|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Forest Service Drops Outside Environmental Reviews WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2004, (ENS) - The Bush administration has advised the U.S. Forest Service to eliminate reviews of its actions by other federal agencies for compliance with endangered species, clean water, and historical preservation laws.The agency plans to remove any consultation or other "process" it deems unrelated to "the Four Threats" - fire risk, invasive species, unmanaged recreation and loss of open land - according to a memo detailing instructions given in January by Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth. The memo calls for the elimination of endangered species consultation on "inland aquatic species with both ... Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries." In addition, building on a recently finalized rule waiving Endangered Species Act consultations on fire-related activities, the Forest Service would expand this no consultation stance "to all land management activities." The policy removes the obligation for outside environmental analyses of any herbicide applications done in the name of controlling invasive plants and eliminates compliance with Historic Preservation Act rules requiring review by state agencies of protection of historical and cultural artifacts. The memo was not made public by the Forest Service but was released Thursday by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a national alliance of local state and federal resource professionals. The Bush administration has defended the new Forest Service policy as a commonsense approach to environmental reviews and insisted natural resources, public health and wildlife will be protected. But PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch says officials fail to grasp the difference between "streamlining and steamrolling." "The Forest Service's track record makes a powerful case for more outside review not less," Ruch said. The move to end interagency consultation eliminates checks on Forest Service abuses and will lead to more litigation, Ruch explained, because lawsuits would become the only avenue for securing agency compliance with resource protection laws.
Faulty Valve Stalls Restart of Davis Besse Reactor OAK HARBOR, Ohio, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - FirstEnergy's Davis Besse nuclear power plant has been shut down again. The company started producing energy from the plant's nuclear reactor Tuesday morning, but was forced to shut it down in order to fix a broken water valve.Plant officials also reported a steam leak and problems with turbine bypass valves. The plant was engaged at 22 percent power when operators reported the problem with the valve. Officials with the Nuclear Regulatory Agency said there was little if any danger from the problem, which would have kept the plant from reaching full power. FirstEnergy says it aims to restart the plant next week. Critics pounced on the setback as further evidence that the NRC should not have approved the restart of the troubled reactor. The plant had been offline for more than 2 years due to safety and maintenance concerns - several of which came from the discovery that an acid leak had created a sizeable hole in the protective reactor lid. The NRC gave FirstEnergy permission earlier this month to restart the reactor. "While it is appropriate that the plant is being shut down after this discovery, it is troubling that these problems were not identified previously by either FirstEnergy engineers or NRC plant inspectors," said Wenonah Hauter of the interest group Public Citizen. Hauter says the valves were likely malfunctioning before the plant's February 2002 shutdown and apparently were not adequately tested during pre-startup exercises of the plant late last year and early this year. "It appears that Davis-Besse is, at best, a mediocre plant that still poses dangers to the surrounding region," Hauter said. "This continuing saga highlights what happens when regulators act as promoters of the industry they are supposed to oversee."
Judge Boots Interior Department Off the Net WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - A federal judge ordered the much of the Interior Department off the Internet earlier this week. The judge ruled the department has failed to fix security holes in its computer system that put at risk payments owed to Native Americans.The only agencies under the Interior Department's command that are allowed to have Internet access are the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Park Service and the Office of Policy, Management and Budget. This is third time the Interior Department has been forced off the Internet since 2001, when the security breach was discovered. Federal law calls on the Interior Department to keep accounts for some 300,000 American Indians who qualify for energy and mineral royalties from their lands. U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lambeth ruled Monday that the Interior Department's certification that it had fixed the technical glitches of concern is "of no value as being unsworn in violation of federal statute and local rules." "If a Chief Information Officer is unwilling to swear under penalty of perjury that the systems are secure then the Court is unwilling to treat them as such," he wrote. "Beyond this, Interior's plan is facially inadequate as not providing for any independent third party to oversee its efforts and progress … Interior truly brought this on themselves." Interior officials say they are working to address the judge's concerns.
Coal Emissions of 13 States Blow in North Carolina's Face CHARLOTTE, North Carolina, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - The state of North Carolina has petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce air pollution blowing into the state from coal-fired power plants in 13 other states. The petition, filed Thursday by North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, asks the EPA to compel these plants to reduce harmful emissions.It identifies power plants in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia as causing air pollutants to enter the state of North Carolina. Cooper filed the petition under Section 126 of the Clean Air Act and asserted that these out-of-state polluters are interfering with North Carolina's ability to meet national air quality standards despite the state's success at cleaning up in-state pollution. "We have taken steps to cut down on the pollution we produce here in North Carolina, but dirty air doesn't respect state borders," said Cooper. "Since we cannot stop air pollution at the state line, we want to cut it at the source." The petition cites data that power plants in Georgia, Maryland, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia contribute significant air pollution to North Carolina in the form of ozone. Plants in all of the states listed in the petition except Maryland contribute significant particulate matter. Environmentalists applauded the move by North Carolina, which follows a strategy used by attorneys general in several Northeastern states. "North Carolina's action is a wakeup call to the federal government to clean up health-threatening pollution from the nation's power plants," said Elizabeth Ouzts, director of the North Carolina Public Interest Research Group. North Carolina is the first state in the South - one of the regions hardest hit by air pollution due largely to coal burning power plants - to petition the federal government to clean up plants in other states.
George Bush Urged to Clean Up Brother Jeb's Polluted Waters TALLAHASSEE, Florida, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - The administration of President George W. Bush should be ordered to take over the water pollution duties of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in Florida, the state governed by the President's brother Jeb Bush, two national conservation groups say. They claim the state agency is failing to adequately protect Florida's waters.Two national conservation groups - Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) - made the request Wednesday. The organizations say that after years of watching the DEP do virtually nothing to protect Florida's waters, they will now sue to force U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to reassume control over permits and enforcement in the state. "As Floridians, our way of life depends on clean rivers and unpolluted beaches," said Linda Young, Southeast director of the Clean Water Network. "Governor Bush and the federal Bush administration are more interested in protecting corporate polluters than our state's waterways. We have no other choice but to sue to force them to take action." The groups' concern comes in the wake of a Florida court ruling that found the DEP had failed to implement and enforce a permitting program for large dairies as required by Florida law and the federal Clean Water Act. The groups say the DEP is also failing to regulate water pollution from the state's industrial mining pits and paper mills. "The Jeb Bush administration has failed Florida communities time and time again, and the Bush administration in Washington has consistently ignored the state's failures," said David Bookbinder, the Sierra Club's litigation director. "By asking that EPA take control of the situation, we are hoping to hold all parties accountable for enforcing the Clean Water Act." When Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, it gave the EPA responsibility for ensuring compliance. Many states have been granted authority to issue pollution permits and take enforcement actions - Florida assumed the role in 1995. The conservation groups say the state has done an "utterly miserable job." "It is the big corporate polluters and wealthy developers who are benefiting from DEP's failure to enforce the law," said Jessica Landman, a NRDC senior attorney. "And who's paying the price? Florida residents and visitors who want to go swimming or fishing without worry, or, for that matter, take a drink from the tap." Responding to the threat of legal action, the Department said Thursday that it is "committed to protecting and restoring Florida's water and is fully implementing its delegated responsibilities under the federal Clean Water Act." Florida’s water is "cleaner and better protected today than it was five years ago" when Governor Bush took office, the DEP said in a statement. Over the last five years, Florida has invested more than $1.8 billion to clean up pollution from stormwater, upgrade drinking water facilities and improve wastewater treatment, funding more than 700 projects statewide. This year, the DEP said, Governor Bush recommended an additional $6.6 million "to accelerate restoration of Florida’s lakes and rivers using sound science to identify and clean up polluted waters." In addition, the governor has acted to protect Florida’s 600 freshwater springs, the agency said.
Fishery Observer Programs Face Budget Chop WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - The Bush administration's fiscal year 2005 budget request slashes nationwide funding for fishery observers programs by nine percent and funding for New England by 42 percent. Critics fear such cuts will undermine the ability of the observer program to generate data needed to more effectively manage the nation's fishery resources.Fishery observers are independent scientists who work alongside fishermen at sea, collecting information about what is actually caught as compared to landings data, which records only what is brought to port. These observers are critical in monitoring and assessing bycatch - marine species unintentionally caught and discarded. The United Nations estimates that some 25 percent of all captured biomass is discarded as bycatch, including sensitive species such as sea turtles, sharks and cetaceans. "We need more eyes on the ocean and the Bush proposal suggests we look the other way," said Ted Morton, federal policy director for Oceana, a Washington based international oceans advocacy organization. "The President's budget request undermines key observer programs," said Morton. "Fishery managers need better data to develop measures to reduce bycatch and to rebuild depleted fish populations." The National Marine Fisheries Service reports that it does not know the status of 76 percent of U.S. fish stocks. There are approximately 300 U.S. federally managed fisheries, yet less than 30 observer programs. Estimates put the cost of fully funding observer programs at $50 to $100 million annually. The Bush budget proposal earmarks $22.5 million for fishery observer programs - compared to $24.7 million in 2004 and $13.8 million in 2003. The New England groundfish fishery takes the hardest hit under the Bush budget; the request proposes a $4 million reduction of the $9.5 million in new funding appropriated by the Congress last year. This reduction will affect the government's ability to manage several fisheries including cod, haddock, flounder, and striped bass. Using government observer data, Oceana estimates that between 1.4 million and 2.4 million pounds of striped bass were caught and discarded in the Northeast trawl fishery between May 2002 and April 2003. A precise number of striped bass lost is not possible without funding for additional observers. "Even with the few observers currently in place," Morton said, "we have already learned that in some fisheries, threatened and endangered sea turtles are being caught at a much higher rate than originally estimated by the fishery managers." All six species of sea turtles in U.S. waters are classed as threatened or endangered.
Congress Urged to Set Individual Fishing Quota Standards WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - The Marine Fish Conservation Network today released to Congress a comprehensive report that examines the potential consequences of implementing individual fishing quota (IFQ) programs in marine fisheries.IFQ programs grant individual fishermen exclusive access to catch a percentage of the total number of fish that will be caught in a fishery. The program is an alternative to traditional fishery management methods that limit the number of fishing days in an area or lower the total annual catch to manage fishing levels. The United States needs legislation to set national standards for individual fishing quota (IFQ) programs if the systems are to avoid potential environmental and economic pitfalls, says the Marine Fish Conservation Network, a coalition of 160 commercial and recreational fishing groups, aquariums, marine science groups, and environmental organizations. The Network's report summarizes scientific research on the environmental, public trust, and socioeconomic impacts of already established quota system programs in Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Proponents contend the system promotes safety and better conservation measures, but many fishermen and conservationists are concerned that poorly regulated programs will negatively impact fishing communities and harm efforts to conserve fish populations. The report finds that individual fishing quota programs privatize publicly owned fishery resources, and often increase bycatch because fishermen may toss back less economically valuable fish. In addition, the IFQ programs tend to consolidate fishing quotas in the hands of a few large fishing businesses, excluding smaller fishermen and hurting fishing communities. "We cannot ignore the potential negative outcomes of individual fishing quota programs - the consequences are too great," said Lee Crockett, executive director of the Marine Fish Conservation Network. "Achievement of stronger conservation measures, better management of our marine resources, and fair economic opportunities for everyone involved depends on how well we regulate these IFQ programs." Congress placed a moratorium on new IFQ programs from 1996-2002 to further study the pros and cons of such programs before they were established. Currently, the Gulf of Mexico regional fishery council is are developing an IFQ program to manage red snapper and the Pacific regional fishery council is working on a groundfish IFQ program. "This report clearly makes the case that national standards must be passed by Congress before we can move forward with IFQ programs," said Peter Huhtala, senior policy director of the Pacific Marine Conservation Council and co-chair of the Network. "Unfortunately, we are running out of time to put these protective measures into place," Huhtala warned. "IFQ programs are already moving forward, so Congress must act quickly."
Horseshoe Crab Harvest Restricted to Benefit Birds ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - Fishery managers have announced strict harvest limits on horseshoe crabs in the Delaware Bay and have agreed to new conservation measures to further protect the species.The Delaware Bay is inhabited by the largest population of American horseshoe crabs. Considered "a living fossil" the species has barely changed in some 250 million years. The decision was announced last week by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Horseshoe Crab Management Board, which said its intent is to "increase the abundance of horseshoe crab eggs to meet the energetic requirements of migratory shorebirds that stopover in the Delaware Bay." The board voted 12 to three to restrict the harvest of horseshoe crab and prohibit commercial harvest and landings from May 1 through June 7 - the prime spawning season. Each spring during the high tides of new and full moons the crabs descend on the Delaware Bay to spawn. These new restrictions will go into effect in New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. New Jersey and Delaware have each set a commercial harvest limit of 150,000 crabs - Maryland's limit is 170,000. New York has also agreed to limit its catch to 150,000 crabs. The board agreed to encourage bait saving techniques; horseshoe crabs are primarily harvested as bait for the conch fishery. Conservationists including the National Audubon Society welcomed the decision, which comes amid renewed warnings that the horseshoe crab population may be declining along with several species of migratory shorebirds that depend on the crabs for food. Migrating shorebirds stop over on Delaware Bay beaches each spring to feed on the rich eggs of the horseshoe crabs. New Jersey officials say the migrating shorebird species most in peril if horseshoe crabs decline is the Western Hemisphere's Red Knot. Scientists predict the Red Knot could be extinct within six years. The migratory shorebirds travel more than 18,000 miles each year, often as many as 2,500 miles non-stop from their wintering home in Brazil to their summer home in the Arctic. The Delaware Bay is their last stop en route to the Arctic. There they eat enough horseshoe crab eggs to double their weight so that they can survive their long migration.
Congressional Democrats Score High on Animal Protection WASHINGTON, DC, March 19, 2004 (ENS) - National animal protection organizations have released a midterm report on the 108th Congress that outlines a deep partisan divide on issues important to animal rights advocacy groups.On the 100 point scale used by the organizations, Senate Democrats averaged a score of 74.3, while Senate Republicans scored a poor 16.9. Democrats in the House of Representatives scored 72.6, while House Republicans averaged just 26.7. Members of Congress from the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Coast regions were generally the most reliable supporters of animal protection, according to the report card, while members from the Interior West, Great Plains, and the South were the least supportive. Members from the Midwest fell somewhere in between. The report, released by The Humane Society of the United States, The Fund for Animals and other groups, covers animal protection issues that emerged between January 2003 and February 2004. The organizations said the Congress made progress on a number of fronts, enacting the Captive Wildlife Safety Act and providing meaningful funding for animal welfare programs, including enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act. But the groups criticized the Congress for failing to act on other issues, including measures to increase penalties for animal fighting and to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption, and for rejecting measures they believe should have received resounding approval. "One of Congress' biggest missteps was its failure to adopt an amendment to halt the slaughter of downed animals, livestock too sick or injured to walk, for human consumption," said Wayne Pacelle, a senior vice president of The Humane Society of the United States, which compiled the score card along with The Fund for Animals and other groups. "Had the no-downer policy been in place, the mad cow in Washington would have never made it into the food supply and the economic repercussions for the cattle industry would have been considerably mitigated," Pacelle said. His opinion differs from that of three witnesses to the infected cow's slaughter, who signed affidavits saying the cow was not a downer. Following the mad cow discovery, the Bush administration announced a ban on downer cattle on December 30, 2003. The animal advocacy organizations also criticized the House for its support of bear baiting. Some 190 members of the House had signed on to a bill to stop the practice on federal lands, but the organizations contend the legislation lost support after the National Rifle Association weighed in with opposition. "All federal land management agencies tell visitors never to feed bears, but they allow trophy hunters in nine states to set up thousands of dump sites - consisting of rotting meat, jelly doughnuts, and grease and honey - to lure bears to shoot them at the bait sites," said Michael Markarian, president of The Fund for Animals. "Besides being cruel and unsporting, this is a blatant and irreconcilable conflict in federal land management policy. The scorecard is available here. |
