There are lots of other astronomers who are more believable and more balanced. Strittmater never mentions the attempt of the Coalition to Preserve Mt. Graham to invite the National Academy of Sciences to referee and to balance astro versus eco values. Steward Observatory rejected this offer in 1986, claiming that only Steward Observatory and the Forest Service were necessary as the bastions of objectivity. Strittmater doesn't mention that the first astro-data on Mt. Graham were wrong because of poorly planned and constructed instruments and, by the time Steward Observatory recanted its exaggerated image clarity data, Emerald Peak had been clearcut. He doesn't mention that very little was known about the astro-qualities of Emerald Peak when the University switched sites.
Conservation biology is an actual science with very specific requirements.
The book treats it as a pop culture kicker to attract buyers. The editors did not obviously redline opinions for or against the project. But, Storm's informational gaps are hopelessly galactic, the book reeks of cheap journalistic amnesia. Available in mid-November from local booksellers.