I was reading that the U.S. State Department wrote to the British Columbian government, protesting a new coal mine proposed for that region. The mine would be located just north of Glacier National Park and the U.S. government is afraid that it would cause damage to the environment in Montana. While I was glad to see that our administration was anxious to protect our national parks from threats north of the border, it seemed pretty hypocritical to me. Where is our State Department when coal is being mined in this country every day and damage is being caused to the topography and environment in many of our states? For instance, when the mountains of West Virginia are being detonated with TNT, where is the angry letter to the coal mining companies from the Bush Administration? When miners are working in conditions where they do not have methane monitors or they are at risk of being trapped in underground mines, where is our government? It only seems that action follows some catastrophe. My theory is that the government took action on the British Columbian mine because of the nostalgic and sentimental meaning that Glacier National Park has to many in this nation. While this park is more than worthy of protection and should be shielded from the effects of coal mining, what about other areas of our nation? If anything, the Bush Administration seems to be making destructive coal mining easier rather than harder to accomplish in many parts of the U.S. Further, when it comes to protecting our nation's citizens from the damaging effects of coal pollution, such as mercury, the EPA has dropped the ball many times. I think it is time that this double-standard be done away with and that our State Department start writing letters to more coal mining companies than those north of our nation's border. If we don't act even-handedly with our country's own coal mining operations, how can we tell other nation's companies what to do?