The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
Suit Filed Against Park Service to Protect Big Cypress National Preserve
The nation’s leading park advocacy organization, the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), filed a lawsuit Oct. 12 against the National Park Service (NPS) for their failure to protect unique wilderness lands and Florida panther habitat within Big Cypress National Preserve by exposing its Addition Lands to motorized off-road vehicle (ORV) use. The lawsuit also seeks to require a fair balance of interests on the federally appointed ORV Advisory Committee, as required by law.
“We will show the court that instead of being guided by the legal mandates and the scientific evidence in making its decisions, the National Park Service followed the reverse process in this case, bending or ignoring the legal mandates and the science to make way for the decisions it wanted to reach,” said Robert Rosenbaum of the law firm of Arnold & Porter.
For years, the Addition Lands within Big Cypress National Preserve have been protected by federal and state laws for all Americans to enjoy as a natural area—to hike and view wildlife among other activities. The final NPS plan opens most of the 147,000 acre Addition Lands portion of Big Cypress National Preserve to ORV use, where it has been prohibited. The plan minimizes the area to be protected as wilderness, and authorizes more than 130 miles of intrusive ORV trails.
Not only will the ORV trails negatively impact the Big Cypress Addition Lands, the trails will also be detrimental to Everglades National Park, which is the final stop for water flowing through Big Cypress. “NPS has admitted that they do not fully understand the impacts that ORV trails and use will have on critical surface water flows through this area, including water flowing into Everglades National Park,” said John Adornato, NPCA’s Sun Coast regional director in Hollywood, Florida. “This water flow is vital to the health of the Everglades and is an important reason that the addition was added to the preserve.”
The suit charges that NPS wrongly dropped 40,000 acres from its previous wilderness finding with no factual or legal basis and without public input. In addition, the lawsuit also seeks to balance the federally appointed ORV Advisory Committee, which will participate in implementing the new Addition Lands ORV plan.
“From its inception in 2007, the committee has been dominated by ORV users, with only nominal representation for those advocating for the protection of the preserve’s unique and natural ecology, which is the preserve’s primary purpose,” said Rosenbaum. “The court should order the committee to cease further operation until its membership has been fairly balanced.”
“Big Cypress National Preserve is a national treasure for all Americans and was created to preserve and protect sensitive lands,” said Adornato. “NPS should throw the current plan out and start over. A new plan is needed to protect this treasured land, which is home to several endangered species, including the Florida panther.”
For more information, click here.
Since 1919, the nonpartisan National Parks Conservation Association has been the leading voice of the American people in the fight to safeguard our National Park System. NPCA, its more than 600,000 members, supporters and partners work together to protect the park system and preserve our nation’s natural, historical, and cultural heritage for our children and grandchildren.
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Last week, the Peruvian Palm Oil Producers' Association (JUNPALMA) promised to enter into an agreement for sustainable and deforestation-free palm oil production. The promise was secured by the U.S. based National Wildlife Federation (NWF) in collaboration with the local government, growers and the independent conservation organization Sociedad Peruana de Ecodesarrollo.
The rallying cry to build it again and to build it better than before is inspiring after a natural disaster, but it may not be the best course of action, according to new research published in the journal Science.
"Faced with global warming, rising sea levels, and the climate-related extremes they intensify, the question is no longer whether some communities will retreat—moving people and assets out of harm's way—but why, where, when, and how they will retreat," the study begins.
The researchers suggest that it is time to rethink retreat, which is often seen as a last resort and a sign of weakness. Instead, it should be seen as the smart option and an opportunity to build new communities.
"We propose a reconceptualization of retreat as a suite of adaptation options that are both strategic and managed," the paper states. "Strategy integrates retreat into long-term development goals and identifies why retreat should occur and, in doing so, influences where and when."
The billions of dollars spent to rebuild the Jersey Shore and to create dunes to protect from future storms after Superstorm Sandy in 2012 may be a waste if sea level rise inundates the entire coastline.
"There's a definite rhetoric of, 'We're going to build it back better. We're going to win. We're going to beat this. Something technological is going to come and it's going to save us,'" said A.R. Siders, an assistant professor with the disaster research center at the University of Delaware and lead author of the paper, to the New York Times. "It's like, let's step back and think for a minute. You're in a fight with the ocean. You're fighting to hold the ocean in place. Maybe that's not the battle we want to pick."
Rethinking retreat could make it a strategic, efficient, and equitable way to adapt to the climate crisis, the study says.
Dr. Siders pointed out that it has happened before. She noted that in the 1970s, the small town of Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin moved itself out of the flood plain after one too many floods. The community found and reoriented the business district to take advantage of highway traffic and powered it entirely with solar energy, as the New York Times reported.
That's an important lesson now that rising sea levels pose a catastrophic risk around the world. Nearly 75 percent of the world's cities are along shorelines. In the U.S. alone coastline communities make up nearly 40 percent of the population— more than 123 million people, which is why Siders and her research team are so forthright about the urgency and the complexities of their findings, according to Harvard Magazine.
Some of those complexities include, coordinating moves across city, state or even international lines; cultural and social considerations like the importance of burial grounds or ancestral lands; reparations for losses or damage to historic practices; long-term social and psychological consequences; financial incentives that often contradict environmental imperatives; and the critical importance of managing retreat in a way that protects vulnerable and poor populations and that doesn't exacerbate past injustices, as Harvard Magazine reported.
If communities could practice strategic retreats, the study says, doing so would not only reduce the need for people to choose among bad options, but also improve their circumstances.
"It's a lot to think about," said Siders to Harvard Magazine. "And there are going to be hard choices. It will hurt—I mean, we have to get from here to some new future state, and that transition is going to be hard.…But the longer we put off making these decisions, the worse it will get, and the harder the decisions will become."
To help the transition, the paper recommends improved access to climate-hazard maps so communities can make informed choices about risk. And, the maps need to be improved and updated regularly, the paper said as the New York Times reported.
"It's not that everywhere should retreat," said Dr. Siders to the New York Times. "It's that retreat should be an option. It should be a real viable option on the table that some places will need to use."
Leaked documents show that Jair Bolsonaro's government intends to use the Brazilian president's hate speech to isolate minorities living in the Amazon region. The PowerPoint slides, which democraciaAbierta has seen, also reveal plans to implement predatory projects that could have a devastating environmental impact.
Last week we received positive news on the border wall's imminent construction in an Arizona wildlife refuge. The Trump administration delayed construction of the wall through about 60 miles of federal wildlife preserves.