method says you need to come up with a new theory. Instead, the AGW cult comes up with new numbers.
Debunking the very fake news the AGW cult relies upon.
https://youtu.be/5ATswpscuUg
So THERE all you who believe in Global Warming!
We now have been provided with absolutely rock solid terrific PROOF that AGW is a hoax. And it was provided by none other than some guy on YouTube.
The only thing better than that might be still more proof from Chris Wallace on FOX delivered to us by The Blaze.
They sure told those silly scientists what they really need to know!
In the meantime, the Park Service is simply wrong every time they point out another piece of evidence of effects of that hoax.
I think I get it now Lee. You have a complete inability to look at information, process it and come to your own conclusion. Therefore you rely only on the source or on whether the argument being made is what you want to hear. Tell us, what in the YouTube video was wrong? Tell us, what in the Chris Wallace interview was wrong? And please, tell us what evidence the NPS has provided that proves "Climate Change" is primarily caused by man.
Ecbuck,
Just because some predictions have not beared out does not mean the science is wrong, it just means you don't understand, and will not ever be capable of understanding, due to your condition.
From the link provided on the first page: "Some of the bold forecasts of the 2006 movie are holding, and others are on an accelerated track. A few of the most dire warnings need revising, says Thompson, at Ohio State University in Columbus. And plenty of questions remain. In a controversial paper in March in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, researchers argued that the effects of climate change could be even more severe and sudden than current predictions.
While a lot has changed, the fundamental understanding of climate change, dating back to the 19th century recognition that carbon dioxide warms the planet, has held strong, he says.
"The physics and chemistry that we've known about for over 200 years is bearing out," Thompson says. "We've learned so much in the last 10 years, but the fact that the unprecedented climate change of the last 40 years is being driven by increased CO2 hasn't changed."
Here is another new video debunking the junk science claim that Arctic sea ice is experiencing a record decline.
https://youtu.be/D_Qjj8hYpyc
Progressives have a "condition" about the Paris accord, because they understand nothing about science, climate, government, politics, or anything else.
Beach, a quick glance at the National Snow and Ice Data Center website makes one wonder where Mr. Heller got his data: