While many environmental groups lauded Gov. John Hickenlooper’s executive order Tuesday committing Colorado to the carbon emissions goals of the Paris climate accord, one environmental activist was doing a double-take – and reaching out to the media with a fact check.

Gary Wockner, executive director of Save the Colorado River, sent an email to Colorado media, suggesting they shouldn’t give credit where it isn’t due:

From: Gary Wockner <gary@garywockner.com>Date: Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:20 PMSubject: Hickenlooper undercuts Colorado’s climate goals established by Ritter?

Hi Colorado Environmental Media,

Many of you are reporting that Hickenlooper’s EO (executive order) this morning was a step forward. It actually, now offically and legally, undercuts (Democratic former Gov. Bill) Ritter’s EO.Read: https://www.dailycamera.com/guest-opinions/ci_30348292/kevin-cross-and-gary-wockner-hick-moves-coloradoRitter was at 20% by 2020 and 80% by 2050. EOs are official and legally binding unless they are changed by a future EO, which Hick just did.At best, Hick’s EO – of 26% by 2025 and 35% by 2035 – is a wash, but may be a step backward.And in either case, emissions are going up, not down, and so it’s quite a stretch for Hick to think he’s going to make emissions go down.

Happy to chat,Gary

The link in Wockner’s missive is to a commentary he penned with fellow environmentalist Kevin Cross last fall for the Boulder Daily Camera. At the time, Hickenlooper had floated the idea of an executive order that would set carbon emissions standards similar to those in the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, which had been halted by a court challenge (and is now effectively moot under the Trump administration). In their commentary, Wockner and Cross called out the governor’s draft executive order for being “substantially less ambitious than the goals set forth by Gov. Ritter in 2008.” 

Last year’s draft order also was substantially the same as the executive order signed this week.

Hickenlooper later decided not to proceed with last year’s initiative.

The overall accolades for Hickenlooper by environmentalists today represent a turnabout from just last fall, when leading environmental groups were heavily lobbying then-presidential hopeful and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton against picking Hickenlooper for her Interior secretary. They saw the onetime petroleum geologist as being too easy on the oil and gas industry.

What a difference a presidential election makes. The Trump team went on to pick former Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head – critics say cripple – the Environmental Protection Agency. And the president pulled out of the Paris accord.

By comparison, a Hickenlooper regime at Interior would have been a cake walk for the environmental movement. Maybe that’s why their praise for Hick was so effusive this time around.