• Experts Call on Bush to Fund Climate Change Research
  
• Tiger Funds Form Alliance to Benefit Endangered Cats
  
• Special Counsel Probes Park Police Chief Dismissal
  
• Revised Energy Bill Fails to Please Environmentalists
  
• Grand Canyon Old Growth Timber Sale Challenged
  
• Groups Ask White House to Review Biotech Wheat
  
• Slow Moving Groundwater Adds to Chesapeake Cleanup Challenge
  
• Montana Slaughters Wild Yellowstone Bison
  

Experts Call on Bush to Fund Climate Change Research

The committee that wrote the report said funding should be set aside to implement the revised strategic plan for climate change research as soon as possible.

"Advancing the science called for in the plan will be of vital importance to the nation," said committee chair Thomas Graedel, professor of industrial ecology at the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. "There are still ways in which the plan could be improved, but at this point the main challenge is to implement it vigorously."

The plan was written by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), a group formed two years ago to coordinate climate change research among 13 federal agencies.

In its revised plan, the CCSP tackles a wider array of research activities than the federal government pursued in the prior decade under the auspices of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, according to the committee.

The committee welcomed the plan's new emphasis on achieving a better understanding of how climate change will affect ecosystems and people, as well as on research to support decisions about how to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects.

Unlike the earlier plan, the revised version directly connects research on climate change and the development of technologies to address it.

But for the plan's expanded portfolio of research to succeed, it must be funded, the committee said. Although it was not given prospective budget information, the committee concluded that CCSP's current budget does not appear capable of supporting all of the activities outlined in the strategic plan.

The federal government currently spends some $1.7 billion annually on climate research and Bush officials say increases are unlikely given current budgetary restraints.

Another hurdle facing the CCSP, the committee said, is ensuring the scientific independence and credibility of its research efforts.

The presence of high level political leaders in CCSP management should help the program secure resources, but it also may lead to a real or perceived political influence that could discredit the program, the committee said.

The panel recommends the CCSP seek independent oversight, preferably by a standing advisory body and ensure its reports are reviewed by the wider scientific community and stakeholders.

The report was issued on Wednesday, the same day that more than 60 of the nation's top scientists slammed the Bush administration for suppressing and distorting scientific analysis on a range of issues - including climate change.

Tiger Funds Form Alliance to Benefit Endangered Cats

At the beginning of the 20th century, more than 100,000 tigers roamed free, but today, fewer than 7,500 remain in the wild. They survive in a patchwork of areas across Asia, from the tropical rainforests of the Indonesian island of Sumatra to the temperate oak forest of the Amur River Valley in the Russian Far East.

Habitat loss, poaching, and shrinking numbers of prey animals are responsible for putting the tiger on the endangered species list.

Unified action is critical in addressing today's threats to the world's endangered tigers, which include organized regional networks that are smuggling tiger parts that are often linked to trafficking in narcotics and weapons.

"Although terrorist threats, the economy and diseases have knocked the tiger off front page news, its status in the wild remains in need of urgent action," said John Seidensticker, Save The Tiger Fund Council chairman and senior scientist at the Smithsonian's National Zoological Park in Washington, DC.

"Scaling up efforts together is essential to ensure that we do not lose ground against the remarkable progress made so far and, just as important, that these negative forces do not impede further success," he said.

Save the Tiger Fund is a project of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in partnership with the ExxonMobil Corporation. Founded in 1995, Save The Tiger Fund has supported 226 tiger conservation projects in 13 countries.

The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a joint initiative of Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. Founded in 2000, the fund supports more than 110 nongovernmental organizations and community groups.

Now the two granting agencies will forge united tiger conservation strategies, catalyzing partner organizations and community groups to combine their efforts to benefit both tigers and people. Partnerships are the hallmark of both funds, with a focus on uniting efforts at all levels to achieve greater impact.

"Collaboration among donors and those in the front line is essential for larger, landscape level programs," said Jorgen Thomsen, CEPF executive director and senior vice president of Conservation International.

"Save The Tiger Fund's unique way of investing in conservation leaders and allied efforts have made a tangible difference for tigers," Thomsen said. "Bringing our efforts together will make greater outcomes possible to save tigers and many other species."

As part of the new alliance, CEPF has pledged $3 million over three years to at least double the size of Save the Tiger Fund's grant distribution in Asia's biodiversity hotspots, the biologically richest yet most endangered areas.

ExxonMobil Foundation has also committed an additional $3 million. Since 1992 ExxonMobil Foundation has invested more than $11 million in tiger range countries, which it says is one of the largest corporate commitments ever made to saving a species.

Special Counsel Probes Park Police Chief Dismissal

In accepting jurisdiction over the case, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has found that, as a matter of law, statements by Chief Chambers to both Congress and the media fall within the Whistleblower Protection Act and other free speech laws.

On December 9, 2003, Deputy Park Service Director Donald Murphy asked Chief Chambers to surrender her gun and badge, placed her on administrative leave and ordered her not to speak any further with the media. He acted within days of a "Washington Post" article quoting Chambers' admission of staffing shortfalls in Park Police coverage of Capital District parks and parkways.

The OSC investigation will determine whether Murphy acted improperly.

One week later, Murphy offered to forego any charges and fully restore Chief Chambers to her job if she would agree to a "gag order" giving Murphy control as to "contact and content" of all future communications with Congress or the media.

After she refused the offer, Murphy proposed to fire Chambers on the basis of her statements, as well as a handful of other allegations, most several months old, that Murphy labeled "insubordination."

The Office of Special Counsel acts as the guardian of the federal "merit system," the code that ensures fair and legal treatment of civil servants.

If investigators determine that Murphy acted in reprisal against legally protected disclosures, the OSC can move to have Chief Chambers restored as well as bring disciplinary action against Murphy for taking "a prohibited personnel action."

In the interim, the OSC can seek a "stay" that prevents further action against Chief Chambers and can also seek to have her go back to work until the matter is resolved.

For the more than 30 days since Chambers filed a rebuttal of Murphy's accusations, the Department of Interior, the Park Service's parent agency, has been struggling to decide what to do with Murphy's allegations. The Office of Special Counsel's intervention may take matters out of Interior's hands.

"It is time to end this horror show and let Chief Chambers go back to work," said PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, who added that Murphy acted to seize the Chief's badge and gun and place her under armed escort on the 25th anniversary of her swearing in as a police officer.

"Chief Chambers has been under virtual house arrest for more than two months for the alleged crime of telling the truth," Ruch said.

Revised Energy Bill Fails to Please Environmentalists

The revised bill has a price tag of only $14 billion - compared to the $31 billion version rejected by senators in November. It does not contain a controversial liability waiver for manufacturers of the gasoline oxygenate MTBE, but it is still laden with tax breaks for fossil fuel and nuclear energy.

In trimming the bill, Senate leaders cut one of the few programs environmentalists supported - a $3 billion fund for energy efficiency and savings programs.

In addition, the proposed legislation has damaging implications for weakening states' environmental authority and undermining longstanding bipartisan protections for America's oceans, according to Richard Charter, marine conservation advocate with Environmental Defense.

The revised bill still proposes a controversial plan to assign unilateral permitting and regulatory authority to the Secretary of Interior for all offshore energy related industrial facilities within the 200 mile U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone.

The bill would also arbitrarily interfere with decades of successful federal consultation with coastal states under the Coastal Zone Management Act.

In addition, it includes a giveaway of free undersea oil in fragile Alaskan areas to petroleum companies in an attempt to promote new offshore drilling in rough and spill prone waters.

"The Senate had a reasonable chance to repair the previously fatal problems with this bill between legislative sessions, but unfortunately, the current flawed version continues to unduly threaten America's coastline," Charter said. "The revised bill still bulges with expensive taxpayer funded offshore drilling incentives and budget busting tax breaks for the oil industry, while seriously jeopardizing our economically important living marine resources."

The Senate is in recess this week - debate on the new bill could begin Monday.

Grand Canyon Old Growth Timber Sale Goes to Court

The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club in the District of Arizona's Phoenix courthouse.

The groups contend that the Forest Service's proposed East Rim timber sale in remote areas of Kaibab National Forest would harm rare wildlife, create an increased risk of fire, and illegally log within designated old growth forests as well as the Grand Canyon Game Preserve.

The preserve is a protected area set aside by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 for the benefit of wildlife.

"Theodore Roosevelt would be appalled by the continued logging of old growth on the North Rim of the Grand Canyon, an area he attempted to protect nearly 100 years ago," said Brian Segee, Southwest public lands director with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Unfortunately, the Bush administration would rather sell our natural heritage to the highest bidder than honor the vision of the Republican party's greatest conservationist."

The Forest Service says the timber sale will increase forest health and decrease fire risk.

The proposal would permit the logging of at least eight million board feet of timber - enough to fill 1,800 logging trucks. Critics note the sale is 48 miles from the nearest community, and would log tens of thousands of large, fire resistant trees.

The plan also includes extensive logging within popular camping and recreation sites overlooking Grand Canyon National Park, as well as areas directly adjacent to the popular Saddle Mountain Wilderness Area.

While both plaintiff groups say they support legitimate fuels reduction measures such as thinning small trees and prescribed burns, especially in areas near at risk forest communities, the East Rim sale would allow logging of many of the largest, most fire resistant trees in one of the most remote forest areas in the state of Arizona.

The groups contend that the Forest Service violated the law in planning the East Rim Sale by failing to protect habitat for the northern goshawk and the Mexican spotted owl, both of which are listed under the Endangered Species Act.

The densest breeding population of northern goshawks in North America exists on the Kaibab Plateau. The Plateau has also been designated a National Natural Landmark for the protection of the Kaibab squirrel, a species found nowhere else on Earth in the wild.

"The East Rim timber sale will further reduce the quality and quantity of rare habitat for key wildlife species," said Aaron Isherwood, an attorney with Sierra Club. "The planned logging flies in the face of established needs for these species and ignores a recent court decision that found the Forest Service broke the law in establishing guidelines for the northern goshawk which have allowed increased logging of old growth and large diameter trees."

Groups Ask White House to Review Biotech Wheat

The groups represent diverse constituencies - the Minnesota Farmers Union, the Center for Food Safety, the Organic Trade Association, the National Catholic Rural Live Conference, and the Intertribal Agriculture Council.

The groups signed on to a legal addendum in support of the original petition filed by Northern Plains' wheat farmers last March.

At issue is a GM strain of hard red spring wheat that is resistant to herbicide created by Monsanto, a global leader in the development of GM crops. The company submitted a petition to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for commercialization of its Roundup Ready wheat variety in December 2002.

The farmers' original petition contends that the USDA is legally obligated by the National Environmental Policy Act to conduct a full environmental impact statement (EIS) on the biotech wheat and called for a moratorium on GM wheat until the environmental and socioeconomic impacts are determined.

The USDA has in the past said that GM crops are not substantially different from conventional crops, and thus they do not need an environmental review.

The petitioners are concerned that some countries have indicated they would not allow imports of the GM wheat. They fear that the introduction of Monsanto's GM wheat could cause economic hardship for all American wheat farmers.

"When GM varieties of other crops, like corn, were introduced, USDA conducted only a cursory review," said Todd Leake, a North Dakota wheat farmer and member of the Dakota Resource Council, one of the original petitioners. "As a result, U.S. farmers lost millions of dollars in export markets."

The petition argues that the EIS should assess issues like the potential loss of export markets, the feasibility of segregating biotech wheat from conventional wheat, and the creation of so-called herbicide resistant super weeds, and volunteer GM wheat plants that may be resistant to herbicides and could therefore disrupt cropping practices.

"We think we are getting the agency's attention," Leake said. "After we filed the petition last year, USDA rejected Monsanto's initial application as deficient. Our petition raised issues - like loss of export markets and the danger of super weeds - that, frankly, the USDA has never looked at seriously before in other crops."

Monsanto publicly stated it would resubmit its application for its Roundup Ready GM wheat by the end of last year, but so far has not done so.

In a cover letter submitted with the groups' addendum, Joe Mendelson, attorney with the Center for Food Safety, cited five new studies that demonstrate the potential for additional adverse agronomic impacts from the introduction of GM wheat. The letter asks the USDA to consider these studies as it decides on whether to require an environmental impact statement.

One cited report by Iowa State University agricultural economist Robert Wisner found that prices of hard spring wheat could drop by 33 percent to 52 percent if a GM wheat is commercially introduced into Montana or North Dakota in the next two to six years.

Slow Moving Groundwater Adds to Chesapeake Cleanup Challenge

Groundwater supplies about half of the water and nitrogen to streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and is therefore an important pathway for nitrogen to reach the bay, according to a recent USGS study.

Some 300 million pounds of nitrogen flow into the Bay every year, causing algae overgrowth that kills fish and harms bay grasses, which are vital habitat for crabs and small fish.

The groundwater moving to streams in the Bay watershed has an average age of 10 years.

The relatively slow movement of groundwater to streams and into the Bay will impact the "lag time" between implementation of management practices and improvement of water quality in the nation's largest estuary.

The age of groundwater in shallow aquifers underlying most of the Chesapeake Bay watershed ranges from less than one year to more than 50 years.

The majority of the groundwater - some 75 percent - is less than 13 years old, which is younger than previously thought.

The USGS study found that some 50 percent of the water in a stream is from groundwater with a range of 16 to 92 percent. Surface water runoff and soil water supply the rest of the water to a stream - both have very young ages of hours to months.

The USGS study estimated that on average 48 percent of the total nitrogen load in a stream was transported through groundwater, with a range of 17 to 80 percent in different streams.

"Knowing the amount, age and nitrogen content of groundwater entering streams helps explain some of the reasons for the relatively slow improvements in water quality of rivers draining to the Bay," said Scott Phillips, the USGS Chesapeake Bay coordinator and one of the investigators on the study. "The lessons learned from Chesapeake Bay will also help guide management decisions for protecting water quality in other areas of the nation."

Montana Slaughters Yellowstone Bison