The Middle River Group, LLC

fly fishing, conservation and politics.

Featured

Senate shines a light on press freedom

By

Today, Senator Brian Schatz put the U.S. Senate on record in defense of the Constitution, the First Amendment, freedom of the press and most importantly affirmed that the press was not the enemy of the people.

“We swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, including the First Amendment,” said Senator Schatz. “Today, every senator upheld that oath by sending a message that we support the First Amendment, and we support the freedom of the press in the face of these attacks. As Thomas Jefferson put it, ‘our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.’ ”

While Senator Schatz is from Hawaii he payed homage to James Madison and the Declaration of Rights of the Commonwealth of Virginia, “The freedom of the Press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic Governments.”

The resolution is straight forward and direct, saying “the press is not the enemy of the people” and “condemns attacks on the institution of the free press and views efforts to systematically undermine the credibility of the press as a whole as an attack on our democratic institutions.”

It is an unfortunate sign of the times that the such a statement by the U.S. Senate is needed, fortunately Sen. Schatz helped them make it and the Senate unanimously passed it.

Here is the full text of the resolution [PDF]:
Whereas the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects the press from government control and suppression;

Whereas the freedom of the press—
(1) has been recognized as integral to the democratic foundations of the United States since the beginning of the United States; and
(2) has endured and been reaffirmed repeatedly throughout the history of the United States;

Whereas Benjamin Franklin in 1722 wrote, “Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech.”

Whereas Thomas Jefferson in 1786 wrote, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

Whereas James Madison in 1789 introduced the freedom of the press in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States;

Whereas James Madison based the freedom of the press on the Declaration of Rights of the Commonwealth of Virginia, which in 1776 declared, “The freedom of the Press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic Governments.”

Whereas President Ronald Reagan proclaimed August 4, 1985, as Freedom of the Press Day, stating that “Freedom of the press is one of our most important freedoms and also one of our oldest.”

Whereas President Reagan also said, “Today, our tradition of a free press as a vital part of our democracy is as important as ever. The news media are now using modern techniques to bring our citizens information not only on a daily basis but instantaneously as important events occur. This flow of information helps make possible an informed electorate and so contributes to our national system of self-government.”

Whereas Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in International Soc. for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee, 505 U.S. 672 (1992), “The First Amendment is often inconvenient. But that is beside the point. Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech.”

Whereas the United States Supreme Court also affirmed the history and intent of the freedom of the press in New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), stating, “In the First Amendment, the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.”

Whereas tyrannical and authoritarian governments and leaders throughout history have sought to undermine, censor, suppress, and control the press to advance their undemocratic goals and actions; and

Whereas the United States, including its long-held commitment to and constitutional protection of the free press, has stood as a shining example of democracy, self-government, and freedom for the world to emulate: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, that:
(1) The Senate –
(A) affirms that the press is not the enemy of the people;
(B) reaffirms the vital and indispensable role the free press serves to inform the electorate, uncover the truth, act as a check on the inherent power of the government, further national discourse and debate, and otherwise advance our most basic and cherished democratic norms and freedoms; and
(C) condemns attacks on the institution of the free press and views efforts to systematically undermine the credibility of the press as a whole as an attack on our democratic institutions.

It is the sense of the Senate that it is the sworn responsibility of all who serve the United States by taking the oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States to uphold, cherish, and protect the entire Constitution, including the freedom of the press.

Have a beer with me

By

Or coffee. Or a soda. You get the point—it doesn’t matter, just sit here and let’s talk for a few minutes.

At the end of Reed Galen’s piece Hope the High Road there is this call to action:

“Call your friends, your neighbors, your family and your co-workers. Tell them you want to talk politics. Not Trump or Hillary, but the politics of solutions and progress. Have a meal or a beer and ask, what can we do, here and now in our town, on our block or in our district. Then go do it.”

Sounds pretty good, and rather easy in theory, but then comes the asking.

If you are reading this, it is likely you have come to the point that political discourse has made you uncomfortable. And it often feels like that discomfort makes it hard to start a conversation about politics, doesn’t it?

If you spend any time on social media sites like Facebook or Twitter you know the scenario; one person posts a political point of view, the argument starts, and then rages in the thread. Others jump in or out as their levels of outrage, indignation, exasperation, or disgust dictate. These fights are increasingly just political squabbles without reason or content, a smorgasbord of smugness, sneers, and trolling. In the end, no minds get changed, and too often, some feelings get hurt.

In our day-to-day real lives, we rarely stop what we are doing and engage in this sort of behavior—perhaps social media, with the protection of the computer screen and keyboard, give us a sense of security to expose our more argumentative tendencies. Sure, we argue and debate, but rarely when sitting face to face with someone would we devolve to the behavior we see online.

The fallout from this type of behavior found online is that people don’t want to engage in essential discussions around tough topics like politics. They fall back to tribal beliefs, nurtured by the two parties, and relegate politics to an unpleasant task or conversation to be avoided.

When that happens, you become part of the base—subject to the dog whistle behavioral signals and counted upon to vote the straight party ticket. That reinforces the notion that the status quo cannot be changed: So why bother? Why engage in the dirty pettiness we see in politics today? And who would blame you?

But by avoiding that political conversation, you surrender to the party and let them put their interests ahead of yours.

Let me encourage you to step out of your comfort zone and help make political discourse a civil conversation again. Here is why changing civil discourse and having those political conversations are important:

If you think the country is headed in the wrong direction and that our elected leaders are not doing enough to change it, then you have to be willing to engage in politics. It is time to start electing leaders who are not wed to the tribal politics of the two-party system. By engaging in civil discourse, you can help make that happen.

The way you can do that with other people is by acting like you care about the person, and not their politics. Sit face to face with someone over a beer, coffee, or a meal and speak with respect of the other person’s point of view. Show them the SAM Principles and listen to what they say, think, and feel about them.

SAM has provided the leadership for a movement to build a new political party for those left behind by a political system that puts its interests ahead of those of the American people. And, to be frank, that is the easy part. By changing the narrative and engaging in civil, political discussion, I am asking you to take on a more important role.

First, let me tell you about the “first follower” theory and Leadership Lessons from a Dancing Guy from Derek Sivers’ “How to Start a Movement” Ted talk.

In the video Sivers shows a movement take place in three minutes. There is the first guy dancing to the music who is then joined by a second guy. The second guy waves others to join him, and slowly they are joined by others, and at the end, there is a crowd. Sivers narrates the action and offers some intriguing insights on what is happening.

“A leader needs the guts to stand alone and look ridiculous. But what he’s doing is so simple, it’s almost instructional. This is key. You must be easy to follow! 

Now comes the first follower with a crucial role: he publicly shows everyone how to follow. Notice the leader embraces him as an equal, so it’s not about the leader anymore – it’s about them, plural. Notice he’s calling to his friends to join in. It takes guts to be a first follower! You stand out and brave ridicule, yourself 

Being a first follower is an under-appreciated form of leadership. The first follower transforms a lone nut into a leader. If the leader is the flint, the first follower is the spark that makes the fire.”

SAM, through their leadership, has made it easy to follow. Your role then, is to ignite a spark. To help make civil discussions about politics the music that gets people to dance together. With your help, we can build a new political party for a new American majority. One where fairness, integrity and common-sense solutions work together to achieve real progress for Americans.

So please. Have a beer with me?

Author’s note: This article originally appeared on the SAM – Serve America Movement website.

If you want a copy of the principles, let me know in the comments and I’ll email you a copy.

Saving our Seas

By

11 October Update:The president signed the Save our Seas Act into law. UPI story here.

Recently Hatch Magazine ran an article (below) that I wrote about federal legislation that would reauthorize the Marine Debris Act.

In the article I noted industry efforts  to address the problem of plastic waste in our oceans. Chris Gaggia of Patagonia alerted me to Bureo a business supported by Patagonia Works.

At Bureo, we make skateboards from recycled fishing nets. Our recycling program in Chile, ‘Net Positiva’, provides fishing net collection points to keep plastic fishing nets out of our oceans. Preventing harmful materials from entering the ocean, our programs protect wildlife and supporting local fishing communities through financial incentives.”

Check them out at Bureo.

Here is the Hatch article.

Trash, mostly plastic, in the oceans is a serious problem and visible reminder of our careless attitude toward the planet. In recent years, the fly-fishing industry has dedicated continued energy to address this problem. Through the introduction of cardboard fly boxes, the American Fly Fishing Trade Association has worked to get plastic out of the waste stream. Costa has their #KickPlastic campaign, Fishpond has Cyclepond fabric, and Patagonia is working to address microfiber pollution.

These days most of us rarely look to Congress for good news, but there is a bit of positive news to convey.

Legislation to assist in cleanup of the oceans took a step forward this summer. In a rare example of bipartisan cooperation, instigated by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, the U.S. Senate passed the Save our Seas Act, S. 756 in August of this year. The legislation was introduced by Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska and cosponsored by Senators Whitehouse, Booker (NJ), Coons (DE), Peters (MI), Inhofe (OK), Tillis (NC), and Murkowski (AK). 14 other Senators had joined them by the time the bill was passed.

The legislation reauthorizes, funds and amends the Marine Debris Act. It provides $10 million for outreach and education to address both land and sea-based marine debris challenges and $2 million for better law enforcement related to trash dumped from ships and supports Federal funding for research and development of environmentally feasible improvements to materials that reduce municipal solid waste. It also promotes international action to reduce marine debris including ocean biodegradable plastics research, examining the causes of ocean debris, developing effective prevention and mitigation strategies, and measuring the economic benefits from addressing the challenges.

“Over the course of years and decades, marine debris deposited in the ocean half a world away inevitably finds its way to our coastal communities and ecosystems. Alaska feels the brunt of this crisis with its extensive coastline,” said Senator Sullivan. “I’m heartened that Senators from coastal and landlocked states alike – from both parties – have come together to support the Save Our Seas Act, which is now one step closer to becoming law. I encourage my colleagues in the House to move swiftly, so that we can reauthorize NOAA’s vital Marine Debris Program and enact other measures to clean up Alaska’s waters and protect our marine environment.”

“Plastic garbage and other junk crowding our oceans and shores is more than an eyesore. It’s a threat to vital ocean and coastal ecosystems and our economy,” said Senator Whitehouse. “This bill tackles the marine debris crisis along American coasts. It will also push us to work with other countries on limiting the plastics and other harmful materials that find their way to the ocean. That includes working on an international agreement to stop the flow of trash from land into the ocean, and, if trash does get to the ocean, supporting research into new materials that break down in a way that won’t wreak havoc in our seas. Thank you to Senators Sullivan, Booker, and all the bipartisan co-sponsors for helping to see this bill through.”

Washed up garbage embedded in the turf layer at the high-water mark along a beachfront (photo: Bo Eide cc/2.0).
What is encouraging is the bipartisan nature of this legislation and the fact it is moving through the Senate and not sitting idle and gathering dust. It could serve as a logical amendment to any oceans related legislation that has more momentum should the U.S. House fail to act.

The U. S. House of Representatives does have a companion measure with the same title, H.R. 2748. It was introduced by Representative Don Young of Alaska. Young has attached 39 co-sponsors to the bill so far. The bill is slowly working its way through the committee process, but with the pressing load of other legislative matters, the prospect of passage in the House seem dim.

Considering the almost unfathomable amount marine debris currently plaguing our oceans, this legislation alone is not going to solve the plastics problem, but these days any progress is good progress.

If you want to show your support for this legislation contact your Member of Congress and ask them to co-sponsor the Save our Seas Act, H.R. 2748. Don’t know who represents you in Congress; find out here.

Author’s note: This article first appeared in Hatch Magazine

Liam Diekmann and Odell Creek.

By

O’Dell Creek holds a special place in my heart.

The first time I saw it was in August 2006 with Alex Diekmann. Alex and I worked together at the Trust for Public Land; he was a project manager, and I was a lobbyist. He found the places to protect, and I helped find the resources to try and protect them. One of the last times I was with Alex we fished O’Dell together.

photo:Alex Diekmann

The O’Dell project as it has come to be known is the conservation vision and hard work of Jeff Lazlo. Jeff  has made O’Dell Creek wetlands restoration an award winning model for citizen-driven conservation. In doing so he created a source of cold, clean water and a haven and breeding ground for native cutthroats in the Madison River.

Alex’s death was a blow to many of us, but his legacy of fishing and conservation I am delighted to say lives on in his youngest son Liam.

Liam writes of fishing and conservation for Mountain Journal. His latest article, For Every Great Trout Stream, There’s a Conservation Map, is his story about working on Lazlo’s, Granger Ranch, home to O’Dell Creek.

I thought the way you learned about trout was by catching them. But my project taught me how and why a good trout stream exists. Clean, cold water filled with healthy amounts of natural fish food doesn’t just happen.”

Liam is a fine young outdoor writer, and his work reflects a conservation ethos steeped in things he learned at his mother’s and father’s side. His articles in Mountain Journal are worth the read.

If you don’t know Mountain Journal, it is a new publication keeping a weather eye on the Yellowstone ecosystem. They are a not-for-profit public interest journalism outfit, check it out and shoot them a few buck so they can keep lights on and the presses running.

Tom, Liam, Alex photo: Logan Diekmann

Darkness Falls Upon Our Land

By

This is an evolving story. Links to relevant stories are in the Postscript section at the bottom.

Source: https://twitter.com/NatResources/status/939236821971734530

Think long and hard about the implications of that tweet from the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee.

You may not agree with Patagonia or the language they used (see Outside Online article in the postscript), but this is a branch of our government attacking a U.S. company, disparaging their motive for speaking out and condescendingly ridiculing your fellow citizens.

Hijacking the debate my ass.

The hypocrisy of suit wearing, highly compensated and mostly wealthy, elected officials continues to astound me. I am not an elitist, wealthy, urban dweller and neither are many of my friends who wear Patagonia clothes and use their gear. I wear Patagonia products for my work as a guide in rural Virginia and for much of my regular attire. I choose their products because of the quality, suitability for my work and my admiration for who they are as a company.

Patagonia is not hijacking the debate for sales. Patagonia has fully engaged in the public lands and environmental debates for quite some time, a quick look at their website or the Axios story in the postscript below will show that. Conversations with friends and colleagues make me think their website page call to action could be a mixed bag for sales. The Axios story points out that they prepared for the adverse consequences back in 2012.

Source: http://www.patagonia.com/protect-public-lands.html

The shadow of repression grows longer.

There is a place for responsible rebuttals. The House Natural Resources Committee tweet, however, crosses a line by sending an intimidating message to those who dare to voice their opinion.

If you care about public lands and the freedom to speak out on their behalf, this should infuriate you. We have entered dark times for our public lands. It is time to raise our voices and call bullshit once again.

“Wildlife and its habitat cannot speak, so we must and we will.”
-Theodore Roosevelt

I stand with Patagonia.

Postscript (most recent at the bottom):
Axios: 8. Patagonia v. Trump
Outside Online: Patagonia and the Federal Government Go Head to Head
Huffington Post: Your Tax Dollars Are Being Used To Attack Patagonia
GQ: Now the Government Is Going After Patagonia for Criticizing Trump
Outside Online: Is the GOP Congress Calling for a Patagonia Boycott?
Walter Shaub Twitter thread:“When a federal government official publicly calls you a liar on an official social media account…”
Washington Post: Zinke, House GOP escalate feud with Patagonia over monuments
Washington Post, The Energy 202: Ryan Zinke rebuffed for retweet
U.S. House Natural Resources Committee: Chairman Bishop Invites Patagonia CEO to Testify Before the Committee
Chairman Bishop’s invitation letter. Credit were credit is due, the letter is well written, respectful and a much more appropriate response than the one on Twitter.
Outside Online: The GOP Wants Chouinard to Testify? He Should Accept.
Columbia Journalism Review: Outside reporter: ‘I wasn’t banned—at least, not as far as I can prove’
Patagonia’s Yvon Chouinard in The Cleanest Line: Response to the House Committee on Natural Resources. If you are going to say “no thanks” he could not have done it better and for the right reasons.

Solutions and Progress

By

It is time to serve America first and put people before party.

On Thursday, Nov. 9, Rep. Bob Goodlatte announced he was not going to run for re-election in 2018. I heard the news the day before the official announcement, and as I drove home to the Valley from my most recent trip to the D.C., I pondered what that opportunity could mean.

As I drove home, I called my wife and a couple of friends. “Goodlatte is going to retire, I’m thinking of running for Congress…” The response then and as I talked with others about it was encouraging, supportive and realistic.

It would be a long shot, but I wanted to change the narrative. The toxicity of party politics and the party over policy approach to governing appalled me. The issues I cared deeply about, conservation, small business, veterans, were becoming political casualties.

Mulling it over I questioned if it just ego or could a pull it off.

Thanksgiving morning I made the decision. Nope, not going to do it.

The reasons were pretty straightforward. To be competitive in a primary should I choose that route and then again in the general election I would have to stop everything else I was doing and focus all my time, energy and attention on the campaign. My work at the Marine Fish Conservation Network is enjoyable and rewarding. The thought of giving up guiding and teaching on the weekends, an essential mental and physical part of my life was almost unthinkable. The financial commitment was daunting. In the end, those factors made it a mountain too high to climb.

So where do I go from here? The system is broken, the change has to come from people who are willing to call bullshit and work for a better solution. If I’m not going to get in the campaign arena personally how can I work for change?

One of my favorite political scribes is Rich Galen of Mullings fame. Rich’s son Reed is no slouch behind the keyboard, and often, because of tips in his dad’s column, I will find my way to Reed’s articles. Such was the case right after my Thanksgiving decision.

Reed’s article, Hope the High Road captured my thinking and concerns.

“The last decade or so has brought into stark relief what many Americans have known instinctively for years: Our elected leaders far too often serve their own ambition or tribal beliefs rather than those they’re sworn to represent. This isn’t new news, it’s not even terribly surprising. It is however, time to do something about it.”

More importantly, Reed shown a spotlight on a path forward.

“Trump’s behavior, complete lack of ability (or desire) to govern and his obsession with trivial, anger-inducing issues is waking up voters to the idea that if we want to be better, we need to do better. That starts with us. It starts with good people saying enough is enough and putting themselves forward for public office. It means shedding 150 years of partisan snakeskin in favor of new, better options.

Of course, I agreed with what he wrote and thought “Oh crap, just got called out on the decision I made three days ago…”

Fortunately, he went on to add more steps that could be taken.

“The transformation won’t start on Facebook or Twitter or Fox News or MSNBC. It will start when citizens — like you and me — get together in their dining rooms, living rooms, union halls and VFW halls and start to say, “We’re here, and we’re ready. Let’s get to work.” So let’s do it. Call your friends, your neighbors, your family and your co-workers. Tell them you want to talk politics. Not Trump or Hillary, but the politics of solutions and progress. Have a meal or a beer and ask, what can we do, here and now in our town, on our block or in our district. Then go do it.”

OK, now I feel better about my decision. I’m a career lobbyist and enjoy my forays into journalism; I can talk “the politics of solutions and progress.” Where shall I start?

Let this article serve as the introduction. I am getting back behind the keyboard and starting writing about the politics of solutions and progress. I’ll focus on those topics near and dear to me as noted above.

And here is an opportunity to join me and become part of a movement to change the narrative from party over policy and the two-party system that perpetuates it.

Join SAM, the Serve America Movement. Check out the website, watch the video, read the principles, and if you agree that this is right path forward, sign up. After that sit down with your friends and family and tell them you want to talk politics; the politics of solutions and progress.