committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-18--Banning plastic grocery bags spreads disease

Environmental virtue signaling and folly continues apace , the latest example of which is New York State ’ s ban on plastic grocery bags that went into effect earlier this month .
Count on at least two results from the outlawing of plastic grocery bags : increased energy use and environmental cost to produce more paper grocery bags ; and increased spreading of germs from reusable tote bags at grocery stores , which is especially worrisome with the coronavirus pandemic .
New York last year became the second state after California to ban single-use plastic grocery bags , though there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now approximately 400 local jurisdictions in the United States with such bans .
The primary reason for banning plastic grocery bags is to reduce litter , yet only 0.5 percent of U.S. municipal waste is comprised of plastic bags .
Plastic bags are not biodegradable and can end up polluting waterways , but they are recyclable .
It is axiomatic that litter is a bad thing , but banning such bags is still more harmful than positive .
Plastic grocery bags also have a secondary use as garbage pail liners , carrying other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Rebecca Taylor , an economist at the University of Sydney , Australia , has studied the effects of banning plastic bags and concluded such laws increase greenhouse gas emissions based on the substitutionary effects of plastic garbage bags and paper .
The absence of plastic grocery bags means more paper bag usage , which further studies show is worse for the environment .
More paper bags means more trees cut down to produce them , which requires more energy and chemical use in the process .
Though paper bags are biodegradable , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and take up more landfill space than plastic grocery bags .
In locations with bans on plastic grocery bags , Taylor found that plastic garbage bag sales sharply increased since they can substitute for the outlawed bags for groceries and secondary use .
Plastic garbage bags also are thicker than the banned grocery bags , which diminish the erstwhile benefit of banning them .
Then there are the germs from reusing cloth tote bags for groceries in the absence of plastic grocery bags .
Viruses and bacteria that linger in and spread from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to merchants and shoppers who touch items and surfaces that become infected .
A study by the University of Arizona found that reusable bags that were collected from shoppers were rarely cleaned from prior use and that “ large numbers of bacteria were found in almost all bags.
” This was especially true for bags that contained meat juices .
Compounding the risk is that bacteria and pathogens like coronaviruses , including COVID-19 , can linger on surfaces for up to nine days .
Journalist John Tierney who writes for the City Journal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plastic is the cheapest , simplest and safest way to prevent foodborne illnesses.
” This obvious truth seems not to penetrate those self-proclaimed environmentalists who are committed to banning plastic grocery bags and impervious to the boomerang effects .
The downside of the alternatives to plastic single-use grocery bags beg the questions of whether policymakers rethink the bans in place and will efforts continue to enact new bans ?
Environmental religiosity is hard to overcome no matter how many facts come to light on issues including carbon emissions , man-made global warming , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Plastic itself faces continued hostility from some environmental quarters for the growing problem of litter , particularly its baleful effect on oceans , but also for the simple fact that it is derived from fossil fuels .
Plastic waste indeed is a problem – a crisis – but banning its use , especially for single-use grocery bags , is not the way to address it .
There are other means underway to deal with the larger issue of plastic waste , as CFACT has reported .
The environmental cost of alternatives to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resist further bans on them and to reconsider existing bans .
More so , the spread of coronavirus and other bacteria demands even more – the repeal of the bans on plastic grocery bags .

Environmental virtue signaling and folly continues apace, the latest example of which is New York State’s ban on plastic grocery bags that went into effect earlier this month.
Count on at least two results from the outlawing of plastic grocery bags: increased energy use and environmental cost to produce more paper grocery bags; and increased spreading of germs from reusable tote bags at grocery stores, which is especially worrisome with the coronavirus pandemic.
New York last year became the second state after California to ban single-use plastic grocery bags, though there are some exceptions allowed. There are now approximately 400 local jurisdictions in the United States with such bans.
The primary reason for banning plastic grocery bags is to reduce litter, yet only 0.5 percent of U.S. municipal waste is comprised of plastic bags. Plastic bags are not biodegradable and can end up polluting waterways, but they are recyclable. It is axiomatic that litter is a bad thing, but banning such bags is still more harmful than positive. Plastic grocery bags also have a secondary use as garbage pail liners, carrying other items, and for various household purposes.
Rebecca Taylor, an economist at the University of Sydney, Australia, has studied the effects of banning plastic bags and concluded such laws increase greenhouse gas emissions based on the substitutionary effects of plastic garbage bags and paper.
The absence of plastic grocery bags means more paper bag usage, which further studies show is worse for the environment. More paper bags means more trees cut down to produce them, which requires more energy and chemical use in the process. Though paper bags are biodegradable, they can still end up as litter and take up more landfill space than plastic grocery bags.
In locations with bans on plastic grocery bags, Taylor found that plastic garbage bag sales sharply increased since they can substitute for the outlawed bags for groceries and secondary use. Plastic garbage bags also are thicker than the banned grocery bags, which diminish the erstwhile benefit of banning them.
Then there are the germs from reusing cloth tote bags for groceries in the absence of plastic grocery bags. Viruses and bacteria that linger in and spread from these reusable tote bags are a hazard to merchants and shoppers who touch items and surfaces that become infected.
A study by the University of Arizona found that reusable bags that were collected from shoppers were rarely cleaned from prior use and that “large numbers of bacteria were found in almost all bags.” This was especially true for bags that contained meat juices.
Compounding the risk is that bacteria and pathogens like coronaviruses can linger on surfaces for up to nine days.
Journalist John Tierney who writes for the City Journal summed it up well: “disposable plastic is the cheapest, simplest and safest way to prevent foodborne illnesses.”
This obvious truth seems not to penetrate those self-proclaimed environmentalists who are committed to banning plastic grocery bags and impervious to the boomerang effects.
The downside of the alternatives to plastic single-use grocery bags beg the questions: will policymakers reconsider the bans in place; or will efforts continue to enact new bans? Environmental religiosity is hard to overcome no matter how many facts come to light on issues including carbon emissions, man-made global warming, nuclear energy, or plastic grocery bags.
Plastic itself faces continued hostility from some environmental quarters for the growing problem of litter, particularly its baleful effect on oceans, but also for the simple fact that it is derived from fossil fuels. Plastic waste indeed is a problem – a crisis – but banning its use, especially for single-use grocery bags, is not the way to address it. There are other means underway to deal with the larger issue of plastic waste, as CFACT has reported.
The environmental cost of alternatives to plastic grocery bags should cause policymakers to resist further bans on them and to reconsider existing bans. More so, the spread of coronavirus and other bacteria demands the repeal of the bans on plastic grocery bags.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-19--Climate Hustle 2 Postponed

Climate Hustle 2 Postponed

Climate Hustle 2 : Rise of the Climate Monarchy has been postponed .
With the excitement building , and CFACT ’ s climate-shattering film needed now more than ever , we were really looking forward to our coast to coast April movie date with you .
When AMC , Regal , Cinemark and others announced that their theaters were going dark for six to twelve weeks to combat the coronavirus , CFACT met with our distribution partner , Fathom Events , and agreed that we had no choice but to postpone .
This movie is too important to permit anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to love Climate Hustle 2 .
CFACT is very proud of it .
CH2 exposes the tricks and scams of the climate trade like nothing has before .
Kevin Sorbo ( TV ’ s Hercules ) is brilliant as narrator .
Marc Morano may well be the world ’ s number one debunker of climate hype .
Marc brings the full weight of his knowledge to bear .
The climate elite won ’ t know what hit them !
Thank you to everyone who continues to chip in to bring this vital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purchased advance tickets .
We ’ ll know more soon and will keep you fully updated .
Climate Hustle 2 is coming .
It ’ s coming big , it ’ s coming strong , and it ’ s coming soon .
We can ’ t wait to see you at the movies .

Climate Hustle 2: Rise of the Climate Monarchy has been postponed.
With the excitement building, and CFACT’s climate-shattering film needed now more than ever, we were really looking forward to our coast to coast April movie date with you.
When AMC, Regal, Cinemark and others announced that their theaters were going dark for six to twelve weeks to combat the coronavirus, CFACT met with our distribution partner, Fathom Events, and agreed that we had no choice but to postpone.
This movie is too important to permit anything but an optimal release.
You are going to love Climate Hustle 2. CFACT is very proud of it.
CH2 exposes the tricks and scams of the climate trade like nothing has before. Kevin Sorbo (TV’s Hercules) is brilliant as narrator. Marc Morano may well be the world’s number one debunker of climate hype. Marc brings the full weight of his knowledge to bear. The climate elite won’t know what hit them!
Thank you to everyone who continues to chip in to bring this vital film to the public and all who purchased advance tickets.
We’ll know more soon and will keep you fully updated.
Climate Hustle 2 is coming. It’s coming big, it’s coming strong, and it’s coming soon.
We can’t wait to see you at the movies.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-19--Telecommuting — An empowering lesson from COVID-19

One of the things that I ’ ve been focusing on for about 20 years is the question of social resilience .
What characteristics of our society make us more resilient to unexpected events ?
How are things like governance and the economy structured so that we ’ re able to benefit from periodic positive phenomenon ( like mild winters ) , and also withstand episodic negative phenomena , like the regular ( but not easily predictable ) evolution of a particularly contagious/virulent viral strain .
With COVID-19 and all the social-distancing/telework guidance floating around , something I wrote about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recession takes on a new relevance – telecommuting , aka “ telework.
” My focus at that time was on several concerns : the impacts of the recession on the economy , the growing development of alternatives to commuting ( digital and distributed options like Über ) , and continued concerns about climate change and the desire by some to reduce society ’ s use of fossil fuels , most of which continue .
What I found when studying this idea ( 2010 data ) was that both teleworkers and their employers could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over the course of a year , the average American could save about 340 gallons of gas , more than one thousand dollars in commuting costs , and more than three tons of carbon-dioxide emissions by teleworking .
Annually , a worker with a one-way commute of twenty-two miles could save about 50 % of the annual energy consumption of an average household .
Employers also benefitted : for example , with 40 % of its employees teleworking , IBM had reduced office space by 78 million square feet and gained $ 2.9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers were more productive : a group called The Telework Research Network found a 25 % reduction in workforce attrition from teleworkers , and a 27 % increase in productivity on telework days .
More relevant to COVID-19 were the findings of a study in Science at the time : Brad Allenby and Jonathan Fink , writing in Science , observed that dispersing assets makes companies less vulnerable to targeted attacks , disasters like tornadoes , and diseases spreading among employees .
In addition , they explained : “ A dispersed workforce enhances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The response to the September 11 attacks indicates that post-event stress and anxiety ( which is a major purpose of many terrorist attacks ) can be relieved substantially if arrangements are in place that enable dispersion of the workforce , especially to a home environment where they are both more comfortable and feel themselves less of a potential target.
” The challenge is that both corporate culture and government culture are deeply entrenched , and hard to change .
Both senior executives and senior governmental officials gauge how important they are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ size and ( perceived ) enthusiasm of their retinue .
Being able to lead visitors past your diligent group of hard-working employees to your nice corner office is a massive status display that people are reluctant to give up .
Economic motivations have , ( and should ) eventually prevail in the private sector , but government is not often constrained by such motivations as profit and loss .
At the very least , however , government can get out of the way .
As I pointed out way back in 2010 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telecommuting , supporting the “ big retinue of warm bodies ” status quo .
That means breaking down tax barriers and regulatory barriers that needlessly constrain telework .
Telework-reforms are something we can easily implement moving forward from COVID-19 that would let us learn from a crisis and immunize ourselves better against future challenges .
It ’ s a rare win-win opportunity to turn , as the Chinese might say , a crisis into an opportunity

One of the things that I’ve been focusing on for about 20 years is the question of social resilience. What characteristics of our society make us more resilient to unexpected events? How are things like governance and the economy structured so that we’re able to benefit from periodic positive phenomenon (like mild winters), and also withstand episodic negative phenomena, like the regular (but not easily predictable) evolution of a particularly contagious/virulent viral strain.
With COVID-19 and all the social-distancing/telework guidance floating around, something I wrote about in the 2010 aftermath of the Great Recession takes on a new relevance – telecommuting, aka “telework.” My focus at that time was on several concerns: the impacts of the recession on the economy, the growing development of alternatives to commuting (digital and distributed options like Über), and continued concerns about climate change and the desire by some to reduce society’s use of fossil fuels, most of which continue.
What I found when studying this idea (2010 data) was that both teleworkers and their employers could reduce energy use and save money. Over the course of a year, the average American could save about 340 gallons of gas, more than one thousand dollars in commuting costs, and more than three tons of carbon-dioxide emissions by teleworking. Annually, a worker with a one-way commute of twenty-two miles could save about 50% of the annual energy consumption of an average household. Employers also benefitted: for example, with 40% of its employees teleworking, IBM had reduced office space by 78 million square feet and gained $2.9 billion between 1995 and 2010. And workers were more productive: a group called The Telework Research Network found a 25% reduction in workforce attrition from teleworkers, and a 27 % increase in productivity on telework days.
More relevant to COVID-19 were the findings of a study in Science at the time: Brad Allenby and Jonathan Fink, writing in Science, observed that dispersing assets makes companies less vulnerable to targeted attacks, disasters like tornadoes, and diseases spreading among employees. In addition, they explained: “A dispersed workforce enhances resiliency in more subtle ways. . . The response to the September 11 attacks indicates that post-event stress and anxiety (which is a major purpose of many terrorist attacks) can be relieved substantially if arrangements are in place that enable dispersion of the workforce, especially to a home environment where they are both more comfortable and feel themselves less of a potential target.”
The challenge is that both corporate culture and government culture are deeply entrenched, and hard to change. Both senior executives and senior governmental officials gauge how important they are in the old Roman style: by the size and (perceived) enthusiasm of their retinue. Being able to lead visitors past your diligent group of hard-working employees to your nice corner office is a massive status display that people are reluctant to give up.
Economic motivations have, (and should) eventually prevail in the private sector, but government is not often constrained by such motivations as profit and loss. At the very least, however, government can get out of the way. As I pointed out way back in 2010, tax policies can serve as deterrents to telecommuting, supporting the “big retinue of warm bodies” status quo. That means breaking down tax barriers and regulatory barriers that needlessly constrain telework.
Telework-reforms are something we can easily implement moving forward from COVID-19 that would let us learn from a crisis and immunize ourselves better against future challenges. It’s a rare win-win opportunity to turn, as the Chinese might say, a crisis into an opportunity


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-20--CLINTEL president says zero carbon is a crime against humanity

I recently got an intriguing email from Professor Guus Berkhout , president of the Climate Intelligence Foundation or CLINTEL .
It contained this striking paragraph and the last sentence really got me thinking : “ The past 150 years show that affordable and reliable energy is the key to prosperity .
The past 150 years also show that more CO2 is beneficial for nature , greening the Earth and increasing the yields of crops .
Why do governments ignore these hard facts ?
Why do they do the opposite and lower the quality of life by forcing high-cost , dubious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The zero-emission act is a crime against humanity.
” ( Emphasis added . )
So I looked into the law on crimes against humanity and Professor Berkhout may have a strong case .
At its simplest , a crime against humanity is a government policy that systematically and knowingly harms a specific group of innocent people .
Zero carbon emission laws like the Green New Deal in the EU and the US will deprive poor people of affordable energy worldwide .
This fact has been well established by numerous studies .
Thus these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ innocent people .
And as CLINTEL points out in its World Climate Declaration , there is no climate emergency that might justify this harm .
What we have are governments deliberately harming their citizens .
But look also at the latest developments in climate science .
There is new insight that has to do with a review of carbon budgets .
A carbon budget indicates the amount of CO2 that may still be emitted before a certain warm-up limit is exceeded .
IPCC climate scientists that authored the SR15 report of 2018 took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the carbon budgets in IPCC ’ s AR5 report of 2014 and concluded that they had been too pessimistic in the past .
And not so slightly .
In the SR15 report those carbon budgets have been increased spectacularly .
By way of illustration , the carbon budget for the 1.5 degree limit has increased by no less than a factor of 5 !
It therefore takes considerably longer for the carbon budgets to be exhausted , which means that the strict emission requirements based on AR5 can be significantly relaxed .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people concerned about the climate .
It fully confirms CLINTEL ’ s message : ‘ There is NO climate emergency.
’ Unfortunately , the good news has been snowed under by the increasing ‘ gloom and doom ’ actions and stories about the ‘ dangerous climate change ’ , ironically fed by the same SR15 report .
Actually , the reader should realize that the good news is even better because on top of the computational error in AR5 we still deal with IPCC ’ s continuing exaggerated climate sensitivity for CO2 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that – despite the strong scientific and moral arguments – it is now the stated goal of the UN alarmists that all countries should adopt zero carbon laws , preferably in time for the Climate Summit in Glasgow this November .
Given that the harm is proportional to poverty , such precipitous actions would be especially harmful to the poorest .
And , for heaven ’ s sake , why ?
Zero carbon laws are prohibitions against those forms of energy that presently supply about 80 % of human need .
A well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ inhumane acts intentionally causing great suffering ” .
Deliberately depriving poor people of affordable energy certainly fits this definition .
My colleague Paul Driessen have written extensively about this issue , albeit not from the perspective of crimes against humanity .
See for example our https : //www.cfact.org/2019/12/30/climate-alarmist-banks-go-carbon-colonialist/ .
Mind you we were just talking about the tragedy of so-called development banks refusing to fund affordable energy development .
Laws that prohibit the use of fossil fuels are infinitely worse .
Imagine not being allowed to use a kerosene light or a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having electricity .
But we do not have to go to poor Africa to find energy poverty .
It is being documented throughout Europe , especially in those countries where misguided governments have forced renewable energy on their people .
Yet the UK and EU are both adopting draconian zero carbon policies .
The energy poor here also probably have a good case of crimes against humanity .
In the U.S. it is estimated that millions of households live in what is defined as “ energy poverty ” due in large part to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Energy poverty is reported to be the second leading cause of homelessness in America .
The proposed Green New Deal will make this suffering dramatically worse .
In short , CLINTEL president Guus Berkhout is right .
Zero-carbon laws are not only scientifically utterly silly , they are crimes against humanity .

I recently got an intriguing email from Professor Guus Berkhout, president of the Climate Intelligence Foundation or CLINTEL. It contained this striking paragraph and the last sentence really got me thinking:
“The past 150 years show that affordable and reliable energy is the key to prosperity. The past 150 years also show that more CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth and increasing the yields of crops. Why do governments ignore these hard facts? Why do they do the opposite and lower the quality of life by forcing high-cost, dubious low-carbon energy technologies upon their citizens? The zero-emission act is a crime against humanity.” (Emphasis added.)
So I looked into the law on crimes against humanity and Professor Berkhout may have a strong case. At its simplest, a crime against humanity is a government policy that systematically and knowingly harms a specific group of innocent people.
Zero carbon emission laws like the Green New Deal in the EU and the US will deprive poor people of affordable energy worldwide. This fact has been well established by numerous studies. Thus these policies knowingly harm a specific group of innocent people. And as CLINTEL points out in its World Climate Declaration, there is no climate emergency that might justify this harm. What we have are governments deliberately harming their citizens.
But look also at the latest developments in climate science. There is new insight that has to do with a review of carbon budgets. A carbon budget indicates the amount of CO2 that may still be emitted before a certain warm-up limit is exceeded. IPCC climate scientists that authored the SR15 report of 2018 took another close look at the calculations of the carbon budgets in IPCC’s AR5 report of 2014 and concluded that they had been too pessimistic in the past. And not so slightly. In the SR15 report those carbon budgets have been increased spectacularly.
By way of illustration, the carbon budget for the 1.5 degree limit has increased by no less than a factor of 5! It therefore takes considerably longer for the carbon budgets to be exhausted, which means that the strict emission requirements based on AR5 can be significantly relaxed. So this is very good news for all people concerned about the climate. It fully confirms CLINTEL’s message: ‘ There is NO climate emergency.’
Unfortunately, the good news has been snowed under by the increasing ‘gloom and doom’ actions and stories about the ‘dangerous climate change’, ironically fed by the same SR15 report. Actually, the reader should realize that the good news is even better because on top of the computational error in AR5 we still deal with IPCC’s continuing exaggerated climate sensitivity for CO2. When will that be corrected?
Note that – despite the strong scientific and moral arguments – it is now the stated goal of the UN alarmists that all countries should adopt zero carbon laws, preferably in time for the Climate Summit in Glasgow this November. Given that the harm is proportional to poverty, such precipitous actions would be especially harmful to the poorest. And, for heaven’s sake, why?
Zero carbon laws are prohibitions against those forms of energy that presently supply about 80% of human need. A well recognized definition of crimes against humanity is “inhumane acts intentionally causing great suffering”. Deliberately depriving poor people of affordable energy certainly fits this definition.
My colleague Paul Driessen have written extensively about this issue, albeit not from the perspective of crimes against humanity. See for example our https://www.cfact.org/2019/12/30/climate-alarmist-banks-go-carbon-colonialist/.
Mind you we were just talking about the tragedy of so-called development banks refusing to fund affordable energy development. Laws that prohibit the use of fossil fuels are infinitely worse. Imagine not being allowed to use a kerosene light or a gasoline scooter, on top of not having electricity.
But we do not have to go to poor Africa to find energy poverty. It is being documented throughout Europe, especially in those countries where misguided governments have forced renewable energy on their people. Yet the UK and EU are both adopting draconian zero carbon policies. The energy poor here also probably have a good case of crimes against humanity.
In the U.S. it is estimated that millions of households live in what is defined as “energy poverty” due in large part to the forced shift to renewable power. Energy poverty is reported to be the second leading cause of homelessness in America. The proposed Green New Deal will make this suffering dramatically worse.
In short, CLINTEL president Guus Berkhout is right. Zero-carbon laws are not only scientifically utterly silly, they are crimes against humanity.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-20--State regulators, feds team up to deep-six California swordfishermen

Officials in California and Washington , D.C. are on the verge of inflicting a double whammy on the Golden State ’ s struggling swordfish fishermen .
What is being done in the name of protecting marine mammals and sea turtles from the practices of California fishermen will ironically – and predictably – benefit foreign suppliers of swordfish , many of whom operate with nary a thought of protecting endangered marine life .
In September 2018 , then-Governor Jerry Brown ( D ) signed a bill ( S.B .
1917 ) banning the most widely used method of catching swordfish for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , known as drift gillnetting , is one of only two legal ways commercial fishermen can catch swordfish in California .
The other legal method , harpooning , is expensive and inefficient , leaving drift gillnetting as the gear of choice for the vast majority of swordfish fishermen .
Under the new law , however , drift gillnetting will be illegal within three nautical miles of the California coast .
To ensure compliance , S.B .
1017 also terminated California ’ s decades-old permitting system for the commercial catch and landing of swordfish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weren ’ t enough , the National Marine Fisheries Service ( NMFS ) , a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce also decided to get into the act .
NMFS plans to issue a rule mandating an immediate closure of the California/Oregon drift gillnet fishery for swordfish and thresher shark ( 14 -inch minimum mesh size ) if a hard cap ( i.e.
, limit ) on mortality/injury is met or exceeded for certain protected species during a rolling two-year period .
The length of the closure will depend on when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s swordfish fishermen live a world apart from Silicon Valley high flyers or San Francisco hedge-fund managers .
They are small , family-owned businesses , the kinds of enterprises that once drew people to the Golden State and are now disappearing at an alarming rate due to California ’ s hostile regulatory and tax policies .
The laws targeting California fishermen supposedly protect marine mammals and sea turtles from being accidentally caught in nets .
However , with plenty of longstanding protections in place such as seasonable closures and equipment and observer mandates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But the squeeze play launched by Sacramento and Washington will destroy California ’ s commercial swordfish fishermen , shifting demand to foreign markets where environmental accountability and oversight are far less stringent .
The unintended result will be more animals killed or injured .
If the policies are allowed to stand , they will spell the end to California ’ s generations-old swordfish businesses and destroy the livelihoods of the families involved in them .
The fishermen are not taking this lying down .
With the assistance of the Pacific Legal Foundation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two lawsuits , one is state court – Abad , et al .
v. Director , Cal .
Dept .
of Fish & Wildlife , et al .
– and one in federal court – Williams , et al .
v. Ross , et al .
In the state case , attorney Damien Schiff pointed out in PLF ’ s complaint that the West Coast swordfish industry is an important component of the nation ’ s seafood industry , as evidenced by the NMFS ’ s decision to federalize the fishery in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency .
But once S.B .
1017 is fully implemented , it will eliminate all outstanding state permits , thereby depriving swordfish fishermen their right to earn a living .
“ Because it attacks what federal law expressly permits , and because it precludes the commercially viable use of a federally regulated fishery , California ’ s anti-fisherman campaign unlawfully deprives Mr. Abad and Mr. Brown ( two of the plaintiffs ) of their federal rights , including their Fourteenth Amendment right to earn a living secured by the Privileges and Immunities Clause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law.
” Plaintiffs in the federal case argue that the new NMFS rule fails to minimize the economic impact of the policy on fishermen and their communities , as required by federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act , commonly known as the Fishery Act .
Furthermore , as noted by Schiff and fellow PLF attorney Michael Poon , NMFS ’ s hard caps rule violates the Constitution ’ s Appointment Clause , which reserves the exercise of significant federal power , including rule-making , to “ Officers of the United States ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate .
But the federal hard caps rule was proposed by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council , none of whose members were appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate .
Both complaints were filed in March 2020 so it will take some time for them to wind their way through the court system .
In the meantime , the fate of the small swordfish businesses hangs in the balance .

Officials in California and Washington, D.C. are on the verge of inflicting a double whammy on the Golden State’s struggling swordfish fishermen. What is being done in the name of protecting marine mammals and sea turtles from the practices of California fishermen will ironically – and predictably – benefit foreign suppliers of swordfish, many of whom operate with nary a thought of protecting endangered marine life.
In September 2018, then-Governor Jerry Brown (D) signed a bill (S.B. 1917) banning the most widely used method of catching swordfish for commercial use by 2022. That method, known as drift gillnetting, is one of only two legal ways commercial fishermen can catch swordfish in California. The other legal method, harpooning, is expensive and inefficient, leaving drift gillnetting as the gear of choice for the vast majority of swordfish fishermen.
Under the new law, however, drift gillnetting will be illegal within three nautical miles of the California coast. To ensure compliance, S.B. 1017 also terminated California’s decades-old permitting system for the commercial catch and landing of swordfish by drift gillnetting.
As if that weren’t enough, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce also decided to get into the act. NMFS plans to issue a rule mandating an immediate closure of the California/Oregon drift gillnet fishery for swordfish and thresher shark (14 -inch minimum mesh size) if a hard cap (i.e., limit) on mortality/injury is met or exceeded for certain protected species during a rolling two-year period. The length of the closure will depend on when the hard cap is reached.
Family-Owned Businesses
California’s swordfish fishermen live a world apart from Silicon Valley high flyers or San Francisco hedge-fund managers. They are small, family-owned businesses, the kinds of enterprises that once drew people to the Golden State and are now disappearing at an alarming rate due to California’s hostile regulatory and tax policies. The laws targeting California fishermen supposedly protect marine mammals and sea turtles from being accidentally caught in nets. However, with plenty of longstanding protections in place such as seasonable closures and equipment and observer mandates for boats, unwanted bycatch is minimal.
But the squeeze play launched by Sacramento and Washington will destroy California’s commercial swordfish fishermen, shifting demand to foreign markets where environmental accountability and oversight are far less stringent. The unintended result will be more animals killed or injured. If the policies are allowed to stand, they will spell the end to California’s generations-old swordfish businesses and destroy the livelihoods of the families involved in them.
The fishermen are not taking this lying down. With the assistance of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), they have filed two lawsuits, one is state court – Abad, et al. v. Director, Cal. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, et al. – and one in federal court – Williams, et al. v. Ross, et al.
Unlawfully Depriving Fishermen of Their Rights
In the state case, attorney Damien Schiff pointed out in PLF’s complaint that the West Coast swordfish industry is an important component of the nation’s seafood industry, as evidenced by the NMFS’s decision to federalize the fishery in 2018 through a permitting system administered by that agency. But once S.B. 1017 is fully implemented, it will eliminate all outstanding state permits, thereby depriving swordfish fishermen their right to earn a living.
“Because it attacks what federal law expressly permits, and because it precludes the commercially viable use of a federally regulated fishery, California’s anti-fisherman campaign unlawfully deprives Mr. Abad and Mr. Brown (two of the plaintiffs) of their federal rights, including their Fourteenth Amendment right to earn a living secured by the Privileges and Immunities Clause, or is otherwise preempted by federal law.”
Plaintiffs in the federal case argue that the new NMFS rule fails to minimize the economic impact of the policy on fishermen and their communities, as required by federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, commonly known as the Fishery Act.
Furthermore, as noted by Schiff and fellow PLF attorney Michael Poon, NMFS’s hard caps rule violates the Constitution’s Appointment Clause, which reserves the exercise of significant federal power, including rule-making, to “Officers of the United States” (Buckley v. Valeo). Such officers must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. But the federal hard caps rule was proposed by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, none of whose members were appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Both complaints were filed in March 2020 so it will take some time for them to wind their way through the court system. In the meantime, the fate of the small swordfish businesses hangs in the balance.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-20--Forest fires on the decline: Believe it

Forest fires on the decline: Believe it

The Union of Concerned Scientists are not necessarily scientists ( anyone can join by paying a modest dues ) and they certainly are not concerned about the lies they tell .
Try this one : “ The effects of global warming on temperature , precipitation levels , and soil moisture are turning many of our forests into kindling during wildfires ” Like many apocalyptic climate myths , there is wide acceptance among the media and the general public that forest fires are increasing in size and frequency due to global warming .
Like the fatally flawed mathematical climate models the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absurd as the data will show .
A study by scientists with the Canadian Forest Service compared temperatures and carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) concentrations versus frequency of forest fires over 150 years in North America and Northern Europe beginning in 1850 .
Not only did they not find a correlation between an increase in CO2 with an increase in forest fires they found a decrease in fires with an increase in CO2 .
This is illustrated in Figure 1 from the National Interagency Fire Center ( NIFC ) from 1962 to 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going back to 1928 : One reason for the decline is an increase in worldwide soil moisture content that is partially due to increasing CO2 .
Higher CO2 levels mean that plants require less water , which remains in the soil .
A study performed in 2014 by Yang found that acreages burned worldwide in the 20th century and early 21st century had declined significantly as shown below in figure 2 .
In spite of all the recent focus on the California forest fire tragedies and contrary to most public pronouncement , forest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rest of the northern hemisphere .
The United States Geological Survey ’ s fire scientist Jon Keeley checked the data for California back to 1920 and found that the number of forest fires peaked in the 1970s with a significant decrease since .
According to University of Washington scientist Cliff Mass , the number of fires in his state has been in a decades-long decline .
Mass reports that between 1987 and 2016 fires declined by 50 % although the areas burned have increased slightly .
In the early mid-20th century , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , tree thinning , controlled burns and grazing .
Under the Clinton administration most of these activities were stopped in the name of having “ naturally functioning ecosystems ” which they ignorantly believed would protect old growth forests and spotted owls .
The result has been more damage done per fire allowed due to increasing fuel-driven intensity .
If you control the fuel , you control the fire .
In an interview with Evergreen magazine in 1994 , forester Dr. Bob Zybach , warned that dead and dying material accumulating in forests in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put out all wildfires , even when no human life was in danger , would lead to much greater wildfires in terms of their size .
Eventually he predicted the potential loss of life we have seen in the past two years in California .
According to Gregory Wrightstone , in his climate science book INCONVENIENT FACTS the Sierra Nevada Conservancy , hardly a pro-logging group , explained that there are 300 to 400 trees per acre in western forest today where there had been only 50 to 80 trees when our forests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of bark beetles that leads to the death of trees which become kindling waiting for a spark to ignite them .
The conservancy says “ Fires that once revitalized forests are instead destroying them ” .
It is important that we all understand the nature of forest fires to ensure we do not over-react to the misinformation provided by the media .
The first ingredient of fires is an ignition source .
According to University of Colorado ecologist Jennifer Batch , 84 % of all fires in the United States are instigated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with some degree of carelessness .
They include electric power lines , vehicle exhausts , smoking , motorized equipment such as lawnmowers and weed wackers and of course ARSON .
With more homes encroaching on fire prone areas , it stands to reason that human caused ignition would increase .
The USGS ’ s Jon Keeley calculated that homes at risk due to being in fire-prone areas in the west increased from about 600,000 in 1940 to nearly 7 million by 2010 .
This has dramatically increased the possibility for human ignition .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ story while the data tell quite another .
Rather than an increase in the frequency and intensity of forest fires , thanks to more carbon dioxide in the air , there has been as decrease .
This is a very inconvenient fact for the ant-fossil fuel groups and the two men left vying for the Democratic nominee for President next fall .
Note : portions of this article were excerpted from the outstanding book INCONVENIENT FACTS with permission of the author Gregory Wrightstone .
For detailed facts on the many facets of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highly recommended .

The Union of Concerned Scientists are not necessarily scientists (anyone can join by paying a modest dues) and they certainly are not concerned about the lies they tell. Try this one: “The effects of global warming on temperature, precipitation levels, and soil moisture are turning many of our forests into kindling during wildfires”
Like many apocalyptic climate myths, there is wide acceptance among the media and the general public that forest fires are increasing in size and frequency due to global warming. Like the fatally flawed mathematical climate models the predictive equations for forest fires are equally absurd as the data will show.
A study by scientists with the Canadian Forest Service compared temperatures and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations versus frequency of forest fires over 150 years in North America and Northern Europe beginning in 1850. Not only did they not find a correlation between an increase in CO2 with an increase in forest fires they found a decrease in fires with an increase in CO2. This is illustrated in Figure 1 from the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) from 1962 to 2017.
I recommend using the NIFC chart going back to 1928:
One reason for the decline is an increase in worldwide soil moisture content that is partially due to increasing CO2. Higher CO2 levels mean that plants require less water, which remains in the soil.
A study performed in 2014 by Yang found that acreages burned worldwide in the 20th century and early 21st century had declined significantly as shown below in figure 2.
In spite of all the recent focus on the California forest fire tragedies and contrary to most public pronouncement, forest fires in his state are declining with the rest of the northern hemisphere. The United States Geological Survey’s fire scientist Jon Keeley checked the data for California back to 1920 and found that the number of forest fires peaked in the 1970s with a significant decrease since.
According to University of Washington scientist Cliff Mass, the number of fires in his state has been in a decades-long decline. Mass reports that between 1987 and 2016 fires declined by 50% although the areas burned have increased slightly.
In the early mid-20th century, sensible forest management included periodic timber harvests, tree thinning, controlled burns and grazing. Under the Clinton administration most of these activities were stopped in the name of having “naturally functioning ecosystems” which they ignorantly believed would protect old growth forests and spotted owls. The result has been more damage done per fire allowed due to increasing fuel-driven intensity. If you control the fuel, you control the fire.
In an interview with Evergreen magazine in 1994, forester Dr. Bob Zybach, warned that dead and dying material accumulating in forests in the west along with the decision to put out all wildfires, even when no human life was in danger, would lead to much greater wildfires in terms of their size. Eventually he predicted the potential loss of life we have seen in the past two years in California.
According to Gregory Wrightstone, in his climate science book INCONVENIENT FACTS the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, hardly a pro-logging group, explained that there are 300 to 400 trees per acre in western forest today where there had been only 50 to 80 trees when our forests were managed intelligently.This dense growth promotes the spread of bark beetles that leads to the death of trees which become kindling waiting for a spark to ignite them. The conservancy says “Fires that once revitalized forests are instead destroying them”.
It is important that we all understand the nature of forest fires to ensure we do not over-react to the misinformation provided by the media. The first ingredient of fires is an ignition source. According to University of Colorado ecologist Jennifer Batch, 84% of all fires in the United States are instigated by people. Not intentionally, but with some degree of carelessness. They include electric power lines, vehicle exhausts, smoking, motorized equipment such as lawnmowers and weed wackers and of course ARSON. With more homes encroaching on fire prone areas, it stands to reason that human caused ignition would increase. The USGS’s Jon Keeley calculated that homes at risk due to being in fire-prone areas in the west increased from about 600,000 in 1940 to nearly 7 million by 2010. This has dramatically increased the possibility for human ignition.
The media and alarmist groups tell one story while the data tell quite another. Rather than an increase in the frequency and intensity of forest fires, thanks to more carbon dioxide in the air, there has been as decrease. This is a very inconvenient fact for the ant-fossil fuel groups and the two men left vying for the Democratic nominee for President next fall.
Note: portions of this article were excerpted from the outstanding book INCONVENIENT FACTS with permission of the author Gregory Wrightstone. For detailed facts on the many facets of the climate change delusion, this book is highly recommended.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-20--Migratory Bird Treaty Act reform will clarify longstanding confusion

A century-old statute enacted to protect birds that cross international boundaries has become the object of conflicting legal interpretations , sowing confusion over what kinds of acts leading to the injury of death of a protected species can be punished by a fine or even a prison sentence .
Now , the Trump administration ’ s Fish & Wildlife Service ( FWS ) , a division of the Interior Department , is stepping in to define the scope of the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ( MBTA ) to provide regulatory certainty to the public , industries , states , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ By proposing to codify FWS ’ s existing interpretation that the prohibitions of the MBTA only apply to actions “ directed at ” migratory birds , their nests , or their eggs , FWS is taking a significant step toward clarifying confusion that has resulted from no fewer than five recent conflicting circuit court of appeals decisions on the scope of the MBTA , as well as conflicting interpretations by the Obama administration and the Trump administration..
The muddled legal interpretation of what constitutes a “ take ” of a protected bird under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protracted litigation as the public has struggled to understand what the law actually says .
On Jan. 10 , 2017 – ten days before the Obama administration left office – the Solicitor General at the Obama Interior Department issued a legal opinion , according to which any act that takes or kills a migratory bird – regardless of the violator ’ s intention or state of mind – falls within the scope of the MBTA as long as it results in the death of a bird .
But on Dec. 22 , 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Solicitor ’ s Opinion concluding that an otherwise lawful activity that results in the incidental take of a protected bird does not violate the MBTA .
In its proposed rulemaking , FWS codifies the Trump Solicitor ’ s Opinion .
As pointed out in CFACT ’ s public comments submitted to FWS on March 18 : The proposed codification differentiates between wanton acts of destruction and criminal negligence , on the one hand , and the accidental or incidental take of a protected bird , however regrettable , on the other .
U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by intent and harm caused by accident .
The proposed rulemaking extends that practice to the MBTA .
The rulemaking would also change how FWS administers the MBTA by determining that an Environmental Impact Statement ( EIS ) under the National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ) is the most efficient and comprehensive approach for considering the potential impacts of this action on the environment .
Until recently , such a proposal would have been a fool ’ s errand because of the extraordinary delays long associated with the NEPA process .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Environmental Quality ( CEQ ) having recently proposed a long-overdue streamlining of the NEPA process , CEQ ’ s rulemaking – assuming it survives legal challenges – compliments what the Service is proposing to do with regard to the MBTA .
Both the Trump administration ’ s clarification of the MBTA and its reforms of the National Environmental Policy Act will be challenged in court by environmental groups .
If they survive those challenges , at least some of the litigation and red tape that have surrounded environmental policy for decades will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Fish and Wildlife Service Bonner Cohen submitted on behalf of CFACT here .

A century-old statute enacted to protect birds that cross international boundaries has become the object of conflicting legal interpretations, sowing confusion over what kinds of acts leading to the injury of death of a protected species can be punished by a fine or even a prison sentence.
Now, the Trump administration’s Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS), a division of the Interior Department, is stepping in to define the scope of the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) to provide regulatory certainty to the public, industries, states, tribes, and other affected parties.
By proposing to codify FWS’s existing interpretation that the prohibitions of the MBTA only apply to actions “directed at” migratory birds, their nests, or their eggs, FWS is taking a significant step toward clarifying confusion that has resulted from no fewer than five recent conflicting circuit court of appeals decisions on the scope of the MBTA, as well as conflicting interpretations by the Obama administration and the Trump administration..
The muddled legal interpretation of what constitutes a “take” of a protected bird under the MBTA has opened the door to protracted litigation as the public has struggled to understand what the law actually says.
Obama vs. Trump Interpretations
On Jan. 10, 2017 – ten days before the Obama administration left office – the Solicitor General at the Obama Interior Department issued a legal opinion, according to which any act that takes or kills a migratory bird – regardless of the violator’s intention or state of mind – falls within the scope of the MBTA as long as it results in the death of a bird. But on Dec. 22, 2017, the Trump administration issued its own Solicitor’s Opinion concluding that an otherwise lawful activity that results in the incidental take of a protected bird does not violate the MBTA.
In its proposed rulemaking, FWS codifies the Trump Solicitor’s Opinion. As pointed out in CFACT’s public comments submitted to FWS on March 18:
The proposed codification differentiates between wanton acts of destruction and criminal negligence, on the one hand, and the accidental or incidental take of a protected bird, however regrettable, on the other. U.S. law has long differentiated between harm caused by intent and harm caused by accident. The proposed rulemaking extends that practice to the MBTA.
The rulemaking would also change how FWS administers the MBTA by determining that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is the most efficient and comprehensive approach for considering the potential impacts of this action on the environment. Until recently, such a proposal would have been a fool’s errand because of the extraordinary delays long associated with the NEPA process. However, with the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) having recently proposed a long-overdue streamlining of the NEPA process, CEQ’s rulemaking – assuming it survives legal challenges – compliments what the Service is proposing to do with regard to the MBTA.
Court Battles Loom
Both the Trump administration’s clarification of the MBTA and its reforms of the National Environmental Policy Act will be challenged in court by environmental groups. If they survive those challenges, at least some of the litigation and red tape that have surrounded environmental policy for decades will be trimmed back.
Read the official comment to the Fish and Wildlife Service Bonner Cohen submitted on behalf of CFACT here.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-03-20--Can the Key Largo Woodrat win its game of cat and mouse?

A mid-sized rodent with reddish-brown fur on its sides , the Key Largo woodrat is a rare species found only in Southern Florida .
With only an estimated 6,500 in the wild , it was placed on the Endangered Species List in 1984 and has been slow to scamper its way back to healthy numbers ever since .
Today , conservationists are making some headway – but their efforts are being stymied by a cute and cuddly menace : namely , cats .
“ Fifteen years ago , in a last-ditch attempt to save the woodrat from extinction , conservationists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a captive breeding program at the Animal Kingdom in Orlando .
Over several years wildlife biologists successfully bolstered the woodrats ’ numbers in captivity .
The real test , though , would be surviving back in Key Largo ( the woodrat ’ s natural habitat ) .
Local conservationists had repeatedly asked the Ocean Reef Club , which fed and cared for [ stray ] cats through a program called ORCAT , to figure out how to keep them contained [ in the refuge where woodrats would be let go ] .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scapegoated for a long list of problems , and anyway it would be impossible to restrict them all to the 2,500-acre property .
Over several weeks in 2010 and 2011 , biologists released 27 tagged woodrats into the refuge .
Within weeks cats killed every one of them.
” That cats pose a problem to woodrat recovery is sure , but perhaps even more problematic is taking on the cat ’ s advocates .
Organization ’ s like ORCAT passionately oppose the culling and rounding up of feral felines as they view it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if they put endangered species like the Key Largo woodrat at risk .
They prefer to see wild cats captured , sterilized , and returned to the wild .
Their “ solution ” has merit in that it has been shown to reduce feral cat numbers over time — but is of little comfort to those charged with resuscitating woodrat numbers immediately today .
Neutered cats , conservationists counter , may be unable to reproduce , but they still go on killing and munching on woodrats .
Until wild cat numbers go down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Just what those approaches will be , however , remain to be seen .
For more information , you can read the full story at Scientific American .

A mid-sized rodent with reddish-brown fur on its sides, the Key Largo woodrat is a rare species found only in Southern Florida. With only an estimated 6,500 in the wild, it was placed on the Endangered Species List in 1984 and has been slow to scamper its way back to healthy numbers ever since.
Today, conservationists are making some headway – but their efforts are being stymied by a cute and cuddly menace: namely, cats.
As reported in Scientific American:
“Fifteen years ago, in a last-ditch attempt to save the woodrat from extinction, conservationists teamed up with Disney … to begin a captive breeding program at the Animal Kingdom in Orlando. Over several years wildlife biologists successfully bolstered the woodrats’ numbers in captivity. The real test, though, would be surviving back in Key Largo (the woodrat’s natural habitat).
Local conservationists had repeatedly asked the Ocean Reef Club, which fed and cared for [stray] cats through a program called ORCAT, to figure out how to keep them contained [in the refuge where woodrats would be let go]. But ORCAT demurred: the cats were being scapegoated for a long list of problems, and anyway it would be impossible to restrict them all to the 2,500-acre property.
Over several weeks in 2010 and 2011, biologists released 27 tagged woodrats into the refuge. Within weeks cats killed every one of them.”
That cats pose a problem to woodrat recovery is sure, but perhaps even more problematic is taking on the cat’s advocates. Organization’s like ORCAT passionately oppose the culling and rounding up of feral felines as they view it as cruel and unusual punishment – even if they put endangered species like the Key Largo woodrat at risk. They prefer to see wild cats captured, sterilized, and returned to the wild.
Their “solution” has merit in that it has been shown to reduce feral cat numbers over time — but is of little comfort to those charged with resuscitating woodrat numbers immediately today. Neutered cats, conservationists counter, may be unable to reproduce, but they still go on killing and munching on woodrats. Until wild cat numbers go down, other approaches must also be taken.
Just what those approaches will be, however, remain to be seen.
For more information, you can read the full story at Scientific American.


I, Pencil

Coronavirus policymakers take heed .
Every dollar you spend , no matter how trivial , has an economic multiplier effect .
In a free market economy that power is tremendous .
When we withdraw from the marketplace , a reverse multiplier takes hold with a strangling grip .
Buy a pencil and watch your dollar multiply .
Classic : I am a lead pencil—the ordinary wooden pencil familiar to all boys and girls and adults who can read and write .
Writing is both my vocation and my avocation ; that ’ s all I do .
You may wonder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , to begin with , my story is interesting .
And , next , I am a mystery —more so than a tree or a sunset or even a flash of lightning .
But , sadly , I am taken for granted by those who use me , as if I were a mere incident and without background .
This supercilious attitude relegates me to the level of the commonplace .
This is a species of the grievous error in which mankind can not too long persist without peril .
For , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We are perishing for want of wonder , not for want of wonders.
” I , Pencil , simple though I appear to be , merit your wonder and awe , a claim I shall attempt to prove .
In fact , if you can understand me—no , that ’ s too much to ask of anyone—if you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize , you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing .
I have a profound lesson to teach .
And I can teach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or an airplane or a mechanical dishwasher because—well , because I am seemingly so simple .
Simple ?
Yet , not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me .
This sounds fantastic , doesn ’ t it ?
Especially when it is realized that there are about one and one-half billion of my kind produced in the U.S.A. each year .
Pick me up and look me over .
What do you see ?
Not much meets the eye—there ’ s some wood , lacquer , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit of metal , and an eraser .
Just as you can not trace your family tree back very far , so is it impossible for me to name and explain all my antecedents .
But I would like to suggest enough of them to impress upon you the richness and complexity of my background .
My family tree begins with what in fact is a tree , a cedar of straight grain that grows in Northern California and Oregon .
Now contemplate all the saws and trucks and rope and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carting the cedar logs to the railroad siding .
Think of all the persons and the numberless skills that went into their fabrication : the mining of ore , the making of steel and its refinement into saws , axes , motors ; the growing of hemp and bringing it through all the stages to heavy and strong rope ; the logging camps with their beds and mess halls , the cookery and the raising of all the foods .
Why , untold thousands of persons had a hand in every cup of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are shipped to a mill in San Leandro , California .
Can you imagine the individuals who make flat cars and rails and railroad engines and who construct and install the communication systems incidental thereto ?
These legions are among my antecedents .
Consider the millwork in San Leandro .
The cedar logs are cut into small , pencil-length slats less than one-fourth of an inch in thickness .
These are kiln dried and then tinted for the same reason women put rouge on their faces .
People prefer that I look pretty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slats are waxed and kiln dried again .
How many skills went into the making of the tint and the kilns , into supplying the heat , the light and power , the belts , motors , and all the other things a mill requires ?
Sweepers in the mill among my ancestors ?
Yes , and included are the men who poured the concrete for the dam of a Pacific Gas & Electric Company hydroplant which supplies the mill ’ s power !
Don ’ t overlook the ancestors present and distant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carloads of slats across the nation .
Once in the pencil factory— $ 4,000,000 in machinery and building , all capital accumulated by thrifty and saving parents of mine—each slat is given eight grooves by a complex machine , after which another machine lays leads in every other slat , applies glue , and places another slat atop—a lead sandwich , so to speak .
Seven brothers and I are mechanically carved from this “ wood-clinched ” sandwich .
My “ lead ” itself—it contains no lead at all—is complex .
The graphite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] .
Consider these miners and those who make their many tools and the makers of the paper sacks in which the graphite is shipped and those who make the string that ties the sacks and those who put them aboard ships and those who make the ships .
Even the lighthouse keepers along the way assisted in my birth—and the harbor pilots .
The graphite is mixed with clay from Mississippi in which ammonium hydroxide is used in the refining process .
Then wetting agents are added such as sulfonated tallow—animal fats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passing through numerous machines , the mixture finally appears as endless extrusions—as from a sausage grinder—cut to size , dried , and baked for several hours at 1,850 degrees Fahrenheit .
To increase their strength and smoothness the leads are then treated with a hot mixture which includes candelilla wax from Mexico , paraffin wax , and hydrogenated natural fats .
My cedar receives six coats of lacquer .
Do you know all the ingredients of lacquer ?
Who would think that the growers of castor beans and the refiners of castor oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are .
Why , even the processes by which the lacquer is made a beautiful yellow involve the skills of more persons than one can enumerate !
Observe the labeling .
That ’ s a film formed by applying heat to carbon black mixed with resins .
How do you make resins and what , pray , is carbon black ?
My bit of metal—the ferrule—is brass .
Think of all the persons who mine zinc and copper and those who have the skills to make shiny sheet brass from these products of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ferrule are black nickel .
What is black nickel and how is it applied ?
The complete story of why the center of my ferrule has no black nickel on it would take pages to explain .
Then there ’ s my crowning glory , inelegantly referred to in the trade as “ the plug , ” the part man uses to erase the errors he makes with me .
An ingredient called “ factice ” is what does the erasing .
It is a rubber-like product made by reacting rapeseed oil from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with sulfur chloride .
Rubber , contrary to the common notion , is only for binding purposes .
Then , too , there are numerous vulcanizing and accelerating agents .
The pumice comes from Italy ; and the pigment which gives “ the plug ” its color is cadmium sulfide .
No One Knows Does anyone wish to challenge my earlier assertion that no single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me ?
Actually , millions of human beings have had a hand in my creation , no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very few of the others .
Now , you may say that I go too far in relating the picker of a coffee berry in far-off Brazil and food growers elsewhere to my creation ; that this is an extreme position .
I shall stand by my claim .
There isn ’ t a single person in all these millions , including the president of the pencil company , who contributes more than a tiny , infinitesimal bit of know-how .
From the standpoint of know-how the only difference between the miner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Oregon is in the type of know-how .
Neither the miner nor the logger can be dispensed with , any more than can the chemist at the factory or the worker in the oil field—paraffin being a by-product of petroleum .
Here is an astounding fact : Neither the worker in the oil field nor the chemist nor the digger of graphite or clay nor any who mans or makes the ships or trains or trucks nor the one who runs the machine that does the knurling on my bit of metal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his singular task because he wants me .
Each one wants me less , perhaps , than does a child in the first grade .
Indeed , there are some among this vast multitude who never saw a pencil nor would they know how to use one .
Their motivation is other than me .
Perhaps it is something like this : Each of these millions sees that he can thus exchange his tiny know-how for the goods and services he needs or wants .
I may or may not be among these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more astounding : The absence of a master mind , of anyone dictating or forcibly directing these countless actions which bring me into being .
No trace of such a person can be found .
Instead , we find the Invisible Hand at work .
This is the mystery to which I earlier referred .
It has been said that “ only God can make a tree.
” Why do we agree with this ?
Isn ’ t it because we realize that we ourselves could not make one ?
Indeed , can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can not , except in superficial terms .
We can say , for instance , that a certain molecular configuration manifests itself as a tree .
But what mind is there among men that could even record , let alone direct , the constant changes in molecules that transpire in the life span of a tree ?
Such a feat is utterly unthinkable !
I , Pencil , am a complex combination of miracles : a tree , zinc , copper , graphite , and so on .
But to these miracles which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extraordinary miracle has been added : the configuration of creative human energies—millions of tiny know-hows configurating naturally and spontaneously in response to human necessity and desire and in the absence of any human masterminding !
Since only God can make a tree , I insist that only God could make me .
Man can no more direct these millions of know-hows to bring me into being than he can put molecules together to create a tree .
The above is what I meant when writing , “ If you can become aware of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing.
” For , if one is aware that these know-hows will naturally , yes , automatically , arrange themselves into creative and productive patterns in response to human necessity and demand— that is , in the absence of governmental or any other coercive master-minding—then one will possess an absolutely essential ingredient for freedom : a faith in free people .
Freedom is impossible without this faith .
Once government has had a monopoly of a creative activity such , for instance , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals will believe that the mails could not be efficiently delivered by men acting freely .
And here is the reason : Each one acknowledges that he himself doesn ’ t know how to do all the things incident to mail delivery .
He also recognizes that no other individual could do it .
These assumptions are correct .
No individual possesses enough know-how to perform a nation ’ s mail delivery any more than any individual possesses enough know-how to make a pencil .
Now , in the absence of faith in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tiny know-hows would naturally and miraculously form and cooperate to satisfy this necessity—the individual can not help but reach the erroneous conclusion that mail can be delivered only by governmental “ masterminding.
” If I , Pencil , were the only item that could offer testimony on what men and women can accomplish when free to try , then those with little faith would have a fair case .
However , there is testimony galore ; it ’ s all about us and on every hand .
Mail delivery is exceedingly simple when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making of an automobile or a calculating machine or a grain combine or a milling machine or to tens of thousands of other things .
Delivery ?
Why , in this area where men have been left free to try , they deliver the human voice around the world in less than one second ; they deliver an event visually and in motion to any person ’ s home when it is happening ; they deliver 150 passengers from Seattle to Baltimore in less than four hours ; they deliver gas from Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in New York at unbelievably low rates and without subsidy ; they deliver each four pounds of oil from the Persian Gulf to our Eastern Seaboard—halfway around the world—for less money than the government charges for delivering a one-ounce letter across the street !
The lesson I have to teach is this : Leave all creative energies uninhibited .
Merely organize society to act in harmony with this lesson .
Let society ’ s legal apparatus remove all obstacles the best it can .
Permit these creative know-hows freely to flow .
Have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to the Invisible Hand .
This faith will be confirmed .
I , Pencil , seemingly simple though I am , offer the miracle of my creation as testimony that this is a practical faith , as practical as the sun , the rain , a cedar tree , the good earth .
Leonard Read ’ s delightful story , “ I , Pencil , ” has become a classic , and deservedly so .
I know of no other piece of literature that so succinctly , persuasively , and effectively illustrates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s invisible hand—the possibility of cooperation without coercion—and Friedrich Hayek ’ s emphasis on the importance of dispersed knowledge and the role of the price system in communicating information that “ will make the individuals do the desirable things without anyone having to tell them what to do.
” We used Leonard ’ s story in our television show , “ Free to Choose , ” and in the accompanying book of the same title to illustrate “ the power of the market ” ( the title of both the first segment of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the book ) .
We summarized the story and then went on to say : “ None of the thousands of persons involved in producing the pencil performed his task because he wanted a pencil .
Some among them never saw a pencil and would not know what it is for .
Each saw his work as a way to get the goods and services he wanted—goods and services we produced in order to get the pencil we wanted .
Every time we go to the store and buy a pencil , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our services for the infinitesimal amount of services that each of the thousands contributed toward producing the pencil .
“ It is even more astounding that the pencil was ever produced .
No one sitting in a central office gave orders to these thousands of people .
No military police enforced the orders that were not given .
These people live in many lands , speak different languages , practice different religions , may even hate one another—yet none of these differences prevented them from cooperating to produce a pencil .
How did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the answer two hundred years ago.
” “ I , Pencil ” is a typical Leonard Read product : imaginative , simple yet subtle , breathing the love of freedom that imbued everything Leonard wrote or did .
As in the rest of his work , he was not trying to tell people what to do or how to conduct themselves .
He was simply trying to enhance individuals ’ understanding of themselves and of the system they live in .
That was his basic credo and one that he stuck to consistently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public—not public service in the sense of government service .
Whatever the pressure , he stuck to his guns , refusing to compromise his principles .
That was why he was so effective in keeping alive , in the early days , and then spreading the basic idea that human freedom required private property , free competition , and severely limited government .

Coronavirus policymakers take heed. Every dollar you spend, no matter how trivial, has an economic multiplier effect. In a free market economy that power is tremendous. When we withdraw from the marketplace, a reverse multiplier takes hold with a strangling grip. Buy a pencil and watch your dollar multiply. Classic:
I am a lead pencil—the ordinary wooden pencil familiar to all boys and girls and adults who can read and write.
Writing is both my vocation and my avocation; that’s all I do.
You may wonder why I should write a genealogy. Well, to begin with, my story is interesting. And, next, I am a mystery —more so than a tree or a sunset or even a flash of lightning. But, sadly, I am taken for granted by those who use me, as if I were a mere incident and without background. This supercilious attitude relegates me to the level of the commonplace. This is a species of the grievous error in which mankind cannot too long persist without peril. For, the wise G. K. Chesterton observed, “We are perishing for want of wonder, not for want of wonders.”
I, Pencil, simple though I appear to be, merit your wonder and awe, a claim I shall attempt to prove. In fact, if you can understand me—no, that’s too much to ask of anyone—if you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing. I have a profound lesson to teach. And I can teach this lesson better than can an automobile or an airplane or a mechanical dishwasher because—well, because I am seemingly so simple.
Simple? Yet, not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me. This sounds fantastic, doesn’t it? Especially when it is realized that there are about one and one-half billion of my kind produced in the U.S.A. each year.
Pick me up and look me over. What do you see? Not much meets the eye—there’s some wood, lacquer, the printed labeling, graphite lead, a bit of metal, and an eraser.
Innumerable Antecedents
Just as you cannot trace your family tree back very far, so is it impossible for me to name and explain all my antecedents. But I would like to suggest enough of them to impress upon you the richness and complexity of my background.
My family tree begins with what in fact is a tree, a cedar of straight grain that grows in Northern California and Oregon. Now contemplate all the saws and trucks and rope and the countless other gear used in harvesting and carting the cedar logs to the railroad siding. Think of all the persons and the numberless skills that went into their fabrication: the mining of ore, the making of steel and its refinement into saws, axes, motors; the growing of hemp and bringing it through all the stages to heavy and strong rope; the logging camps with their beds and mess halls, the cookery and the raising of all the foods. Why, untold thousands of persons had a hand in every cup of coffee the loggers drink!
The logs are shipped to a mill in San Leandro, California. Can you imagine the individuals who make flat cars and rails and railroad engines and who construct and install the communication systems incidental thereto? These legions are among my antecedents.
Consider the millwork in San Leandro. The cedar logs are cut into small, pencil-length slats less than one-fourth of an inch in thickness. These are kiln dried and then tinted for the same reason women put rouge on their faces. People prefer that I look pretty, not a pallid white. The slats are waxed and kiln dried again. How many skills went into the making of the tint and the kilns, into supplying the heat, the light and power, the belts, motors, and all the other things a mill requires? Sweepers in the mill among my ancestors? Yes, and included are the men who poured the concrete for the dam of a Pacific Gas & Electric Company hydroplant which supplies the mill’s power!
Don’t overlook the ancestors present and distant who have a hand in transporting sixty carloads of slats across the nation.
Once in the pencil factory—$4,000,000 in machinery and building, all capital accumulated by thrifty and saving parents of mine—each slat is given eight grooves by a complex machine, after which another machine lays leads in every other slat, applies glue, and places another slat atop—a lead sandwich, so to speak. Seven brothers and I are mechanically carved from this “wood-clinched” sandwich.
My “lead” itself—it contains no lead at all—is complex. The graphite is mined in Ceylon [Sri Lanka]. Consider these miners and those who make their many tools and the makers of the paper sacks in which the graphite is shipped and those who make the string that ties the sacks and those who put them aboard ships and those who make the ships. Even the lighthouse keepers along the way assisted in my birth—and the harbor pilots.
The graphite is mixed with clay from Mississippi in which ammonium hydroxide is used in the refining process. Then wetting agents are added such as sulfonated tallow—animal fats chemically reacted with sulfuric acid. After passing through numerous machines, the mixture finally appears as endless extrusions—as from a sausage grinder—cut to size, dried, and baked for several hours at 1,850 degrees Fahrenheit. To increase their strength and smoothness the leads are then treated with a hot mixture which includes candelilla wax from Mexico, paraffin wax, and hydrogenated natural fats.
My cedar receives six coats of lacquer. Do you know all the ingredients of lacquer? Who would think that the growers of castor beans and the refiners of castor oil are a part of it? They are. Why, even the processes by which the lacquer is made a beautiful yellow involve the skills of more persons than one can enumerate!
Observe the labeling. That’s a film formed by applying heat to carbon black mixed with resins. How do you make resins and what, pray, is carbon black?
My bit of metal—the ferrule—is brass. Think of all the persons who mine zinc and copper and those who have the skills to make shiny sheet brass from these products of nature. Those black rings on my ferrule are black nickel. What is black nickel and how is it applied? The complete story of why the center of my ferrule has no black nickel on it would take pages to explain.
Then there’s my crowning glory, inelegantly referred to in the trade as “the plug,” the part man uses to erase the errors he makes with me. An ingredient called “factice” is what does the erasing. It is a rubber-like product made by reacting rapeseed oil from the Dutch East Indies [Indonesia] with sulfur chloride. Rubber, contrary to the common notion, is only for binding purposes. Then, too, there are numerous vulcanizing and accelerating agents. The pumice comes from Italy; and the pigment which gives “the plug” its color is cadmium sulfide.
No One Knows
Does anyone wish to challenge my earlier assertion that no single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me?
Actually, millions of human beings have had a hand in my creation, no one of whom even knows more than a very few of the others. Now, you may say that I go too far in relating the picker of a coffee berry in far-off Brazil and food growers elsewhere to my creation; that this is an extreme position. I shall stand by my claim. There isn’t a single person in all these millions, including the president of the pencil company, who contributes more than a tiny, infinitesimal bit of know-how. From the standpoint of know-how the only difference between the miner of graphite in Ceylon and the logger in Oregon is in the type of know-how. Neither the miner nor the logger can be dispensed with, any more than can the chemist at the factory or the worker in the oil field—paraffin being a by-product of petroleum.
Here is an astounding fact: Neither the worker in the oil field nor the chemist nor the digger of graphite or clay nor any who mans or makes the ships or trains or trucks nor the one who runs the machine that does the knurling on my bit of metal nor the president of the company performs his singular task because he wants me. Each one wants me less, perhaps, than does a child in the first grade. Indeed, there are some among this vast multitude who never saw a pencil nor would they know how to use one. Their motivation is other than me. Perhaps it is something like this: Each of these millions sees that he can thus exchange his tiny know-how for the goods and services he needs or wants. I may or may not be among these items.
No Master Mind
There is a fact still more astounding: The absence of a master mind, of anyone dictating or forcibly directing these countless actions which bring me into being. No trace of such a person can be found. Instead, we find the Invisible Hand at work. This is the mystery to which I earlier referred.
It has been said that “only God can make a tree.” Why do we agree with this? Isn’t it because we realize that we ourselves could not make one? Indeed, can we even describe a tree? We cannot, except in superficial terms. We can say, for instance, that a certain molecular configuration manifests itself as a tree. But what mind is there among men that could even record, let alone direct, the constant changes in molecules that transpire in the life span of a tree? Such a feat is utterly unthinkable!
I, Pencil, am a complex combination of miracles: a tree, zinc, copper, graphite, and so on. But to these miracles which manifest themselves in Nature an even more extraordinary miracle has been added: the configuration of creative human energies—millions of tiny know-hows configurating naturally and spontaneously in response to human necessity and desire and in the absence of any human masterminding! Since only God can make a tree, I insist that only God could make me. Man can no more direct these millions of know-hows to bring me into being than he can put molecules together to create a tree.
The above is what I meant when writing, “If you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing.” For, if one is aware that these know-hows will naturally, yes, automatically, arrange themselves into creative and productive patterns in response to human necessity and demand— that is, in the absence of governmental or any other coercive master-minding—then one will possess an absolutely essential ingredient for freedom: a faith in free people. Freedom is impossible without this faith.
Once government has had a monopoly of a creative activity such, for instance, as the delivery of the mails, most individuals will believe that the mails could not be efficiently delivered by men acting freely. And here is the reason: Each one acknowledges that he himself doesn’t know how to do all the things incident to mail delivery. He also recognizes that no other individual could do it. These assumptions are correct. No individual possesses enough know-how to perform a nation’s mail delivery any more than any individual possesses enough know-how to make a pencil. Now, in the absence of faith in free people—in the unawareness that millions of tiny know-hows would naturally and miraculously form and cooperate to satisfy this necessity—the individual cannot help but reach the erroneous conclusion that mail can be delivered only by governmental “masterminding.”
Testimony Galore
If I, Pencil, were the only item that could offer testimony on what men and women can accomplish when free to try, then those with little faith would have a fair case. However, there is testimony galore; it’s all about us and on every hand. Mail delivery is exceedingly simple when compared, for instance, to the making of an automobile or a calculating machine or a grain combine or a milling machine or to tens of thousands of other things. Delivery? Why, in this area where men have been left free to try, they deliver the human voice around the world in less than one second; they deliver an event visually and in motion to any person’s home when it is happening; they deliver 150 passengers from Seattle to Baltimore in less than four hours; they deliver gas from Texas to one’s range or furnace in New York at unbelievably low rates and without subsidy; they deliver each four pounds of oil from the Persian Gulf to our Eastern Seaboard—halfway around the world—for less money than the government charges for delivering a one-ounce letter across the street!
The lesson I have to teach is this: Leave all creative energies uninhibited. Merely organize society to act in harmony with this lesson. Let society’s legal apparatus remove all obstacles the best it can. Permit these creative know-hows freely to flow. Have faith that free men and women will respond to the Invisible Hand. This faith will be confirmed. I, Pencil, seemingly simple though I am, offer the miracle of my creation as testimony that this is a practical faith, as practical as the sun, the rain, a cedar tree, the good earth.
***
Afterword
By Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, 1976
Leonard Read’s delightful story, “I, Pencil,” has become a classic, and deservedly so. I know of no other piece of literature that so succinctly, persuasively, and effectively illustrates the meaning of both Adam Smith’s invisible hand—the possibility of cooperation without coercion—and Friedrich Hayek’s emphasis on the importance of dispersed knowledge and the role of the price system in communicating information that “will make the individuals do the desirable things without anyone having to tell them what to do.”
We used Leonard’s story in our television show, “Free to Choose,” and in the accompanying book of the same title to illustrate “the power of the market” (the title of both the first segment of the TV show and of chapter one of the book). We summarized the story and then went on to say:
“None of the thousands of persons involved in producing the pencil performed his task because he wanted a pencil. Some among them never saw a pencil and would not know what it is for. Each saw his work as a way to get the goods and services he wanted—goods and services we produced in order to get the pencil we wanted. Every time we go to the store and buy a pencil, we are exchanging a little bit of our services for the infinitesimal amount of services that each of the thousands contributed toward producing the pencil.
“It is even more astounding that the pencil was ever produced. No one sitting in a central office gave orders to these thousands of people. No military police enforced the orders that were not given. These people live in many lands, speak different languages, practice different religions, may even hate one another—yet none of these differences prevented them from cooperating to produce a pencil. How did it happen? Adam Smith gave us the answer two hundred years ago.”
“I, Pencil” is a typical Leonard Read product: imaginative, simple yet subtle, breathing the love of freedom that imbued everything Leonard wrote or did. As in the rest of his work, he was not trying to tell people what to do or how to conduct themselves. He was simply trying to enhance individuals’ understanding of themselves and of the system they live in.
That was his basic credo and one that he stuck to consistently during his long period of service to the public—not public service in the sense of government service. Whatever the pressure, he stuck to his guns, refusing to compromise his principles. That was why he was so effective in keeping alive, in the early days, and then spreading the basic idea that human freedom required private property, free competition, and severely limited government.
This timeless classic originally appeared at FEE