THE LIBRARY- EPA CONNEXION

[James Marple <jesl@carolina.net>]

To the Panel in total:
Some observations from those who advise my watershed planning
efforts.


- I can only hope to develop such clear thinking as Linda, so
endorse her views enthusiastically. Empact is enough involvement
in local affairs, it merely needs more careful delivery. City and
county bureaucrats are too likely to try to reinvent communication
wheels that already revolve nicely. Too often a large part of
granted funds goes to consultants that merely dress up shows stolen
from government files.

-  The EPA needs to focus on armoring itself against private and
political influence to the highest possible degree, not dissipate
its energies duplicating local services or attempting to micromanage
information presentation.

- Laura's excellent reduction of success measurement to understandable
terms deserves attention, in that most who benefit from EPA
information would prefer this form of expression. I offer in addtion
to her points

  5) providing assurance of the impartiality of data and opinion providers. 

- The EPA must make many "need to know" decisions, present a "clear,
complete, concise, and cohesive" and still short format as Deborah
suggests. It must also set up guideposts to the details wherein
the devil may be found. It cannot confine its efforts to separating
masses of data from essentials. It needs to run parallel courses
here, on the one hand providing condensations and evaluations of
proposed planning actions and on the other avoiding interpretation,
providing a direct route to all raw data. Many who use its data
would benefit greatly from expert examination of basic planning
premises.

- The public deserves to see the validity of every basic planning
assumption tested by impartial experts. The EPA should make this
standard procedure, even in local planning documents, by careful
attention to every document that crosses its desks and closer
cooperation with libraries to present its evaluations of these.

- Some people easily recognize environmental planning myths, others
fully qualified to plan do not. For this reason it is imperative
that the EPA observe its fiduciary obligations by illuminating
conventional wisdoms so that the public can see through them to
identify false or misleading elements.

- A Net forum focused on discussion of EPA information in addition
to the others that EPA sponsors may produce useful input.

- Suggestions of a galaxy of local general environmental forums
connected by state and national ones are also worth consideration.
With such forums cautiously moderated to screen out the personal
intimidation that silences so many of our elderly or just naturally
timid souls, the quality of discussion should rise dramatically.

- A nationwide net to allow immediate input into every document
received by the EPA for review would certainly provide a broad
range of 'out of the box' views to counter the narrowness that
often infects government offices. Libraries can be ideal adjuncts
for such a net, enhancing their image while doing legwork for the
EPA.

- A national workshop, with EPA throwing proposals on the table
for general discussion may already exist. But if the general public
doesn't know about it becomes just another opportunity for special
interests to build cages around the minds of decisionmakers would
be just another weapon for those who bleed us of our wealth through
government. (Are catchy prime-time ads too great a sacrifice of
agency budget?)

If we think carefully about whether a national workshop might catch
hold and run away with itself, becoming a shadow government that
terrifies incumbents and threatens our two-party system with
fragmentation, we may decide its is best to avoid this. But in
doing so we would reveal an elitist view unbecoming to people who
enjoy the protection and opportunity won by Americas founders at
such high cost.

- Some comments seemed to reflect a lack of understanding that many
who would like to use the net are not merely poor at it, they have
no clue how to search effectively. They may not fully perceive the
value to them of being able to search effectively and lack the
motivation/patience to learn the needed skills. It is easy to
dismiss them as of no real consequence for their apparent incompetence
but this group includes persons of extraordinary perception whose
input could be of great public benefit.

Conscientious public servants will give this facet of information
dissemination careful attention, will find ways to maximize the
user friendliness of their agencies even to the extreme of setting
up a 'data for dummies' line that offers interactive responses.
Without a means to inform this segment of the population government
agencies literally don't know what they are missing, as it is
not uncommon for gifted thinkers to lack communicative ability.

- Don't just make data available - make the data access interactive.
A possible format, to be posted on the search page:

...................

EITHER TELL IT WHAT YOU WANT -
  "I want to know how many people have wells in Fastrac County"
  (403 homes, 22 businesses, 3 government agencies)

OR TELL IT WHAT TO DO
  Show me how many wells there are in Fastrac County.   (428)

OR TELL IT TO SUGGEST RELATED INFORMATION THAT WOULD HELP YOU 
  (water table - geology - topography - rainfall - usage - drillers
  - laws - history - demographics)

...................

Time runs out, durn.

Good luck with the ongoing discussions, and thanks for the chance
to add our views.

Every panelist deserves our heartfelt thanks. They responded with
great candor and good sense.


James Marple for CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE WATER MANAGEMENT