Rachel Maddow Show: Robert Redford Interview Nov. 24, 2008

President Bush’s contempt for the environment and environmentalism raises its ugly head via his eleventh hour attacks on environmental regulations. His attempt to weaken environmental legislation is reckless and dangerous, because he is meddling with a movement that he can’t comprehend. Surely, he knows that Obama, the new Senate, and the new Congress will work to overturn these rule changes, so Bush is certainly behaving callously.

Furthermore, President Bush also knows that our country is currently focused with other pressing matters, so he may be taking advantage of tough times to impose his narrow and misguided ideology. President Bush’s repeals and weakening of environmental regulation may give irresponsible developers and polluters an opportunity to start projects and show reliance by investing time and resources. Therefore, these projects will be difficult to stop or reverse. What’s more, Obama may not be able to overturn most of Bush’s malfeasance right away, because in order to reverse President Bush’s malfeasance, any proposed responses or remedies will have to go through the administrative process (like the commenting period) before any changes can be reversed. However, Obama will at least have competent people running the country, so we can return to being a progressive country. Certainly, President Bush merely put our country backwards many years.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Via OH, FOR THE LOVE OF SCIENCE!.

On the Net:

1. EPA moves to relax clean air rules near national parks
2. Bush angers environmentalists with last-minute rule changes
3. From ProPublica:
   

   Here is a rundown of rules and regulations that the Bush administration is pushing through the rulemaking process in its waning days. We will update the list regularly by adding new rules, inserting links to breaking news on each rule, and tracking each rule through the rulemaking process. If you know of other rules we should add to this list, please send us an email here. You can use our tip-sheet to get started on your rules research.

Who needs regulation—especially environmental regulation, it’s just too inconvenient for some folks. From the Washington Post:

The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January.

The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms.

Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining.

.       .       .

A rule put forward by the National Marine Fisheries Service and now under final review by the OMB would lift a requirement that environmental impact statements be prepared for certain fisheries-management decisions and would give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests.

An Alaska commercial fishing source, granted anonymity so he could speak candidly about private conversations, said that senior administration officials promised to “get the rule done by the end of this month” and that the outcome would be a big improvement.

Lee Crockett of the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Environment Group said the administration has received 194,000 public comments on the rule and protests from 80 members of Congress as well as 160 conservation groups. “This thing is fatally flawed” as well as “wildly unpopular,” Crockett said.

Two other rules nearing completion would ease limits on pollution from power plants, a major energy industry goal for the past eight years that is strenuously opposed by Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups.

One rule, being pursued over some opposition within the Environmental Protection Agency, would allow current emissions at a power plant to match the highest levels produced by that plant, overturning a rule that more strictly limits such emission increases. According to the EPA’s estimate, it would allow millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually, worsening global warming.

A related regulation would ease limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants near national parks.

A third rule would allow increased emissions from oil refineries, chemical factories and other industrial plants with complex manufacturing operations.

These rules “will force Americans to choke on dirtier air for years to come, unless Congress or the new administration reverses these eleventh-hour abuses,” said lawyer John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The Interior Department is hell-bent on gutting Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In order to minimize the impact on endangered species, Section 7 requires developers or anyone potentially harming endangered species and their habitat to consult with federal officials to develop a plan for their proposed development project, so the ESA doesn’t actually mean zero development in most cases.  Nonetheless, weakening the ESA has been the Holy Grail for most developers, neoconservatives, and republicans.

The Interior Department has made a mockery of the public commenting process (or the democratic process) by reducing the normal commenting period of 90 days to 60 and then to a mere 30 days. Public outcry forced the Department to give the public 60 days to comment. In the end, the Department received 300,000 comments, and 100,000 of these comments were letters.

Previously, the Department decided to disallow commenting via email. This was a strategic move by the Department, because the Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must review all the comments and publish a final rule before the new president is elected. Barack Obama is against the changes to the ESA, so it is now or never for the neoconservative republicans President Bush has festooned throughout agencies such as the Interior Department. From TheNewsTribune.com, WA:

The Interior Department received 300,000 comments about the proposed changes, which supposedly were intended to prevent greenhouse gas emissions from threatening projects thousands of miles away.

About 100,000 of those comments were form letters; the ones that remain include comments from scientists, lawyers, other government agencies and members of Congress.

Actually, “comments” is something of a misnomer since the submissions can run 70 pages or more. At the pace Interior has established, each staffer will have to read and digest seven comments a minute to meet the deadline. Some paper shredders don’t work that fast.

The Interior Department’s review is sham and an insult to the people and organizations who took time to analyze the proposed rules and respond thoughtfully.

If the Bush administration succeeds in ramrodding its proposal through, it could take years for a new president to formally undo – if the next resident of the White House is so inclined.

Democrat Barack Obama is opposed to the rewrite of the endangered species law; Republican John McCain has not taken a position. McCain has said in the past that he is in favor of unspecified changes to the ESA.

The determination of this presidency to weaken wildlife protections is remarkable. Would that the same could be said for its commitment to fully vetting public policy.

To keep up with the deadline, the comment reviewers will have to review 6,250 comments per hour. From the Associated Press:

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne’s office, according to the e-mail, will be responsible for analyzing and responding to them.

The public comment period ended last week, which initiated the review.

House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., whose own letter opposing the changes is among the thousands that will be processed, called the 32-hour deadline a “last-ditch attempt to undermine the long-standing integrity of the Endangered Species program.”

At that rate, according to a committee aide’s calculation, 6,250 comments would have to be reviewed every hour. That means that each member of the team would be reviewing at least seven comments each minute.

It usually takes months to review public comments on a proposed rule, and by law the government must respond before a rule becomes final.

“It would seem very difficult for them in four days to respond to so many thoughtful comments in an effective way,” said Eric Biber, an assistant professor at the UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law.

Along with other law professors across the country, Biber sent in 70 pages of comment.

Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dale Hall told the AP on Tuesday that the short time frame for processing the comments was requested by Kempthorne and would set a record.

On the Net:

1. Consultations with Federal Agencies: Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
2. Tell us what you think! (Quickly.) (By postal mail only, please.): Bush administration hustles through ESA rule change with minimal feedback; Obama opposes
3. Stifling Public Comment On Species Act
4. Comment On Endangered Species Act
5. 200,000 Letters In 32 Hours?
6. Bush administration bent on getting last licks in
7. Rush to read 200,000 comments on Species Act
8. FWS Staff to Review Seven Comments a Minute

AGRICULTURE: Amazon Rain Forest’s Untapped Fruit Bounty

AIR POLLUTION: 35W sculptures aren’t just for looks: Cemstone became the first company in the nation to use a new form of concrete that removes carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides and sulfur dioxide from the atmosphere.

CLIMATE CHANGE: A baaa-d idea? Aussie sheep made to wear gas masks so scientists can see how their breath can affect climate

CONSERVATION: Colorado tests high tech roadkill prevention system

CORAL REEFS: Florida Town Wants to Grow Coral Reefs with Electricity: As coral reefs around the world continue to disappear, one Florida town has taken the initiative by investing $60,000 to stimulate coral reef growth using electricity. While there is not yet peer-reviewed evidence to suggest that using a low powered electrical current works, scientists are not dismissing the idea. The company that has been hired to make the reefs claims that they have had many prior successes.

DINOSAURS: Site thought to be a watering hole discovered on Arizona-Utah border where dinosaurs ‘were happy’

ELECTRIC VEHICLES: Texas Teen Builds His Own Electric Car on $10,000 Budget, Johnson Controls: electric cars will eventually win out, Berlin Announces Plans for World’s Largest Community Electric Car Infrastructure, Oreva Super Electric Car Going for $2000 in India

ENDANGERED SPECIES: Government May Weaken Endangered Species Act For Fish, IUCN Reveals That 1,141 of the 5,487 mammals on Earth Are Threatened with Extinction: The International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List reveals world’s mammals in crisis

ENERGY: Can Electricity From Trees Power Gadgets?

ENVIRONMENTALISM: Do environmental messages do more harm than good?

EVOLUTION: Scientists Discover Fish in Act of Evolution in Africa’s Greatest Lake

FUEL SPILL: Hurricane Ike Spilled 12,000 Barrels of Oil: Is Offshore Oil Worth the Risk?

FUNDAMENTALS OF OUR ECONOMY: You Buy, You Break At Sarah’s Smash Shack

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY: Geothermal Sources Could Add Significant Power Generation Capacity

GLOBAL WARMING: Memos tell wildlife officials to ignore global-warming impact: New legal memos by top Bush administration officials say that the Endangered Species Act can’t be used to protect animals and their habitats from climate change by regulating specific sources of greenhouse gas emissions, the cause of global warming.

GREEN: How green is Apple now?

GREEN CONSTRUCTION: 15 Inspiring Glimpses into the Future of Green Housing

HABITAT DEGRADATION, LOSS, & FRAGMENTATION: Chimps 90 Percent Gone in a “Final Stronghold”

HOMOSEXUALITY IS NATURAL: How gay sex can produce offspring

HYBRID TECHNOLOGY: 2010 Toyota Prius Adds Muscle at Expense of Fuel Efficiency: Toyota’s yet-to-be-unveiled 2010 Prius will have a bigger engine and a higher top speed, but improvements to CO2 emissions and fuel efficiency will take a backseat, Honda Takes on the Hybrid Motorcycle

HYDROGEN FUEL: Scientists Reach Hydrogen Storage Milestone

INVASIVE SPECIES: Aquatic alien ‘thugs’ set to meet

MARINE MAMMALS: Picture is Worth a Thousand…

NATURE: Planet’s loneliest bug revealed: A bug which lives entirely on its own and survives without oxygen in complete darkness underground has been discovered in South Africa, Deepest-Ever Fish Caught Alive on Camera

OBAMA: Racist Obama Billboard Causes Outrage, Man shot three times in street by racist gunman - for wearing Barack Obama T-shirt

OCEAN THERMAL ENERGY CONVERSION: Lockheed Martin to Develop Ocean Thermal Energy Prototype

OFFSHORE DRILLING: Making America Stupid

PLANET EARTH: Birth of an Ocean: The Evolution of Ethiopia’s Afar Depression: Formation of an ocean is a rare event, one few scientists have ever witnessed. Yet this geophysical nativity is unfolding today in one of the hottest and most inhospitable corners of the globe. Visit the site in safety through this extraordinary photographic essay

RECYCLING: Real Simple Recycling A to Z: A Comprehensive Primer on Recycling Nearly Everything, Often for a Good Cause, 7 Hurdles to Electronics Recycling

SARAH PALIN: Sarah Palin: Palling Around With Secessionists

SOCIAL ISSUES: Homeless numbers ‘alarming’

SOLAR: Solar Power Replaces Human Toil in New Rickshaws, Solar Wineries Taking Root and Coming into Bloom

TOXIC CHEMICALS: Adding the ‘Nasty Nine’ to the ‘Dirty Dozen’: The United Nations Considers Expanding Toxic Chemical Ban by 75%, Heavy Metal-Eating “Superworms” Unearthed in U.K.

WATER CONSERVATION: Caroma Profile Smart Dual Flush Toilet: 2008 Breakthrough Product

WIND POWER: Taiwan students invent wind-powered bicycle headlights, Navy charters kite-powered cargo ship to deliver equipment, Huge Offshore Wind Farm Wins Approval

WTF?: Cheney: Wildlife Conservation Has Been A ‘High Priority’ Of Bush Administration

IMAGE: NOAA fisheries biologists fix a satellite transmitter onto a female beluga whale in Cook Inlet, Alaska. (AP Photo/NOAA)

Genetic isolation from other beluga whale stocks, industrial development, and a failure to recover are some factors that resulted in NOAA’s decision to list the Cook Inlet population of beluga whales as endangered. NOAA’s decision contradicts Republican vice-presidential candidate Alaskan governor Sarah Palin’s view that Cook Inlet beluga whales are not endangered. From NOAA:

In 2000, NOAA declared the Cook Inlet beluga population depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. In response to a petition submitted by the Trustees for Alaska on April 20, 2006, the agency proposed on April 20, 2007, that Cook Inlet beluga whales be listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The act requires a final determination by Oct. 20, 2008. This announcement is the result of NOAA’s scientific review of the proposal to list Cook Inlet belugas.

The Cook Inlet beluga population declined nearly 50 percent between 1994 and 1998, based on annual scientific surveys. NOAA scientists estimated the Cook Inlet beluga population at 375 for both 2007 and 2008. Estimates have varied from a high of 653 belugas in 1994 to a low of 278 belugas in 2005.

Despite restrictions on Alaskan Native subsistence harvest of Cook Inlet belugas starting in 1999, the population is still not recovering. Between 1999 and 2006, Alaska Native hunters took a total of five Cook Inlet beluga whales for subsistence. No beluga whales were harvested in 2007 or 2008.

Cook Inlet belugas are one of five populations of belugas recognized within U.S. waters. The other beluga populations inhabit Bristol Bay, the eastern Bering Sea, the eastern Chukchi Sea, and the Beaufort Sea. Of the five stocks of beluga whales in Alaska, the Cook Inlet population is considered to be the most isolated, based on the degree of genetic differentiation and geographic distance between the Cook Inlet population and the four other beluga stocks.

The recovery of the Cook Inlet whales is potentially hindered by strandings; continued development within and along upper Cook Inlet and the cumulative effects on important beluga habitat; oil and gas exploration, development, and production; industrial activities that discharge or accidentally spill pollutants; disease; and predation by killer whales. The agency will identify habitat essential to the conservation of Cook Inlet belugas in a separate rulemaking within a year.

On the Net: Experts reject Palin’s claim over decline of beluga whales in Alaska
On the Net: Cook Inlet Alaska Beluga Whales and Beluga Whales in Western Alaska

Federal officials have added an average of 9.5 species a year to the endangered list under President Bush, compared with 65 a year under President Bill Clinton and 59 a year under President George H.W. Bush. They have designated as “critical habitat” only half the acreage recommended by federal biologists. And they are transferring key decision-making powers from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to other agencies with different priorities.

- The Washington Post

Although signed by a Republican President, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) hasn’t been popular with Republicans, corporations, or developers, and there have been numerous attempts to change the landmark legislation. The ESA doesn’t solely conserve endangered species, but it protects natural landscapes and ultimately our own health as well. However, there are many folks who don’t believe in the benefits that can bloom from conservation or environmentalism.

Back in August, the Bush Administration proposed eleventh-hour changes to the Endangered Species Act. The Administration wanted to gut the “mandatory review by independent federal scientists” component from the Act. However, allowing corporations and developers to manage endangered species is a complete antithesis to what the ESA was legislated to do. The Administration also lowered the public commenting period from 120 to a mere 30 days. However, fierce criticism forced the Administration to extend the public commenting period for an “extra 30 days.”

Of course, conservation groups are fighting back. Recently “more than 100,000 citizens opposed the Bush Administration’s attempt to severely weaken the Endangered Species Act,” and “representatives from the Endangered Species Coalition, Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, National Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity delivered over 100,000 comments emailed in from Americans of all walks of life after the Department of the Interior and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration refused to accept public comments in the form of e-mails or faxes.”

The one bit of government that hasn’t increased under George W. Bush is the ESA. Certainly, it illustrates this Administration’s agenda and priorities.

Number of new species added to the ESA by recent Presidents of the United States:

^*54 of those 58 species were added “in response to litigation.”

On the Net: ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: To Act or not to act

Is John McCain a closeted bear lover, because he certainly voted for the bear study he recently criticized at the first presidential debate in Oxford, Mississippi, and he attacked the bear study in political ads criticizing earmarks. From FactCheck.org:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain cites three absurd-sounding examples of pork-barrel spending in a recent ad: a “bridge to nowhere,” a study of the DNA of bears and a Woodstock museum.

McCain is known for fighting against earmarks, the other term lawmakers use for funding of pet projects back home. But he appears to have chosen these three because they’re easy to mock, not because he had significant involvement in removing them from the budget.

He never specifically went after the “bridge to nowhere,” and he was absent for key votes on its funding.

While he tried to cut money for several other projects in the same bill, he never proposed cutting the bear study and voted for the final bill containing it.

He wasn’t present for the most important votes on the Woodstock museum, including one on an amendment he co-sponsored to kill the earmark and divert some of the funds.

What is the objective of the bear research McCain has consistently attacked although he supported it?  The aim of the research certainly wasn’t what McCain claimed: a paternity test. From Scientific American:

Currently the front-runner for the GOP nod, McCain also hits the research in speeches on the stump, cracking jokes about bear paternity tests and criminal investigations. “I don’t know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money,” McCain railed last month during a campaign stop in Clawson, Mich. Scientists, however, are not amused: They insist that the study is not only worth every penny but that the $3-million price tag cited in the ad is, in a word, wrong.

.       .       .

“This is not pork barrel at all,” says Richard Mace, a research biologist with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). “We have a federal law called the Endangered Species Act and [under this law] the federal government is supposed to help identify and conserve threatened species.”

The grizzly has been listed as a threatened species since 1975 and scientists say that it is essential to get a handle on the population to preserve it. But, according to Kendall, until the feds decided to invest in this grizzly bear DNA study, researchers lacked the funds to conduct research at the scale necessary to get a reliable measure.

In 2002 Kendall assembled a scientific panel with representatives from the USGS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and FWP, along with other scientific and environmental organizations to determine the best way to measure the remaining grizzly population of the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem. It recommended setting up barbed wire hair-snagging stations to painlessly pluck fur from passing bears that would be used for DNA fingerprinting, a technique employed to distinguish individuals of the same species by the differences in their genetic material. This is the only way to accurately estimate population in such heavily forested terrain, where bears are difficult to spot, says Chris Servheen, a grizzly expert with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In response, the USGS set aside $250,000 to launch the Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project; the next year, Congress stepped in to provide additional funding, and from 2003 to 2007 appropriated $4.8 million to the effort, Kendall says.

Image Found Here

Here is a statement by Betsy Loyless, Senior Vice President, National Audubon Society regarding the 11th-hour changes by the Bush administration concerning the attempt to weaken the Endangered Species Act:

“Science and sound decision-making have never been the hallmark of the Bush administration. Today’s proposal to gut the Endangered Species Act is the latest in a sad list of serial offenses against the environment. In fact, it’s likely to be one of many attacks on the environment the American public can expect as this administration limps out the door. We will fight this proposal in every way possible and can say with all sincerity that we look forward to January.”

More at the National Audubon Society.

If Senator Barack Obama wins the election he will overturn any changes by the Bush Administration that weakens the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Furthermore, Senator Barbara Boxer will have a hearing on September 24^th regarding the policy changes to the ESA. From TheHill.com:

Boxer’s office is trying to get administration officials to drop the changes administratively. At the very least, aides say, they want to get Congress on the record stating the changes are illegal. If Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) wins the presidency, the changes could then be overturned easily.

“We are holding this hearing because it is essential to conduct oversight and establish a clear record when an agency acts outside the bounds authorized by law,” Boxer said in a statement. “The Bush administration’s backdoor attempt to repeal one of our landmark environmental laws must be reversed.”

But the committee’s ranking Republican, Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, is gearing up for a fight. Inhofe aides say the changes do not alter “the underlying philosophy of the act,” and that Inhofe is disappointed the changes don’t go further.

More at The Huffington Post.

The Bush Administration attempts to weaken the Endangered Species Act with eleventh-hour rulemaking. Learn the facts and what’s at stake via E&ETV. Watch the video here, or read the transcript here. An excerpt from the transcript:

Monica Trauzzi: So, how do you think this decision fits into the Bush administration’s broader stance on the environment?

John Kostyack: Well, there have been a number of similar assaults on the environment in the past, most have not been successful, some have. But we think, at this particular moment, that it’s more dangerous because people are distracted by the elections, Congress is trying to get home, and, therefore, we are extremely wary about this and a few other proposals that are moving forward, some through the regulatory process with notice and comment procedures, others much more surreptitiously through changes in legal guidance from solicitors offices and that sort of thing. So there’s definitely reason now for more concern than ever.

Monica Trauzzi: So, let’s take a look at the presidential candidates. How are you expecting things to change or will they change with a new president in office in terms of environmental regulations?

John Kostyack: Well, things are bound to change, particularly on the chief issue of our time, which is the impact of global warming on both wildlife and people. Both candidates have taken positions in favor of mandating cuts and emissions through a cap-and-trade program, both candidates have expressed support for taking the funds that would be generated from the sale of emissions permits and put them to good public uses, such as protecting our natural resources from the extremely harmful impacts of global warming. So we’re encouraged by that and we think there’s a lot of work to be done, but we’re going to have to hit the ground running with whatever administration comes in.

From the washingtonpost.com:

On Aug. 4, the state of Alaska filed a lawsuit opposing the polar bear’s listing, arguing that populations as a whole are stable and that melting sea ice does not pose an imminent threat to their survival. The suit says polar bears have survived warming periods in the past. The federal government has 60 days from the filing date to respond.

One of the plaintiff in Thursday’s lawsuit, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), lauded the choice of Palin as the Republican vice presidential nominee for reasons including her advocacy of Alaskan oil and gas exploration, which many fear could be affected by the bear’s protected status.

NAM and the petroleum institute were joined in the lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Mining Association and the American Iron and Steel Institute. They object to what they call the “Alaska Gap” in relation to the special rule the federal government issued in May in conjunction with the polar bear’s protected status. The rule, meant to prevent the polar bear’s status from being used as a tool for imposing greenhouse gas limits, exempts projects in all states except Alaska from undergoing review in relation to emissions.

The Bush Administration’s last minute changes to the ESA are pro-corporation and will impair and upset endangered species protection. Dissents can be found at the IdahoStatesman.com, ID:

Dirk Kempthorne has wanted to rewrite the Endangered Species Act for 15 years.

Now, in his final four months as the Bush administration’s interior secretary, he is pushing changes that could weaken the law.

.       .       .

Kempthorne and the Bush administration are targeting the “consultation” rules that really lend muscle to the law. The section of the law requires federal agencies to consult with wildlife managers to determine whether a road, power plant or any other project or policy will jeopardize “the continued existence of endangered species.”

Kempthorne says he wants to streamline the regulations to ensure that the consultation process isn’t used to address global warming issues. He also wants to help federal agencies avoid “unnecessary” consultations. “We need to focus our efforts where they will do the most good,” Kempthorne says.

But let’s be blunt. The Bush administration carries no credibility when it comes to this rule-making process. This is a White House that once argued - unabashedly but unsuccessfully - that man-made hydroelectric dams are part of the natural environment confronting the Northwest’s migrating salmon. It’s hard to take the administration seriously when it says it wants to merely clarify the process.

and the Billings Gazette, USA:

The administration wants these agencies to be able to determine for themselves whether mines, dams, roadways and other construction projects might do harm

 to threatened plants and animals. If these agencies don’t have concerns, there would be no need for the automatic review of the project by scientists from the National Marine Fisheries Service or Fish and Wildlife Service. These independent reviews, mandated since the act was passed in 1973, would be dramatically reduced

.       .       .

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne defends the changes. He said he fears the act will be increasingly used as a tool to regulate gases blamed for global warming. He raised this concern in May when polar bears were listed as a threatened species because climate change is threatening their Arctic habitat.

We’re troubled by the proposed changes. The timing, coming at the end of this administration’s term, is suspect. The rules would give federal agencies too much discretion in deciding whether a review is warranted. The agencies’ vested interests could likely trump species protection.

and the Kansas City Star:

The Interior Department last week set a 30-day public comment period on an administration proposal that would allow federal agencies approving or funding dams, highways and other projects to decide for themselves — without input from government experts — whether endangered species are likely to be harmed.

That is half the time that was originally scheduled in a draft obtained by The Associated Press. A shorter time frame would give the administration a better chance of imposing the rules before the presidential election.

Group representatives urged Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez in a letter Friday to extend public comment from 30 to 120 days.

An Interior spokeswoman Friday said requests for more time were always considered, but 30 days was not unusual.

—
Photo source for attribution here (Endangered species sign), here (Burrowing owl), here (Flycatcher), here (Hand next to fish), here (Manatee warning) and here (Nene geese). The authors or licensors of these images do not endorse my work or me and their images are protected under an attribution license.

Two environmental causes I strongly recommend:

Regarding endangered species protection:

Tell the Bush Administration to protect endangered wildlife! Bush must not weaken the Endangered Species Act in order to impose the agenda of those politicians and corporations that support cheap, quick and easy unsustainable development and an agenda of climate change disbelief

Facts on the weakening of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)

1. There is normally a 90-day comment period given by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for rule changes. However, to expedite the weakening of the ESA, the comment period was originally reduced to 60 days and then to 30 days. The weakening of the ESA isn’t just detrimental to natural landscapes, but such obtuse and reckless action is characteristic of the Bush Administration, whose policies are eroding and replacing the grass roots movement and individualism with corporatism. We must stop the Bush Administration from imposing their radical agenda of resisting climate change policy, and allowing large corporations to take the cheap and quick route at the detriment of both wildlife and ordinary Americans. More at Gristmill.
2. Normally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allows for electronic commenting through email or the Internet, but public comments regarding the ESA rule changes will have to be hand written and mailed. However, the “NRDC is backdooring the limitation by accepting internet comments here, which they will print and deliver to the Fish and Wildlife Service.”  More at The Thin Green Line.
3. Democrat Barack Obama opposes Bush’s ESA changes. However, Republican John McCain had no comment regarding the changes. From Yahoo! News:
   

   “This 11th-hour ruling from the Bush administration is highly problematic. After over 30 years of successfully protecting our nation’s most endangered wildlife like the bald eagle, we should be looking for ways to improve it, not weaken it,” said Obama campaign spokesman Nick Shapiro. “As president, Senator Obama will fight to maintain the strong protections of the Endangered Species Act and undo this proposal from President Bush.”

Regarding the false promises of offshore drilling:

Tell your members of Congress that we must resist drilling and pursue clean, renewable energy alternatives

As American consumption continues to grow, the infliction of habitat degradation, loss, and fragmentation in addition to human-wildlife conflicts will increase. Therefore, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will draw more attention as it affects people’s lives. Like our Constitution and the Civil Rights Act, the ESA represents an ideal. The ESA should not be manipulated or mitigated for political gain but must continue to exist as a strong regulatory tool which we use to save ourselves from extinction. From Yahoo! News:

Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said late Monday the changes were needed to ensure that the Endangered Species Act would not be used as a “back door” to regulate the gases blamed for global warming. In May, the polar bear became the first species declared as threatened because of climate change. Warming temperatures are expected to melt the sea ice the bear depends on for survival.

.        .       .

The new rules were expected to be formally proposed immediately, officials said. They would be subject to a 30-day public comment period before being finalized by the Interior Department. That would give the administration enough time to impose the rules before November’s presidential election. A new administration could freeze any pending regulations or reverse them, a process that could take months. Congress could also overturn the rules through legislation, but that could take even longer.

.        .       .

“We have always had concerns with respect to the need for streamlining and making it a more efficient process,” said Joe Nelson, a lawyer for the National Endangered Species Act Reform Coalition, a trade group for home builders and the paper and farming industry.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the proposed changes illegal.

“This proposed regulation is another in a continuing stream of proposals to repeal our landmark environmental laws through the back door,” she said. “If this proposed regulation had been in place, it would have undermined our ability to protect the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the gray whale.”

.        .       .

“This is the fox guarding the hen house. The interests of agencies will outweigh species protection interests,” said Eric Glitzenstein, the attorney representing environmental groups in the lawsuit over the wildfire prevention regulations. “What they are talking about doing is eviscerating the Endangered Species Act.”

Simply deplorable.

ANIMAL WELFARE: Wild horses may face death sentence

ANTARCTIC MELTING: At Antarctic Peninsula, Fast Change

BIODIVERSITY: Bat bonanza: 100+ species found in 5 acres of jungle

CARBON: McCain flips flops on flip flop re: CA CO2, The world’s wetlands, threatened by development, dehydration and climate change, could release a planet-warming “carbon bomb” if they are destroyed…

CARPOOLING: It’s time to start thinking in terms of PMPG, people-Miles-per-gallon

CLIMATE CHANGE: Glacier tunnel collapses, Yellowstone geysers may stop erupting, study suggests, Some European grasslands may resist warming, Rare Argentina winter ice break

CORALS: Coral-wrecking starfish curbed by fishing regs, Tainted African dust clouds harm U.S., Caribbean reefs, A third of reef-building corals at risk of extinction

CONSERVATION: McCain turns back on Grand Canyon: GOP hopeful talks like Teddy Roosevelt but doesn’t act like him, Fatal attack on conservationists’ truck in gorilla park

DEVIL FACIAL TUMOUR DISEASE (DFTD): Cancer causing Tasmanian devils to breed younger

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: N. Rockies wolves get federal protection restored

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: Stanford Environmental Law Clinic announces Ninth Circuit upholds case requiring U.S. EPA to regulate invasive species pollution, 9th Circuit Court tells EPA to close loophole for ballast water

EVOLUTION: Bug-eyed flatfish evolution revealed

FISHERIES: Mexican resorts destroying mangroves, dooming fisheries

FUEL ECONOMY: Smart ForTwo MHD stop-start system is claimed to reduce petrol consumption by eight per cent

GIANT SQUID: Giant squid dissected in public

GREEN CONSTRUCTION: 7,000 square foot home has zero carbon footprint

HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT: Planes, machinery and car traffic are so noisy now in many cities that some birds must tweet louder and alter their songs in an attempt to be heard over the near-deafening urban din, new research has determined…., Badgers, rabbits undermine England’s ancient monuments

HYBRID TECHNOLOGY: Honda’s hybrid-only Prius fighter!, Nissan, GM and Ford agree to build hybrid taxis for New York City

MINING: MSHA: Poor engineering left Crandall mine primed for killer collapse

NATURE: 8 Natural wonders added to UN heritage list

NEW SPECIES: Mystery bug invader stumps museum experts

NUCLEAR POWER: A renegade against Greenpeace: Why he says they’re wrong to view nuclear energy as ‘evil’

NUCLEAR WEAPONS: Pentagon: Over 1000 nuclear weapon parts missing?

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: Discounts help bus travel thrive in some cities

SCIENCE: Yellow submarine probes undersea world, New maps to help tap ocean winds, Magnets can deter sharks: research, Northern lights mystery exposed by scientists

SYNGAS: Ottawa building North America’s first gasification facility

WIND POWER: Whales, dolphins inspire wind turbine tech

“Getting people to care about the 238 species of spiders, clams, moths, snails, isopods and other invertebrates on the list of endangered species is about as likely as a magazine putting a photo of a dung beetle rather than a polar bear on its cover.”

- Sharon Begley writing in her Newsweek science column. Read more in “Praise the Humble Dung Beetle.”

—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse me or my work and their image is protected under an attribution license.

IMAGE of a Coastal Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

By the Center for Biological Diversity

PORTLAND, Ore.— The U.S Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not give Columbia River and southwestern Washington populations of the coastal cutthroat trout a fair shake when it denied the trout protection under the Endangered Species Act. The plaintiffs in the case, Center for Biological Diversity, Oregon Wild, Pacific Rivers Council, and WaterWatch, are hopeful that the ruling will lead to much-needed protection for the imperiled fish.

“The sea-run coastal cutthroat trout is near extinction in this corner of the Pacific Northwest,” said Noah Greenwald, science director with the Center for Biological Diversity. “These fish need the safety net provided by the Endangered Species Act to survive.”

Coastal cutthroat have evolved a unique survival strategy, with some fish spending their entire lives in small tributary streams while others are anadromous, migrating to the ocean and returning to spawn much like salmon. The greatest concern is for ocean-migrating populations, whose migratory corridors are severely threatened by habitat loss caused by logging, grazing, hydropower, urban development, and other land and water use.

“Like all too many iconic fish up and down the West Coast, sea-run cutthroat are suffering from the one-two punch of poor freshwater and marine conditions,” said Earthjustice attorney Steve Mashuda, who represented the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. “The Court told the government that it cannot continue to ignore the problems plaguing sea-run trout habitat in this region. We’re hopeful that the Service will listen and grant these fish the protections they need.”

Based on a status review produced by the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Clinton administration proposed to protect coastal cutthroat trout in the Columbia River and southwestern Washington as threatened in 1999. On July 5, 2002, the Bush administration reversed the proposed rule, even though there wasn’t any new information indicating the trout was faring better.

The Bush administration has only protected 58 species of plants, animals, and fish to date, compared to 522 species protected during the Clinton administration and 231 during the elder Bush’s tenure. Under this administration, the Fish and Wildlife Service has not protected a single U.S. species in 712 days. This is by far the longest period without a new species being protected since the landmark federal law was passed, surpassing even James Watt, who, under President Reagan, in 1981 and 1982 went 382 days without listing a species.

“The Bush administration denied coastal cutthroat trout protection not because the species doesn’t need to be protected, but because of hostility to the Endangered Species Act,” said Greenwald. “Decisions about how to protect our rivers and fish need to be based on science, not politics.”

“The coastal cutthroat trout is one of many fish threatened by unwise development of land and water in the West,” said Dr. Chris Frissell, director of science and conservation with the Pacific Rivers Council. “Protection of the coastal cutthroat trout and its habitat benefits us all, saving high-quality rivers and streams and restoring the web of life in fresh waters.”

Coastal cutthroat trout are unique and beautiful fish that were once abundant across the Pacific Northwest. Their name is derived from the brilliant slash of orange or red that usually marks their lower jaw line. Resident cutthroat living in streams may only be a few inches long as adults, while sea-run cutthroats may reach a length of 20 inches or more.

On the Net: Movements of Coastal Cutthroat Trout (Onchorhynchus clarki clarki) in the Lower Columbia River: Tributary, Mainstem and Estuary Use, March 2008 (pdf 1.2mb)

On the Net: Evaluate Status of Coastal Cutthroat Trout in the
Columbia River Basin Above Bonneville Dam

IMAGE: The Asian arowana comes in different color morphs and all are treated as a single species.

A San Francisco man has been charged and sentenced to federal prison with violating the Lacey Act for selling an Asian arowana, which is a CITES Appendix I species to an undercover U.S. Fish and Wildlife agent.

The Lacey Act from 1900 with subsequent revisions is America’s oldest wildlife protection statute and is much broader than the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Historically, the Act was originally instrumental in protecting egrets and herons from the feather trade.

The Act protects species that are regulated by other federal and state wildlife protection statutes such as the ESA or ratified international agreements or treaties like the 1973 CITES or the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna. CITES is an international agreement to protect both animal and plant species from extinction due to uncontrolled trade. To work, CITES must be enforced by individual countries since the trade in threatened and endangered species crosses between borders. Therefore, in the United States the Lacey Act is a regulatory tool to enforce CITES.

The Asian arowana or Scleropages formosus is an Appendix I species and according to CITES, trade in Appendix I species “is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.” For Asian arowanas only certain breeders are certified to keep and sell the animals and the fish are tracked through certificate and microchip. From the San Francisco Chronicle, USA:

A San Francisco man has been sentenced to two months in federal prison and four months in home confinement for selling an endangered species of fish over the Internet.

Danny Yep, 27, sold an Asian arowana fish in July 2004 to an undercover U.S. Fish and Wildlife agent on an Internet site called Aquabid, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White said in sentencing Yep. At a hearing March 20 in San Francisco, White also fined Yep $2,000 and placed him on three years’ probation.

Yep pleaded guilty in December to a felony count of violating the Lacey Act, which makes it illegal to sell an endangered species. He admitted that he knew the fish was listed as endangered and that both the importation and sale of the fish were illegal.

The Asian arowana fish, also known as Asian boney tongue fish, is native to Indonesia and Malaysia, federal prosecutors said. Many Chinese people consider it to be a symbol of good luck, and a single fish can cost $3,000, authorities said.

Image Found Here

Due to pressure from the Center for Biological Diversity, NOAA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration recently recognized Eubalaena japonica as a separate species of Right Whale.

E. japonica or the North Pacific right whale was formally considered the North Pacific stock of the species E. glacialis or the North Atlantic right whale. According to The World Conservation Union or IUCN, “recent genetic [analysis] support the concept of three separate species, one in the North Atlantic, one in the North Pacific, and one in the Southern Hemisphere…”

NOAA will now have to develop a species recovery plan for E. japonica. In addition, the move will influence decisions to drill for oil in areas deemed as critical habitat.

E. japonica is one of the most endangered marine mammals in the world and their numbers may be so depleted from whaling that the species may be functionally extinct. For example, since the North Atlantic right whale has a very small population and reproduces very slowly it has a potential biological removal of zero animals since the species cannot sustain any loss of any individuals especially females. The loss of a female right whale means loss in future reproductive potential. Ship strikes and interactions with fishing gear threaten both the North Atlantic and Pacific right whales. From the Kodiak Daily Mirror, AK:

The ruling was important for CBD, not just because it forced NOAA to recognize all three species, but because it also forced NOAA to come up with a recovery plan specific to the North Pacific right whale.

“Right whales in the North Atlantic occur off Massachusetts, off New York and in the busiest shipping lanes on the Atlantic seaboard, right where everyone sees them,” Cummings said. “They’re highly imperiled, but they also receive a lot of attention.”

He said, as a result of the attention they received, when the original right whale recovery plan was developed in the 1990s the Atlantic right whale received most of the benefit and the North Pacific right whale received barely a mention.

“(It was a) few hundred-page document all about Atlantic right whales with only a couple pages about the North Pacific one saying, ‘There might be a few of them left, we don’t really know too much about them,’” Cummings said.

Image Found Here

On the Net: Center for Biological Diversity: Petition to List the North Pacific Right Whale as an Endangered Species Under the ESA

It is not a generalization or spin that some conservatives and republicans want to quash the Endangered Species Act or limit its use to flagship species like Bald Eagles or Blue Whales. The problem is that people arguing either of these points do not understand basic principles of ecology or how the environment works. Species depend on each other for survival in the web of life. A seemingly insignificant species like an insect may be absolute necessary for the survival of a flagship species or plant that can cure current maladies or those not yet named.

All species matter. From Mother Earth News, KS:

Image Found Here

The first wolverine in 30 years has been confirmed by photographic evidence in California and the first wild Eastern gray wolf in 160 years was confirmed in Massachusetts by DNA analysis. Is the evidence that carnivores are returning or is it too early to make predictions?

The wolverine was proposed for the endangered species list but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service argued that there was no data to warrant the listing. The agency stated that the species naturally occur in low densities and are too hard to observe. Camera traps can be used as a methodology to determine species abundance. However, the animals are so elusive that previous camera trapping in the area did not reveal any wolverines. Perhaps employing camera traps as a methodology to determine wolverine abundance should be intensified.

There was an attempt to delist gray wolves of the Northern Rockies and Western Great Lakes but the delisting was challenged by several conservation groups just before the delisting was placed in the Federal Register. If wolves are delisted, states can assume management of the species. Some like Kevin Bottrell argue that challenging the delisting is unreasonable. However, state management plans often mirror that of ungulates like Elk and not large carnivores. In addition, questioning the credibility of the delisting is reasonable given the history of the U.S. Department of the Interior under the Bush Administration. These conservation and environmental groups are not going to court with an agenda to list every species because their agenda is to have species recover so species can be delisted.

In the future more species will need listing not because of an environmental agenda to list all species but because of expansion, fragmentation and failed policies under the Bush Administration. Population growth is an issue too. The more people added to this planet the more natural resources and space they will need. Population expansion is directly correlated with habitat loss, degradation, fragmentation, poverty and wars. I believe federal law like