I guess I promised at least a short summary/review of "The Last Flight of the Scarlet Macaw," the second book I read over break.

This book is the story of a dam project in Belize - the fight between government/industry forces, scientists, and advocates for nature.

One big thing I learned from the book is what Belize is like as a nation. I did not know much about it before. It is a Central American nation that defines itself as a Caribbean nation - if it could make itself an island in the Caribbean Sea, it would. Culturally it identifies far much with that region.

It is a former British colony, one that basically dropped off the crown jewels by attrition - in the early days it was a source of timber and other resources, and by the time those resources' value dwindled, Britain was willing to cut (most) ties. (There are still some; at the end of the book a Privy Council hearing plays an important role).

Like a lot of smaller nations, it seems pretty beset by corruption. (or maybe, "Like a lot of nations." Or maybe, pessimistically, "Like any other nation..." and the ones we think of as non-corrupt, we just don't see). Nepotism in government is fairly rampant.

It's also not exactly a wealthy nation; and the have vs. have-not divide is pretty steep.

Into this, comes an American woman - Sharon Mattola.

Now, I was not prepared to like Sharon, from the way she was described. Because I've dealt with some people like her - people who don't really have a lot of educational or research credentials, people who are not scientists (and proudly trumpet that fact), but who will take on the mantle of a Defender of Nature because they claim some mystic gnostic knowledge of how nature works that scientists have (so they argue) willingly blinded themselves to. It's kind of the New-Ager view. And as I said, I've worked with people who have that attitude - who are actively disdainful of what science have done, because it's more comfortable to keep their fuzzy gnostic beliefs and to claim some "received knowledge" from "communing with nature."

I know scientists can be arrogant - I know a number of arrogant scientists - but there's also a hearty arrogance that comes from this group - the belief that they somehow feel more deeply than other people, and because of those deep feelings, they have a deep knowledge that even someone who has studied and worked with a system for 40 years does not have.

Luckily, Sharon Mattola turned out to be the "other" kind of "non-credentialed" science-person: the person who actually HAS worked long and hard, who HAS put in the observations, who knows what a field scientist knows - and really, the only difference between them is a piece of paper listing formal coursework. (I've known a few people like that, as well). She's willing to enlist the help of experts; she knows when she doesn't know something. (That's my big issue with the first group I described; a lot of them are unwilling to admit ignorance - maybe even to themselves - and they wind up sort of blundering through things and sometimes do more harm than good).

Sharon has wound up in Belize after traveling about (literally; she left her husband by hopping a freight train). She has kind of inherited a research station, which she has turned into a zoo/rehabilitation center. Her mission, as she sees it, is to connect the people of Belize with their native fauna, both so they will be less inclined to randomly shoot (and sometimes eat) any animal they run across, and also to help instill pride in the nation.

Her personal love is a subspecies of the scarlet macaw which is apparently found only in Belize. A macaw whose nesting site is threatened by a planned dam development for hydroelectrics.

The majority of the book is given over to the fight against the dam.

Now, first, a disclaimer: the book presents mainly the anti-dam side. So there could be some bias involved. (Probably there is).

However, the dam is not just a bad idea on the grounds that it will drown a big part of a forest that is important not just to macaws, but to tapirs, monkeys, and other species. There was also apparently some hanky-panky in the geologic reports; when two independent and unconnected-to-the-dam-project geologists reviewed the cores and the maps, they concluded that the particular area was NOT a safe place for a dam because of seismic activity and unstable rock. There was also a lot of concern that the dam would not generate the level of electricity expected for the price expected - that the costs to the Belizean people would go up (in the postscript, the author noted they had).

There were not many other options for electricity in Belize - it has no coal or much in the way of other fossil fuels; wind power is not viable, and it seems solar is far too expensive. The Belize electrical company was buying power from Mexico but that was costly. (There was also an option to buy from Guatemala, but because of some political things in the past, that would never happen - Belize actually feels somewhat threatened by Guatemala).

So most of the book chronicles what might be seen as a quixotic fight against a foregone conclusion - the dam WOULD be built, no matter what. No matter the arguments made, no matter the legal fights.

(At one point it looked like they might succeed, but no, they did not).

Along the way, there are lots of maddening tales of governmental/industry (I lump the two because it seems they are lumped in this case) obfuscation, lying, and retaliation - at one point a dump was slated to be built next to Sharon's zoo, despite the fact that it would pollute a river many villagers used, because she had been fighting the dam. (Small victory - the geologists got the dump moved by pointing out the clay on the site was totally unsuitable).

I found myself getting frustrated and angry at a lot of points in the book. I know, abstractly, that governments do things that are stupid. That no solution to a problem is ever going to be optimal. But the way the people at the power company and in the government offices treated people who were asking questions, trying to get information - very frustrating.

I will admit my own tiny example of dealing with obfuscatory legislation and government/industry that lacks the will to do the "right" things - I've been on a committee that has been charged with trying to beautify the town where I live. I have nearly quit, twice (and have since decided that I will do "grassroots" stuff like going out and pickup up litter, but never again will I try to actually CHANGE things) because on both occasions we tried to draft up some very simple, and not very restrictive suggestions (like: if you are a business with a parking lot, you should have a trash can available in that lot to try to cut down litter. Or like: you cannot blacktop your ENTIRE property, you need a little green space), lawyers "were sent" to tell us that we were going to "hurt business" with what we were suggesting, and that we needed to take it off the table.

(And the litter continues to build up. It's really bad this spring).

So anyway. I can sympathize on a very banal level with Sharon Mattola and her compatriots. And I don't think I could do what they did, even in a big serious situation - it's too maddening and too heartbreaking when you lose. Which you nearly always do.

So while I continue to do the volunteer efforts - picking up trash, talking to schoolkids, doing the little band-aid sort of things - I find I just don't have the constitution to "fight the power" that some people do. Which may be why I found this book fairly agonizing to read.