• Energy Bill Stalled Until 2004
  
• More Natural Gas Found in Gulf of Mexico
  
• EPA Receives Heat for Low Level Radioactive Waste Plan
  
• Genetic Analysis Could Combat Ivory Poaching
  
• New Jersey Bear Hunt Blasted by Enviros
  
• The Merits of High Tech Wolf Conservation
  
• Study Suggests ESA Listings Do Not Always Help Species
  
• New York Council Eyes Cleaner Air
  

Energy Bill Stalled Until 2004

The vote is blow to the Bush administration, which strongly supports the energy legislation. Much of the 1,200 page bill, which was crafted by House and Senate Republican leaders, mirrored the White House energy policy. The House passed the 1,200 bill last week by a vote of 246 to 180.

Supporters of the legislation say it is needed to reinvigorate domestic energy production, minimize price spikes of natural gas and to implement changes that could help prevent blackouts.

But the bill has no shortage of critics, who cite the high cost - including $24 billion in tax breaks - along with roll backs to environmental laws.

Two thirds of the subsidies are earmarked for coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries.

Failure in the Senate, however, largely turned on the debate over provisions concerning two gasoline additives - ethanol and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). The bill's mandated doubling of ethanol production was enough to entice several Democrats from farm states, including Minority Leader Tom Daschle.

But the safe harbor provision for manufacturers of MTBE was too much for most Democrats and a handful of Republicans, who stood firm despite intense lobbying by the Republican leadership and the White House.

Senator Pete Domenici, a New Mexico Republican and cochair of the conference committee that wrote the final bill, told colleagues that the House leadership had insisted on the MTBE provision.

Domenici warned that members who opposed the bill will be blamed if another blackout occurs or if natural gas prices rise.

Fellow Republican Larry Craig of Idaho said the bill was "revolutionary in driving the nation towards having reliable energy again."

"Shame on the Senate" for not passing the legislation, Craig said.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham echoed that sentiment.

"We have yet to get our energy house in order," Abraham said. "And that will not happen until the Senate passes the comprehensive energy bill."

But environmentalists hailed the blockage of a bill they believe would have been disastrous for the nation's environment and its economy.

"By throwing in the towel on this massive payoff to polluters, Senate leaders have handed a major victory to the environment and a major defeat to the Bush administration and its industry allies," said Sara Zdeb, legislative director for Friends of the Earth. "Proponents have vowed to revive it in January, but the more time senators have to read the fine print in this bill, the more outraged they will be by its special interest handouts."

More Natural Gas Found in Gulf of Mexico

Interior Secretary Gale Norton cited the figures in an attempt to rally support for the energy bill, which has now been shelved by Congress until 2004.

Norton said the bill would have spurred production of these natural gas resources in the Central and Eastern Gulf off the coasts of Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama.

"We now believe as much as 55 trillion cubic feet of natural gas exists in the deep shelf area of the Gulf of Mexico," Norton said. "If converted into electricity, 55 trillion cubic feet of natural gas could provide nearly a three year energy supply for every home in America."

In releasing the study last week, MMS officials said new data and a better understanding of the deep gas potential due to recent discoveries prompted the increased estimate, which is up from the previous estimate of 20 trillion cubic feet.

Agency officials acknowledge that this new estimate is seen as the possible greatest amount of natural gas in the area. The deep shelf lies 15,000 feet or more below the outer continental shelf in water depths of more than 650 feet.

Although much of the deep shelf is accessible to energy producers from existing infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico, Norton says significant and expensive technological challenges stand in the way.

The energy bill would have provided incentives to remove these hurdles, Norton said, and would help "maintain low prices and adequate supplies for American families."

The supply and cost of natural gas has become a major issue for the Bush administration.

The United States is the world's largest consumer and producer of natural gas - some 84 percent of natural gas consumed in the United States is produced domestically.

Price spikes over the past two years have underscored the nation's increasing demand for natural gas, demand expected to grow some 50 percent over the next two decades.

Domestic production is not predicted to keep pace with demand and the White House and many in Congress are keen to increase development of U.S. natural gas supplies.

The interest in getting natural gas from federal lands is understandable - more than 60 percent of the nation's future natural gas reserves lie beneath public lands in the Rocky Mountains and Alaska and in offshore waters managed by the federal government.

Some 85 percent of the outer continental shelf is barred from production by a federal moratorium.

Critics of the Bush administration say the natural gas crunch the nation faces is the result of inadequate storage and transportation, not supply.

A January 2003 report by the Interior Department that found 88 percent of the "technically recoverable" natural gas resources and 85 percent of the "technically recoverable" oil on federal lands in the Rocky Mountain region are currently available for leasing and development.

And a survey in 2000 by the MMS found that 80 percent of the nation's undiscovered, economically recoverable outer continental shelf gas is located in the Central and Western part of the Gulf of Mexico, which is currently not subject to the moratorium.

EPA Receives Heat for Low Level Radioactive Waste Plan

Last week the EPA proposed to allow the storage of low level radioactive waste in landfills designed and permitted only for chemical wastes, industrial wasters, and possibly municipal garbage. Current regulations require such waste to be sent to facilities specifically licensed for radioactive materials and regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the EPA.

The proposal would facilitate this by allowing mixed radioactive and hazardous wastes to be considered only hazardous.

The proposal creates an opportunity for regulations governing the management and disposal of 'low-activity' radioactive "to be rolled back," Feinstein said in her letter to Leavitt. "Radioactive waste, if not stringently regulated, could be disposed of in facilities that are neither designed for nor licensed to accept such materials, to the detriment of our environment and the health of our citizens."

Feinstein says the type of radioactive materials that would be affected by any change in the current regulations is "significant."

"Although the Environmental Protection Agency has given assurances that the wastes under review contain only small amounts of radioactive material, these assurances are unpersuasive in the face of the high risk of potential harm to the health and safety of Americans and our environment," she wrote.

The California Democrat noted that in 1992 a similar effort by the NRC to deregulate low activity radioactive waste was blocked by Congress, "prompted both by public outcry and Congressional concern about losing control over radioactive waste."

"That concern has not abated in the intervening ten years," Feinstein told Leavitt.

EPA officials say the proposal is only the first step towards revising the rule and that the decision is far from final. The public can comment on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking through March 17, 2004.

But a coalition of environmental groups is also convinced the proposal should be scrapped.

"The EPA's proposal is to deregulate radioactive waste pure and simple," said Diane D'Arrigo, Nuclear Waste Project director at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS).

The coalition, which includes NIRS, the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, Sierra Club, and Public Citizen sent a letter last week to Leavitt voicing their opposition to the proposal.

Genetic Analysis Could Combat Ivory Poaching

The analysis can help show which part of Africa the ivory originated from, providing enforcement officials with integral information to holding firm on the international ban on selling African elephant ivory.

"[This method] enables determination of where stronger antipoaching efforts are needed and provides the basis for monitoring the extent of the trade," the researchers write in the December issue of "Conservation Biology."

Although international trade in African elephant ivory was banned in 1989, poaching still continues and last year the Singapore government seized 6.5 tons of ivory, the largest seizure in the history of the ivory trade.

"The flow of illegal ivory appears to have markedly increased in the past year," said researcher Samuel Wasser of the University of Washington in Seattle.

Wasser and colleagues extended a genetic test they had developed that can distinguish blood and tissue samples of elephants from different parts of Africa. The test can distinguish forest elephants from savanna elephants, and can even distinguish elephants from different part of the savanna - such as north-central savanna and eastern-southern savanna.

The researchers say that depending on where the elephants came from, the test is 80 percent to 95 percent accurate.

They adapted their genetic test to ivory, using African elephant tusks that were at least 10 to 20 years old. Even though tusks are teeth, they still contain some DNA and the researchers found that a small amount of ivory - 120 milligrams or a cubic centimeter - was enough for the test.

Being able to track the origin of illicit African elephant ivory could help law enforcers pinpoint where poaching is the heaviest, which in turn could both increase ivory seizure rates and deter poachers.

And if international negotiators agree to relax the ivory ban - something requested by several southern African countries - tracking the source of ivory could show whether such relaxing of the ban leads to an increase in elephant poaching in other parts of the continent.

New Jersey Bear Hunt Blasted by Enviros

The state has approved the hunt amid some concern that conflicts between black bears and humans are on the rise in New Jersey.

A coalition of prominent conservationists, biologists, and animal protection groups have asked state and federal officials to prohibit bear hunting on protected parklands within the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area.

"Allowing the trophy hunting of bears for the first time in more than three decades is bad enough, but allowing it to take place in a federal park with imperiled species simply goes beyond the pale," said Michael Markarian, president of The Fund for Animals.

Delaware Water Gap encompasses more than 67,000 acres of protected park land, home o more than 130 species of rare and endangered birds, mammals, and plants - including a vulnerable population of wintering bald eagles.

Allowing the bear hunt at the park would violate federal environmental laws, the coalition says, and it will file litigation if the hunt goes forward.

The critics note that a similar hunting program at Cape Cod National Seashore was stopped in federal court earlier this year.

They claim that the bear hunt would violate the National Park Service Organic Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act, because the National Park Service has failed to: set any limits on the number of hunters who may enter the park or on the number of bears who may be killed; review the environmental impacts on the bear population and park resources; solicit comment from the public; or engage in consultation concerning potential impacts on threatened and endangered species.

"These black bears have never been hunted - they are shy animals who trust humans and will be especially vulnerable," said Sue Russell, policy director for the New Jersey-based Center for Animal Protection. "Because of that, an already tenuous population will be hard hit, and the government has not accounted for this at all."

The letter was sent to John Donahue, superintendent of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and Interior Department Secretary Gale Norton by The Fund for Animals, The Center for Animal Protection, The Humane Society of the United States, The Animal Protection Institute, The Vernon Civic Association, The Raptor Trust and several concerned individuals.

Steve Ember, a hike leader who has led hundreds of hikers into the Delaware Water Gap, was one who signed the letter.

"Almost every hiker I have known has been thrilled to see black bears in New Jersey," Ember said. "The experience of observing wild bears ranks among the highest benefits of hiking. We do not want our bear population and our hiking experiences jeopardized in New Jersey."

The Merits of High Tech Wolf Conservation

New research shows that movement activated guards with strobe lights and sound recordings can help keep wolves and other large carnivores

"High-technology devices are much more expensive, complicated and limited in effectiveness than a single bullet from a high powered rifle, but they also allow a predator to live - surely the goal of conservation," said study coauthor John Shivik of the United States Department of Agriculture, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center and Utah State University in Logan.

The work is part of a six paper special section co edited by the Wildlife Conservation Society's Adrian Treves on the conflict between people and carnivores in the December issue of "Conservation Biology."

The researchers note that conflicts between people and carnivores are rising as people spread into remote habitats and as large carnivores recover from past eradication efforts. Although wildlife managers often address these conflicts by killing "problem" animals, this runs counter to conservation efforts and could impede the recovery of rare carnivores.

"To promote the existence and expansion of large carnivores, conservation biologists should assist with the real world problems predators cause," say the researchers.

Shivik and his colleagues did two experiments to see if movement activated devices could deter predators from feeding.

First, the researchers compared the predators' consumption of road killed deer carcasses before and after treating them with movement activated guards. This experiment was done on wild predators including wolves and bears in northwest Wisconsin.

In the second experiment, the researchers compared wolves' consumption of sled dog chow before and after treating it with movement activated guards.

This experiment was done on captive wolves at the Wildlife Science Center in Forest Lake, Minnesota.

The researchers say both experiments showed that the movement activated guards deterred the predators from feeding.

In the experiment with wild predators, the movement activated guards decreased the consumption of deer carcasses by about two thirds; in the experiment with captive wolves, the consumption of dog food decreased by about three quarters.

The researchers acknowledge that the movement activated guards have some drawbacks - they do not keep the predators away completely, and they are too costly and complicated to be feasible for many wildlife managers.

But the promise is there, Shivik and colleagues say.

"Non lethal approaches to managing predation ... provide a means for conservation biologists to target areas with high predation levels and increase acceptance of large mammalian predators," the researchers said.

Study Suggests ESA Listings Do Not Always Help Species

Since then, the researchers report that private landowners in their study have degraded as much habitat as they have enhanced, and most oppose the biological surveys that are critical for conserving species.

"Private landowners' responses suggested that the current regulatory approach to rare species conservation is insufficient to protect the Preble's mouse," the researchers write in the December issue of "Conservation Biology."

Some critics of the ESA have long held the belief that listing endangered species may not help protect them on private property because landowners may wreck their habitat to avoid land-use restrictions.

More than 90 percent of federally listed species live at least partly on nonfederal land and as many as half live entirely on nonfederal land, much of which is private.

Researchers from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor surveyed 379 landowners to find out how they responded to the listing of the Preble's jumping mouse, which lives in riparian areas in parts of Colorado and Wyoming. Much of the mouse's known habitat is on private land.

The survey showed that a quarter of the land in the study had been managed to improve the mouse's habitat, but another quarter had been managed to keep the mouse from living there.

It found landowners were more likely to have improved the mouse's habitat if they valued nature or had gotten information from conservation organizations.

Landowners were more likely to have destroyed the mouse's habitat if they depended economically on agriculture, or thought that landowners should not be responsible for species conservation.

The survey also showed that 56 percent of the landowners would not allow a biological survey to determine the abundance and distribution of the mouse on their land, information that is essential for developing and fine tuning conservation plans.

The researchers say their work suggests that listing the mouse may have done more to hurt it than to help it.

They contend that better approaches could include letting landowners know how conserving the mouse's habitat can benefit them - for example, riparian vegetation also benefits landowners by reducing erosion. In addition, greater cooperation might be achieved by reimbursing landowners for the cost of fencing to keep cows away from riparian areas and reducing landowners' fears of regulation by including them in the conservation decision making process.

New York Council Eyes Cleaner Air

Nonroad engines, which include construction machinery, marine engines and others, are among the least regulated and most highly polluting sources of key asthma triggers.

Nationally, nonroad engines emit more fine particulate matter (PM2.5) than cars and trucks combined. The pollutant has been linked to a range of respiratory illnesses, including asthma.

Clean air is a considerable problem in New York, where more than 100,000 residents suffer from asthma - including more than 14,000 children.

In some Harlem neighborhoods 25 percent of children have asthma.

Ultra low sulfur diesel fuel combined with the best available retrofit technology has the ability to reduce diesel emissions by up to 90 percent.

On December 1, the New York City Council will hold a hearing - and potentially a vote - on the legislation.

The regulations for clean fuel and retrofit filter and catalyst technologies are designed to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides - a key ingredient in urban smog.

The ultra low sulfur diesel fuel will contain a sulfur content of 15 parts per million. Current engines run on fuel with a sulfur content from 500 to 3400 parts per million and many have no pollution controls on their tailpipes.

The bill would call for the use of the cleaner fuel immediately, with greater flexibility for implementing retrofit technologies, many of which depend on the use of the cleaner fuel.