Keller Shaft, Mammoth Cave National Park

Keller Shaft, Mammoth Cave National Park
Keller Shaft, Mammoth Cave National Park, Photo by Roger Brucker

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Chapter IV: Two-way communication


IV. Two-way communication, or negotiating

A. What is two-way communication, aka negotiating
Negotiating used to be called sales or personal selling.  This process involves two-way back-and-forth interaction, between the potential buyer and the seller who shapes and makes the offer.  The good salesman listens carefully to the buyer’s description of his suffering or problem.  He then frames his offer – assuming that the product or service will solve the problem or alleviate the suffering – to be responsive to the presented problem.

1. Why this process is of value to karst rapid responders: Once you have been involved in a karst rapid response situation for a while and show no sign of going away or backing down, your group may discover that the other side wants to sit down and negotiate terms with you. Do not rush to the table! Naïve cavers may be easily seduced by old pros at the negotiating game into thinking they are helping solve the karst problem, when in fact they are being co-opted to move the development forward.  Be a savvy salesman – and recruit legal and technically expert talent before going any further.

2. Legal advice:  You may not need a lawyer at first, but sooner or later your organization will need to incorporate as a non-profit under your state’s laws and then formally apply for and receive non-profit tax-exempt status from the IRS,  in order to raise money through tax-free contributions.  Also, an officially-recognized organization can shield some of the organizing individuals from certain financial risks and can confer legal standing (a technical term referring to whether a party challenging has the status of a resident or organization affected by the proposed development). 

Also, lawyers are better negotiators than ordinary citizens, especially those emotionally involved in the case. You’ll be needing them down the road, when offers to negotiate come your way.

How do you find a lawyer?  Ask a lawyer for recommendations.  They know which lawyers have experience with which kinds of cases.  A lawyer specializing in estate and probate work will not be useful to you, but he or she may know who might be good.  You need a lawyer with experience with environmental or historic preservation issues and civil law.  The lawyer you want has handled similar cases to yours and can tell you of the outcomes of cases handled.  Ask for references, and contact them.  “How well did this lawyer serve you?  Did he/she discuss charges?  Was he/she a good communicator? Did you trust him/her?  Would you retain him/her again if you had a case similar to ours?  The lawyer you want will want you, and will give evidence of success in the past.

Lawyers charge by the hour, so it is important that you are clear and efficient in your communication with him/her after the initial (usually free) consultation.  Do not have multiple members of your organization contacting him/her, or send unimportant messages to him/her.  Most lawyers charge for every billable hour spent on your case, and this includes reading junk mail or frivolous conversations.

3. Persuasive power, at the negotiating table and in other formal settings: Your organization should line up cave and karst experts early in your campaign.  Getting experts on your side is a prudent preemptive step.  Find experts with credentials who have served before as expert witnesses; they may be geologists, geohydrologists, biologists, or engineers.  (more to come here)

Warning: a common tactic by the experienced negotiator on the pro-development side is to co-opt your technical experts.  Sincere and competent karst experts may feel they can “talk sense to money.” Unless your experts are already formally retained by you, they may try to become free-lance “peacemakers,” and do heavy damage to your case if it comes to a challenge.  Real experts have plenty of experience in handling trick questions calculated by attorneys to trap the innocent. (more to come here)

Chapter V & Afterword: Preparing for challenges over the long haul


V. Preparing for challenges over the long haul

Prepare for a long campaign – one lasting years, not months.  It took six years of opposition for the Kentucky Transpark to exhibit many of the hazards that KarstEEP identified before the first shovel of ground was turned. Stopping the proposed Pulaski County Landfill expansion above the Sloans Valley Cave System took eight years, and a similar time period elapsed during the struggle over whether or not I-66 will be built across the karst of southern Kentucky. At this time, that project is dead, but eternal vigilance is the price of bringing these “undead” projects to even a temporary halt.

Developers and politicians will attempt to discredit you, then wear you out.  For this reason you must recruit new talent as you go along, to replace attrition and burnout.  Accept that you may have to take a break, every once in a while, and let others take up the slack while you recover. Opposing developers and defending caves is stressful work.  Many individuals hate controversy and dislike the adversary role. Some of your best workers will tire, move away, or lose heart.  Keep in mind what Robert Kennedy, Jr. has said: “They cannot win if we do not quit.”

                                                               
Afterword

Who is KarstEEP?   We are a 501 (c) 3 non-profit corporation established to provide information and environmental education about caves and karst.  Our viewpoint is that karst features, such as underground rivers, should be protected with as much intelligence and zeal as surface rivers and landscapes.

KarstEEP wants to work with others to strengthen the community’s ability to effectively protect threatened cave and karst resources and help guard against unsafe development. We will develop public education, networking, and training resources; will advocate for better protection for karst waters under the Clean Water Act; and we aim to provide a voice for better karst protection ordinances. We are seeking partners and cooperative efforts to further these goals.

Appendices 1 - 4: Networking; Downloadable presentations; Sample demo; FOIA template.


Appendices
Resources for cave and karst rapid response

1. Networking, obtaining resources, training and support

Organizations (to come)

Web sites

Information about caves and karst:
Karst Waters Institute www.karstwaters.org
National Speleological Society www.caves.org
American Cave Conservation Association
Karst Information Portal
(Much more to come here)

2. Downloadable presentations for rapid response

            List of power points available from KEEP Inc. (to come)

3. Sample demonstration for use at a public hearing

 (If you must shorten the demonstration, use those parts that result in the most mess – broken plates and green water spilled. Onlookers may profess to be “shocked,” but your message will have been effectively and memorably delivered.)

A spokesperson for karst advocacy at a recent hearing for a state quarry permit near Mammoth Cave National Park, KY presented a variety of short demonstrations. Karst Environmental Education and Protection, Inc. (KarstEEP) opposed the issuance of this permit because the mitigation proposed by the quarry developer to prevent contamination of the Tier III outstanding underground waters of Mammoth Cave National Park would be inadequate, impractical, and ineffective. His demonstration went like this:

Presenter: “The principal proposed mitigation of contamination by sediments and petroleum products is two constructed sediment detention ponds whose flows are to be sampled twice per month. We will now demonstrate why this approach will fail to prevent contamination of the underground waters.”

(Presenter unfolds a plastic painters drop cloth to protect the floor against water that has been colored by green food coloring, and brings out the exhibits.)

Presenter: “Exhibit A is a portion of a map showing underground watercourses as dye traced by Quinlan, Ray, and Ewers (19Eight9).  It is the best informed guess about where the underground conduits are located.  This map shows a major subterranean stream forming in the Sinkhole Plain and its trunk passing directly beneath the proposed quarry property.  The stream emerges at Mill Hole and sinks after 400 feet, then emerges in Owl Cave/Cedar Sink in Mammoth Cave National Park, and finally rises at Turnhole Spring in Green River.

“Some or all of the proposed quarry and ponds are at risk of collapsing into this underground river, in the same way that Dishman Lane in Bowling Green, KY collapsed into State Trooper Cave River.  Blasting loosens subsurface rocks.  The risk of probable collapse into the Tier III underground river is too high to risk.”

Presenter: “Exhibit B is a dinner plate.  This plate represents limestone, which is quite strong in compression.  If I place the plate on the floor and lay a plank over it, I can stand on the plank and not break it” (demonstrates).  “No fear of collapse, right?  Now if I take the same plate and strike it with a hammer, it shatters” (demonstrates).  “The shock, comparable to quarry blasting, exceeds the yield strength of the plate.  The weakened and broken parts correspond to the roof of the large underground river shown on the map to cross under the quarry site. The point of this demonstration is that collapse failures of this kind have happened too often in karst regions without blasting.  Many caves have breakdown on the passage floors, which is a form of collapse.  An expert witness who says that caves seldom collapse is ignoring breakdown. With blasting, the risk of collapse into the underground Tier III river is too high.”

Presenter: “Exhibit C is a kitchen funnel.  Sediment ponds, farm ponds, and manmade lakes in the Sinkhole Plain karst are usually sinkholes.  Engineering textbooks show such sinkholes in cross-section as funnels that can be easily plugged with clay, rocks, or fill.  Assuming the plug remains, regional rainfall of 55-inches per year, often coming in downpours of 2- or 3-inches in a few hours, overwhelms karst ponds and lakes and washes the contents including bottom sediments over the spillway and over any rubber pond liner.  The front edge of the flood carries most of the contaminants.  We can demonstrate this by plugging this funnel and pouring in a deluge of water” (demonstrates).  “Notice how it overflows the pond. The point of the demonstration is that karst ponds seldom have the capacity to contain runoff water, which will overflow into the nearest sinkhole.”

Presenter: “Exhibit D is the same kitchen funnel. We use toilet tissue paper to block the bottom end to simulate a sinkhole plug.  We fill the funnel with water” (demonstrates).  “So far, so good: the water is contained.  But when the tissue weakens and gives way, the funnel drains out” (demonstrates).  “This demonstrates that karst ponds are ephemeral – they disappear without notice and empty their contents into the underground river.  The point of this demonstration is that not only will the quarry store fine sediments and petroleum spills in the ponds, but that at the loss of containment, the contaminants will flow underground quickly.  A 4000 gallon spill of diesel fuel only 2.3 miles from this quarry site disappeared underground before the HAZMAT crew arrived. There are NO BMPs (Best Management Practice) for ponds in karst regions in Kentucky.  The Heartland Golf Course Lake in Bowling Green is a recent example of sudden loss of containment.

Presenter: “Exhibit E is a kitchen colander.  Contrary to many engineering text books, sinkholes in the Mammoth Cave Region DO NOT resemble funnels in cross-section.  They resemble a colander with holes downward and also laterally along rock bedding.  In other words, most sinkholes cannot be plugged permanently.  Every farmer hereabouts knows this.  We will demonstrate how sinkholes drain by pouring water into this colander” (demonstrates).  “Notice how it pours out all over everything.  It might be possible to plug a few holes in the bottom, but you can see that the contents will drain underground.  The point of this demonstration is that no karst pond can be relied upon to hold water, let alone retain contaminants such as sediments and petroleum products.

“A second point of this demonstration is how would you sample the outflow twice a month?  As you can see, most of the time there will be no outflow; it will be “done-gone!”  Remember, most of the contaminants are carried on the front end of a flood.  Can anyone believe that quarry personnel will sample when it’s pouring rain outside?”

Presenter: “Exhibit F is a large sponge.  This represents the surface of the karst land, the weathered rock fragments, the clay particles, sand, and organic matter.  We will pour some dye onto the sponge surface” (demonstrates). “The dye represents a contaminant, such as oil.  We will then pour water on the sponge and attempt to wash off the dye” (demonstrates).  “Notice that the dye disperses throughout the sponge.  Every time we pour another batch of water to clean the sponge, we get more contaminant out. 

“Why not squeeze the sponge?” (threatens to demonstrate.)  “We can’t do that with karst land.  Instead, the contaminant that remains trapped can be remobilized by subsequent downpours.  Thus, the risk of contamination is a long-range hazard, not something that can be cleaned up.  Once again, the 4000 gallon diesel fuel spill on nearby I-65 warns us that contamination of karst can be a ticking bomb that can pollute wells and the underground river for months and years.  In Hidden River Cave, Horse Cave, KY, periodic floods uncover and re-suspend the toxic contaminants.

“In conclusion, we have been criticized for demonstrating these truths in dramatic ways.  If you have been offended, I apologize.  But what we have demonstrated are scientific truths and actual risks that this quarry cannot and will not be able to prevent or avoid contamination of the Tier III waters of Mammoth Cave National Park.

“We ask that the permit for this quarry be withdrawn.”

(Quinlan, James F. and Joseph A. Ray. 1989. Groundwater Basins in the Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky. Occasional publication no. 2, Friends of the Karst, Mammoth Cave, KY.)

 4. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) template letter (link to come)

Appendices 5, 6 7 The Scientific Method; Karst Model Ordinances; Eight Rivers Safe Development brochure.


5. The Scientific Method: Model for clear thinking under pressure from opponents (and confused supporters!) 

It is important to keep in mind how the scientific process works. This is because some developers and their consultants will make unscientific claims, while swearing they are “true science.” For example, a developer says he will drain a large parking lot into a scientifically safe, permitted Class V Injection Well. The implication is that the procedure is “safe” and “permitted” – so it must be a good idea. Wrong! A Class V Injection Well is nothing but a sinkhole, and the state water authorities may not monitor the drainage at all. They may even “lose” the permit!

On the other hand, overzealous opponents of development on karst may themselves make unscientific claims. “There is no way a building can be built on this karst land,” invites challenge as unscientific. The developer my sink pilings down to bedrock, conduct expensive studies to verify the absence of caves, or pour expensive reinforced concrete foundation beams to span known cavities.

Just because expensive remedies are the only means of avoiding karst hazards does not mean that construction on karst is impossible. Unscientific claims will destroy credibility, which is why it is a good idea to enlist scientific experts to accurately describe risks.

Thomas Poulson, Ph.D. (2009) describes the scientific method as the efficient way to find out how things work – what’s going on. It involves four basic steps: observations, hypotheses, predictions, and experiments. Observations lead to insights and perhaps the beginnings of understanding. Hypotheses are possible explanations (inductive reasoning). From these we use deductive reasoning to make predictions. Finally, we test each prediction with experiments. If experiments verify the hypotheses, we can sometimes
control the outcome.

For example, if we observe that a flashlight fails to work, we have a hypothesis as to why: the batteries are dead. We experiment by replacing the batteries. If the flashlight lights, we are done. If it fails to light, we discard the first hypothesis and move on to a new hypothesis: the bulb is burned out. If we replace the bulb and the light works, we are done. We can control whether the flashlight works by hypothesis testing.

The scientific process described above has been used during the past century by hydrogeologists and other specialists to learn how karst responds to active environmental pressures – the way it becomes weaker and collapses, how it causes floods when too much water exceeds  its drainage capacity, and how contamination introduced into karst conduits will not be treated by natural purification. Developers and consultants – through ignorance or deliberately – can raise false hypotheses about the why karst “misbehaves”, but science is not on their side. A single scientific dye trace can replace speculations with facts (Poulson, Thomas L., 2009. “The Scientific Method”, 2 pp. Unpublished, available from the author).

For example, a quarry operator wanted to develop a limestone quarry in a knob next to the Green River in Kentucky. A series of dye tests demonstrated that the quarry would drain underground to a spring discharging just upstream from an endangered mussel shoal. The map of an eight-mile cave nearby was further scientific evidence that the quarry would threaten unacceptable risk. Science – eventually – trumped business opportunity.


6. Karst Model Ordinances
(to come from Merideth Hildreth)


7. Eight Rivers Safe Development Brochure (link to come)