I'd like to start this post by saying this... I'm no environmentalist. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the environment, I enjoy saving trees and spotted owls as much as the next guy. However, being from a family in which coal buttered my bread for years I understand that often eco-progress not only gets in the way of pollution, but it gets in the way of jobs.

Reasonable eco-dudes and eco-dudettes are fine with me. People that understand clean coal technology, people that realize that logging is just part of life and that trees really will grow back, and people that value the life of a human being over the life of an endangered beetle are a-okay in my book. Unfortunately there are entirely too many holier-than-thou types in this country that give reasonable environmental concerns a bad name. No one gets everything they want, so if you managed to save 50,000 acres of slug habitat then just rest for a few months, don't immediately start calling the hard working Joes that you see logging around the area "murderers."

Now, having said that I will share some eco-news.

The green people of our wonderful country can often be heard throwing endless tantrums regarding the importance of saving America's wetlands. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't done a great deal of research into WHY we should save the wetlands, but as long as it keeps another Wal-Mart out of Florida then I'm 100% behind it. So fine, let's save the wetlands, woo!

Then the information comes out that the Bush administration has created the first net increase in wetlands conservation for the first time since the 1950's, saving 191,800 acres since the last tally. WOW, I thought. George W. Bush is actually doing something about conservation? Maybe I've completely "misunderestimated" this guy... could I have been wrong? As I sat there for a few seconds pondering this new Earth-friendly President Bush I heard a loud thud echoing through my living room... that thud was the other shoe dropping.

How did this anti-environment administration manage to save more wetlands than Jimmy Carter? Quite simple, actually... they just re-categorized golf course water hazards as wetlands. Nope, I'm not making it up. You just can't make up quotes like this one from Jeanne Christie, executive director of the Association of State Wetland Managers Inc, "The 'no net loss of wetlands' is largely due to the proliferation of ponds, lakes and other 'deepwater habitats,' as the report points out," she said. "These ponds include ornamental lakes for residential developments, stormwater retention ponds, wastewater treatment lagoons, aquaculture ponds and golf course water hazards."