Middle River Dispatches

A gumbo of fly-fishing, conservation, politics and days afield, for what it is worth....

Bristol Bay / Pebble Mine – Permit Application Denied

By

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers let science and common sense prevail over politics.

On Nov. 25, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) notified the Pebble Limited Partnership and the public that they had denied the application for the permit for the Pebble Mine project. The Corps said the project would not comply with the Clean Water Act and would be “contrary to the public interest.” The record of decision goes into the details of why they made the decision they did.

This is excellent news and a possible fatal wound to the Pebble project. Given the history of the project, one has to wonder whether any investors would be willing to finance this project.

The Corps also provided a memo for the record summarizing their findings for the compensatory mitigation plan. The memo listed nine elements required to be included in a complete compensatory mitigation plan. The plan submitted by Pebble was found to be noncompliant with all nine elements. You can download and read the Corps memo here.

Following the announcement, U.S. Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan issued a joint statement. Murkowski said:

After years of review and analysis, the Army Corps has found that this project is ‘contrary to the public interest,’ ending consideration of its permit application and affirming that this is the wrong mine in the wrong place. I thank the agency and the broader Trump administration for completing a rigorous, impartial, and science-based process to determine the best course of action. This is the right decision, reached the right way. It should validate our trust and faith in the well-established permitting process used to advance resource development projects throughout Alaska. It will help ensure the continued protection of an irreplaceable resource – Bristol Bay’s world-class salmon fishery – and I hope it also marks the start of a more collaborative effort within the state to develop a sustainable vision for the region.

Sullivan said:

I welcome the Army Corps’ Record of Decision to deny the permit. The Pebble Limited Partnership had its opportunity to present a project that could meet the high environmental standards in Alaska that we demand. Today, the Army Corps has made the correct decision, based on an extensive record and the law, that the project cannot and should not be permitted. Resource development is one of the key industries that drives Alaska’s economy and provides thousands of hard-working Alaskans with good-paying jobs and opportunity for the future. I will continue to be a strong advocate for these resource-development jobs and economic opportunities in our state. However, given the special nature of the Bristol Bay watershed and the fisheries and subsistence resources downstream, Pebble had to meet a high bar so that we do not trade one resource for another. As I have been saying since August, Pebble did not meet that bar and, accordingly, the Corps rightly denied the permit. Throughout this process, I’ve emphasized to senior federal officials and Alaskans that this decision needed to be based on science and data, not politics. I want to thank the Army Corps and the Trump administration for acting accordingly, giving this permit a fair hearing through the regular process, and ultimately following the law and the record to deny the permit.

The Pebble Partnership CEO, John Shively, issued the following statement regarding the decision by the Corps, referred to in the statement as USACE, to deny a permit for the Pebble project:

We are obviously dismayed by today’s news given that the USACE had published an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in July that clearly stated the project could successfully co-exist with the fishery and would have provided substantial economic benefit to the communities closest to the deposit. One of the real tragedies of this decision is the loss of economic opportunities for people living in the area. The EIS clearly describes those benefits, and now a politically driven decision has taken away the hope that many had for a better life. This is also a lost opportunity for the state’s future economy – especially at a time when Alaska is seeing record job losses from the impacts associated with Covid.

The Pebble Deposit contains minerals such as copper that are in the national interest as they will be necessary to support the nation’s transition to more renewable sources of energy and a lower carbon future. President-elect Biden has stated that increasing domestic copper production will be an important step in meeting these goals.

Since the beginning of the federal review, our team has worked closely with the USACE staff to understand their requirements for responsibly developing the project including changing the transportation corridor and re-vamping the approach to wetlands mitigation. All of these efforts led to a comprehensive, positive EIS for the project that clearly stated it could be developed responsibly. It is very disconcerting to see political influence in this process at the eleventh hour.

For now, we will focus on sorting out next steps for the project including an appeal of the decision by the USACE.

It’s pretty rich of Shively to cry political influence at this point, given all we know about Pebble’s actions around this project. We will have to wait and see what they do after sorting out the next steps.

In their joint statement, Senators Murkowski and Sullivan made it clear they support the Army Corps’ decision to deny the permit. Should Pebble try and resurrect this project, their statements of opposition will be put to the test.

There is good reason to believe this project will not happen. Still, history has shown that the backers are seemingly relentless in their desire to push forward. We will continue to watch closely and keep you informed.

Note: This article also appeared on the Marine Fish Conservation’s blog.

Bristol Bay / Pebble Mine – Murkowski Appropriations Statement

By

There continues to be a fair amount of discussion about the fate of the Pebble mine. One development worth looking at carefully is the statement Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, who chairs the Senate’s Interior Appropriations committee, included with the committee’s bill.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2021
SUMMARY OF BILL

Protection of Resources in Bristol Bay, Alaska.—The Committee continues to monitor the Federal permitting process for the proposed Pebble mine project in southwest Alaska, including the efforts of the Department of the Interior, EPA, and independent subject matter experts to help protect the world-class ecosystem and salmon fishery in the Bristol Bay region from unavoidable adverse impacts. The Committee concurs with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ [Corps] assessment of August 24, 2020, that ‘‘the project, as proposed, cannot be permitted under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act’’ and appreciates the administration’s commitment to a decision guided by sound science.

The Committee notes that on August 20, 2020, the Corps separately sent a letter to the Pebble Limited Partnership outlining mitigation requirements for the project. The Corps requested a mitigation plan within 90 days that addresses both in-kind and compensatory requirements, which the Committee believes set an appropriately high bar for this unique project. In the absence of a valid mitigation plan that has received all necessary approvals at the Federal and State levels, the Committee urges the agencies to continue to withhold the applicant’s Clean Water Act permit.

If the Pebble Limited Partnership is unable to provide a full and functional compensatory mitigation plan that meets all requirements within the Corps’ requested 90-day timeframe, the Committee encourages the agencies to proceed to a decision denying the permit for the project.

Reaction from the folks who work on this issue day-to- day were not especially laudatory of the action.

I think if we would’ve seen something that essentially recommended no spending be allowed in the next fiscal year to move forward with the Pebble project, that would’ve been a little more reassuring. But this doesn’t do that,” Bristol said. “It just seems to sort of describe the situation as it is right now.”

Tim Bristol, executive director of SalmonState

According to an Associated Press report, Murkowski spokeswoman Karina Borger said the senator wanted the Corps to know it must hold the mitigation plan to a high standard and Pebble should end the process if the requirements cannot be met.

The language is a clear shot across the bow of the EPA. Hopefully, with the election behind us the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will let science rather than politics drive the decision. But if you are following the news you know anything could happen and the administration may decide to flip off the myriad interests who oppose this project.

We will have to wait and see what the Corps decides to do with Pebble’s mitigation plan. The people I talk to say the bar set by Corps is almost impossible to meet. If the Corps accepts it, and it doesn’t “provide a full and functional compensatory mitigation plan that meets all requirements” the ball will be in Senator Murkowski’s court.

Time will tell. In the meantime it can’t hurt to send a message to Senator Murkowski.

Sources:
https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/press/release/murkowski-unveils-interior-environment-bill-
https://apnews.com/article/alaska-bills-lisa-murkowski-appropriations-5199732752e804c15e0c0b8854171e2d
https://www.alaskapublic.org/2020/11/10/murkowskis-latest-pebble-action-disappoints-mine-opponents/

Alaska’s “Salmon Forest” is in Jeopardy

By Leave a Comment

Removing Roadless Protections for the Tongass National Forest is a Mistake

In late October, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) issued a final rule and record of decision exempting Alaska’s Tongass National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule (2001 Roadless Rule). The 2001 Roadless Rule prohibited timber harvest and road construction in designated inventoried roadless areas within our national forests. The Administration’s action removes protection of approximately 9.4 million acres of the 16.9 million acre Tongass National Forest – thus making more than half of the Tongass available for logging and other resource development. Additionally, it would bring 188,000 acres of old growth forest to the table that was safeguarded by the roadless rule within the 2016 Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

The Tongass National Forest is the largest national forest in the U.S., the world’s largest intact temperate rainforest, and a bulwark against climate change. It holds some of the largest old growth trees in the world, watersheds that provide clean drinking water, essential wildlife habitat, and outstanding outdoor recreation opportunities that should be kept safe for generations to come.

The Tongass is part of the fabric of Alaskan culture and raises more salmon – including all five of North America’s Pacific salmon species – than all other national forests combined. If you are an angler, commercial fisherman, or care about fish, that is a big deal. The fishing and tourism industry that relies on the Tongass accounts for more than 25 percent of local jobs in the region.

By comparison, timber harvesting provides one percent of southeastern Alaska’s jobs, compared with seafood processing’s eight percent and tourism’s 17 percent. A report recently released by Taxpayers for Common Sense documented 40 years of money-losing timber sales in the Tongass National Forest. Its report notes:

Since fiscal year 1980, the USFS has lost approximately $1.7 billion or $44 million per year on average. USFS could end up losing nearly $190 million in the Tongass over the next five years from planned sales, and more if currently roadless areas are opened to logging.

Since this is federal land owned by all Americans, not only will U.S. taxpayers foot the bill, but most of the timber would also go overseas to China. In an opinion piece published in July in the Washington Times, Ed Rollins, longtime Republican campaign consultant and current chairman of the Great America PAC, wrote, “The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) is on the verge of determining whether public lands are managed for the benefit of Americans or for Chinese economic interests.” He continues:

When you break it down at the simplest level, American taxpayers are paying for the economic benefits of China — and they aren’t happy about it. And the Forest Service proposal to drop roadless area protections on the Tongass will only exacerbate the problem.

Commercial fishing is also foundational to Alaska’s economy. The Tongass is home to the world’s largest salmon population. Linda Behnken, executive director of the Alaska Longline Fishermen’s Association, said:

The Tongass National Forest is the largest and most extensive temperate rainforest in the world. It is also Southeast Alaska’s SeaBank. That SeaBank supports the southeast economy with annual dividends in seafood, recreation, wildlife, water and forest products. The dividends and values from SeaBank are paid annually, provided we safeguard the natural capital of the forest. The global ecosystem service values annually provided by the Tongass are between $125-145 trillion. That value increases every year as climate change raises the stakes on carbon sequestration and intact, functioning ecosystems. Why would we risk the forest for the trees? The roadless rule is critical to protecting the Tongass SeaBank for future generations.

Austin Williams, director of law and policy for Trout Unlimited in Alaska, writing on Trout Unlimited’s blog, noted the economic importance and the public’s support to roadless protections:

This is the latest effort by politicians catering to a failing old-growth logging industry that refuses to adapt to the changing global economy, fails to recognize the Tongass is much more valuable for its wild salmon than as a source of timber for foreign markets, and that persists only because of massive government subsidy. With any luck, this shortsighted decision won’t be on the books for long.

More than 96% of public comments on this proposed decision favored keeping the roadless rule in place. In some Alaska communities, every single comment submitted to the Forest Service wanted roadless areas protected. Tribes, small-business owners, hunters and anglers, subsistence users, scientists, and people from all walks of life spoke up in favor of fish, wildlife, beautiful scenery, and for putting an end to unsustainable clear-cut logging of our best remaining old-growth forest.

Hunters, anglers and outdoor enthusiasts have been vocal proponents of conserving Alaska’s roadless treasures. With their large populations of game and healthy fisheries, these public lands and waters are essential for Alaska’s outdoor economy. Land Tawney, president and CEO of the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, calls upon the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the USFS, to consider other users of the public lands:

The backcountry habitat found in the Tongass is quite simply irreplaceable, a jewel in the crowning achievement that is our national forests system, and we as a nation will be poorer if we suffer its loss and weaken conservation standards for our roadless areas. U.S. roadless areas play a crucial role in the health of our big game populations, our iconic fisheries and our opportunities to find adventure and solace on our public lands. Together, sportsmen and women urge Secretary [of Agriculture] Sonny Perdue to listen to Alaskans, to hunters and anglers, to the business owners and community members who have overwhelmingly spoken up, again and again, for conservation of the Tongass.

While public lands issues may seem far afield from federal fisheries policy, everything in nature is interconnected. In fact, the Tongass and the roadless rule are not new issues for the Network’s leadership. Our executive director, Rob Vandermark, said:

In the years before joining the Network, both deputy director Tom Sadler and I worked to safeguard our national forests and the habitat they provide through the roadless rule. I’ve had the opportunity to spend much time in the Tongass and experienced its majesty – it is a natural treasure. There are a myriad of vital reasons to uphold these protections, not the least of which is the cultural and economic importance to the Network’s members, supporters and constituents. This action is contrary to President Teddy Roosevelt’s vision for the creation of our national forest system. I hope the incoming Biden Administration or Congress will quickly right this wrong.

The Network will continue to follow developments surrounding this issue and share updates as they become available.

Editors note: This article originally appeared on the Marine Fish Conservation Network’s “From the Waterfront” blog.

Bristol Bay/Pebble Mine – Mitigation Plan Filed.

By Leave a Comment

My friends at SalmonState put out an update last week. The mitigation plan has not been released to the public yet and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can take their time about making a decision. Some folks think the current administration will still do the right thing. I’m skeptical, but will be delighted to be proven wrong.

SalmonState: Pebble’s mitigation plan inherently flawed; veto only way to defend Bristol Bay

Anchorage, AK—Northern Dynasty Minerals, the parent company of the Pebble Limited Partnership, announced today [Nov. 16] that it has submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers the mitigation plan it hopes will allow its proposed open pit mine and toxic dump at the headwaters of Bristol Bay, Alaska to move forward. Bristol Bay is the planet’s greatest sockeye salmon run and has provided more than half the world’s sockeye salmon catch in recent years. Despite that, the area remains unprotected from destructive mining impacts. 

“You cannot ‘mitigate’ your way out of a toxic 200-year megamine at the headwaters of the world’s most important wild salmon habitat, which is pristine. This ‘plan’ is a continuation of a crooked process full of off-the-record, back-room deal conversations between the Pebble Limited Partnership, the Alaska District of the Army Corps of Engineers, politicians and political appointees,” said SalmonState executive director Tim Bristol. “The only way to defend the incomparable salmon resource of Bristol Bay — and to ensure fishermen, Tribes and Alaskans aren’t dragged through this rubber stamp ‘process’ all over again — is for the EPA to immediately veto the permit application through the Clean Water Act.” 

The Alaska District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a history of rubber stamping “mitigation” measures inconsistently and, at times, going against its own guidelines. It does not plan to make Pebble’s mitigation plan public until it has reviewed it and deemed it “compliant.”

Numerous independent mining experts and scientists have also identified the Final Environmental Impact Statement on which the mitigation plan is based as fatally flawed, which means the plan Pebble submitted would be grossly inadequate were mitigation even possible. 

Pebble Mine Update: What the Army Corps Did and Didn’t Do

By Leave a Comment

If you are following the saga of the proposed Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, you would be forgiven if you thought recent action by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was the death knell for the proposed mine.

On August 24, the USACE released a letter to the Pebble Limited Partnership. The U.S. Army’s press office proclaimed, “Therefore, the Corps finds that the project, as currently proposed, cannot be permitted under section 404 of the Clean Water Act.”

In reality, the USACE essentially kicked the can down the road. The letter to the Pebble Limited Partnership informed them, “As part of the [Record of Decision] the [Alaska District of the USACE] made Clean Water Act Section 404(b) (1) factual determinations that discharges at the mine site would cause unavoidable adverse impacts to aquatic resources and, preliminarily, that those adverse impacts would result in significant degradation to those aquatic resources.” The Alaska District of the USACE determined that Pebble Limited Partnership would need mitigation measures within the Koktuli River Watershed, where the mine potentially will be located, for all direct and indirect impacts on aquatic resources caused by the mine’s discharges.

The letter went on to outline the ways those damages could be mitigated:

There are three approved mechanisms for providing compensatory mitigation, which include mitigation banks, in-lieu fee programs, and permittee-responsible mitigation with preference, in that order. Your mitigation plan may include a combination of means and mechanisms but must comply with all required components of Rule and be found sufficient to offset the unavoidable adverse impacts to the aquatic resources identified above.

Some reactions critics of the project from both sides of Capitol Hill were less than laudatory of the action. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) stated :

A mitigation plan to make up for unavoidable damage from the Pebble Mine is not enough. The Final Environmental Impact Statement for Pebble Mine did not assure me the pristine Bristol Bay region of Alaska, which is home to the world’s most productive salmon fishery, supports 14,000 jobs and generates $1.5 billion of revenue annually, would be sufficiently protected. I again urge the Administration to completely veto a Clean Water Act permit for this project.

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) said :

Delaying the permit for the Pebble Mine is welcome news, but let’s be clear: the only reason this environmental atrocity came this close to happening is because the Trump administration is a favor factory for polluting industries. The previously rejected permit was revived and fast-tracked by this administration, and the only reason they finally hit the pause button is because – thankfully – some individuals close to President Trump made a personal appeal. We can welcome the outcome, but let’s not confuse any of this with environmental stewardship or good government.

This letter did not come as a surprise to the Pebble Limited Partnership. The company responded:

The letter we received today is a normal letter in the permitting process and we are well into an effort to present a mitigation plan to the USACE that complies with the requirements of their letter. A clear reading of the letter shows it is entirely unrelated to recent tweets about Pebble and one-sided news shows. The White House had nothing to do with the letter nor is it the show-stopper described by several in the news media over the weekend.

Now that dust has settled, let’s take a look at the facts included in the Corps’s letter, which should send chills down the spine of anyone who still thinks it is a good idea to permit this mine.

The letter tells us what is at stake:

Therefore, the District has determined that in-kind compensatory mitigation within the Koktuli River Watershed will be required to compensate for all direct and indirect impacts caused by discharges into aquatic resources at the mine site. Direct and indirect impacts at the mine site total 2,825 acres of wetlands, 132.5 acres of open waters, and 129.5 miles of streams.

The District has also determined that compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts to aquatic resources from discharges associated with the transportation corridor and the port site. Direct and indirect impacts associated with the transportation corridor and port site total 460 acres of wetlands, 231.7 acres of open waters, and 55.5 miles of streams.

Let me help you with the math. Here are the totals for what’s at risk:

  • 3,285 acres of wetlands
  • 364 acres of open waters
  • 185 miles of streams

So somewhere, somehow, the Pebble Limited Partnership is going to mitigate all that damage. As they said, “We will share more details of our initial plan as they become more defined.”

They have until November 20 to do that, although they seem to think it may happen sooner. “Based on our understanding of the substance of the letter, our discussions with the state, our substantial work in the field and our discussions with the USACE we believe our final Comprehensive Management Plan submission will be submitted within weeks and will satisfy all of the requirements of the letter.”

We shall see.

Here’s the rub. Bristol Bay is unique. How will that uniqueness be mitigated? How do you mitigate the loss of the world’s best salmon run?

On August 31, a letter from Representatives Huffman and Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and signed by 31 of their colleagues to EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler, made the point, “There is no level of compensatory mitigation that would be sufficient to address the mine’s irreversible harm to the pristine environment that exists in Bristol Bay.”

The letter went on to ask “that the EPA exercise its authority under the Clean Water Act and oppose the flawed Environmental Impact Statement.”

Let’s hope the administration comes to realize that, as the late Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska said, “This is the wrong mine in the wrong place,” and vetoes the Clean Water Act permit. If the USACE and Environmental Protection Agency don’t see the light, hopeful Congress will make them feel the heat.

UPDATE (Oct 30, 2020): Tim Sohn writing in Outside Online, gives a terrific, recap, analysis and update on the state of play in Bristol Bay.
https://www.outsideonline.com/2418304/pebble-mine-tapes-election-explainer.

Your comments questions and other witty repartee are welcome around the Campfire.

Note: This article (pre update) originally appeared on the Marine Fish Conservation Network’s From the Waterfront blog.

Home Water

By Leave a Comment

Editor’s note: This article also appears in From the Waterfront, the Marine Fish Conservation Network’s blog.

Isolation, self-imposed or otherwise, provides a time for reflection. Last weekend I sat down to gather my thoughts on the current state of affairs, and here is where I landed.

First off, my days are not significantly different from my regular routine. I have been working from home for more than a decade. Conference calls, video chats, emails, etc. are all pretty routine. As a side note, dogs and children in the background of calls and video chats are a sign of life and, I would argue, a reaffirmation of life.

I have a separate room for an office, the amenities are numerous and convenient, and the commute is non-existent. My guiding side hustle has taken a beating, but I don’t rely on the income, and it has freed up time for me to get out fishing on my own. I am grateful for relaxation wherever I can find it.

All and all, I can’t complain.

In times like these, we see the best and worst of human behavior. When it comes to interacting with my fellow man, I am a bit of a social dichotomy, to be frank. By nature, I am pretty gregarious; I like to interact with people regardless of where I am and what place they occupy in the world. My parents, the Navy and my friend Jim Range all helped form that mindset. In fact, it is a yardstick I use to measure people. If you look down on the help, are rude to servers or janitors and the like, I consider you beneath contempt and no friend of mine. I’m also extremely scornful of the self-important, self-entitled and greedy.

I am fortunate that either by accident or design, I wound up working in the world of conservation advocacy. It sure didn’t start that way. Over the last 30 years or so, I have been engaged in efforts to conserve and protect our natural resources and advocate for responsible management of our lands and waters and the critters, including us, who rely on them.

With a global pandemic disrupting many daily routines, I can’t help but take comfort in the notion that the things I have fought to protect are now seen as an essential element for surviving this life-threating disruption. I am not equating nature with hospitals or holding out my work as more significant or valuable than those currently on the front lines of this crisis. I am certainly not trying to pat myself on the back. Still, I firmly believe that when the dust settles, there will be a greater appreciation for some previously underappreciated assets in our national and global infrastructure. The truth is we need nature, and we need stewards to defend against those who devalue or, worse, despoil this essential part of existence on this planet.

As a journalist, reading good writing, especially in times of strife and uncertainty, deepens my faith in the many ink-stained wretches who labor to so hard to help us see the world by written word so we may better understand what is going on in places we cannot be. I also hope we will have learned to think for ourselves and not blindly follow the things that reinforce our beliefs and tribal instincts. That we look to our better angels and metaphorically build bridges, longer tables, and appreciate the struggles of others and lend a hand when we can.

I had the opportunity to enrich my reflections by reading three items that buoyed my spirits, and I will close with those in hopes they can do the same for you.

Monte Burke writes for Forbes magazine. Burke and I share a love for fly-fishing and affection for brook trout. His article “March Madness – Finding Calm Amid Coronavirus Anxiety” in The Drake magazine was both unsettling and comforting. Burke writes of his anguish about his exodus from New York City. It is wrenching to read but includes a bit of promise:

At the last minute as my wife and I packed, just before I zipped up my duffel bag, I’d thrown in a 4-weight fly rod, a reel and a box of flies. It was, at the time, merely a symbolic gesture. It was March. The fishing in the medium-sized river in Vermont would be poor if happening at all. The gear was a rather senseless thing to bring along, seeing as we required every inch we could get in the car. But I needed one totem of normalcy, a normalcy that I now realized I had taken for granted all of my life.

Burke tells of his days with the family in self-isolation and how the fly rod and a trip to the river become a beacon of hope:

As I walked home, the sun began to ease itself behind the mountain in the distance and the breeze became more insistent. It was abundantly clear that we were in for difficult times, perhaps more difficult than we can even fathom, a cruel winter that will seem endless. I am trying to prepare myself for the worst. But I decided as I neared the house, I would also start living for the spring — whether it’s actual or metaphorical — and for all of those things I once took for granted. It may be months before we’re there. It may take a year or longer. But it will come.

Land Tawney runs the nonprofit Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Land has a warrior’s heart in the finest sense of the word. He has selflessly given of himself to the conservation cause, and he is at his best when he speaks from his heart about the outside. In an email, he wrote,

For me, a big part of keeping myself safe and healthy – mentally, physically and spiritually — comes back to the Great Outdoors. Earlier this week, I took my family to some public lands just outside of Missoula. The sun was out, the air was crisp and while there was still some snow on the ground, you could feel the onset of spring. We crumpled our local newspaper, full of virus news, and my 8-year-old son lit the fire. We roasted hot dogs and sausages over the coals and noticed the robins, chickadees and crows. Our kingdom. Our solace. It showed me once again how getting outside can help heal us – offering sustenance and a respite from the anxiety and unease in the world.

Admiral William McRaven penned an Op-Ed in The Washington Post about his SEAL training. McRaven writes,

My training class had been out of the mud for a short period of time when the instructors, looking to weed out the weak of mind and body, ordered the entire group of 55 men back into the bog. The mud consumed each man until there was nothing visible but our heads. We were all exhausted, numb from the cold and desperate to hold on. The instructors told us that we could all leave the mud — if just five men quit. It was the instructors’ way of turning us against each other.

McRaven invokes this memory to illustrate his view, one I share, that we Americans are resilient, and there is good reason for hope. He writes,

There were still eight hours to go before the sun rose — eight more hours of bone-chilling cold. Several of the students started moving to dry ground; they were ready to quit. And then, one voice began to echo through the night — one voice raised in song. The song was terribly out of tune but sung with great enthusiasm. One voice became two and two became three, and before long the entire class was singing. The instructors threatened us with more time in the mud if we kept singing, but the singing persisted. Those of us stuck in the mud believed that if one of us could start singing when he was up to his neck in mud, then maybe the rest of us could make it through the night. And we did.

McRaven believes that we will prevail, and it is time for us to start singing. I think we will if we join in that song.

Consider this an invitation.