Trump's Drilling Leases on Public Lands Could Lead to 4.7B Metric Tons of Carbon Emissions
18 July 2019
Climate
Pumpjacks on Lost Hills Oil Field in California. Arne Hückelheim, Wikimedia Commons
By Julia Conley
A national conservation group revealed Wednesday that President Donald Trump's drilling leases on public lands could lead to the release of more carbon emissions than the European Union contributes in an entire year.
<p>The Wilderness Society estimates that U.S. companies <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/16/trump-drilling-leases-pollution-eu-climate-change" target="_blank">will emit</a> at least 854 million and as much as 4.7 billion metric tons of carbon if they develop leases in public waters and lands.</p><p>"Taking into account the potency of shorter-lived climate pollutants like <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/methane" target="_self">methane</a>, lifecycle emissions resulting from the development of these leases could be as high as 5.2 billion metric tons," the group's <a href="https://www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/TWS%20Report_Measuring%20the%20climate%20impact%20of%20Trump%20reckless%20leasing_July%202019.pdf" target="_blank">new report </a>reads.</p><p>The 28 countries in the EU released four billion metric tons in one year, according to the most recent available data.</p><p>Regardless of exactly how many leases are put to use by oil and gas companies, the Wilderness Society reports, "These leasing decisions have significant and long-term ramifications for our climate and our ability to stave off the worst impacts of global warming."</p><p>Since taking office in 2017, Trump has offered up 378 million acres of public land to oil and gas companies and has sought to overturn the Obama administration's ban on coal leases.</p><p>Climate action groups and lawmakers have pushed back against the administration's plans. Earlier this month California Gov. Gavin Newsom <a href="https://twitter.com/foe_us/status/1151250273555439622" target="_blank">wrote</a> to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), saying the federal government's plan to open up more than 725,000 acres across California amounted to an abdication of "our responsibility to protect our residents, our resources, and our right to pursue a future beyond <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuels</a>."</p><p>In Arizona on Tuesday, the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Center for Biological Diversity</a> was among the conservation groups which <a href="https://www.knau.org/post/groups-sue-trump-administration-over-oil-and-gas-leases-blm-land-near-holbrook" target="_blank">sued</a> the Trump administration over its approval of leases on more than 4,000 acres, which they say will threaten wildlife and water in the Coconino Aquifer and Petrified Forest National Park.</p><p>The Wilderness Society noted in its report on what it called "Trump's reckless leasing of public lands" that because of the federal government's lack of transparency regarding emissions on federal property, it can only estimate how much carbon dioxide will be released should the leases be developed.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trump's mismanagement of public lands is contributing to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ClimateChange?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ClimateChange</a>. Americans have been kept in the dark, but we're bringing the truth to light with our new <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrumpEmissions?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TrumpEmissions</a> report. <a href="https://t.co/LQNVbqaGDq">https://t.co/LQNVbqaGDq</a> <a href="https://t.co/2QupjkqDlC">pic.twitter.com/2QupjkqDlC</a></p>— Wilderness Society 🌳 (@Wilderness) <a href="https://twitter.com/Wilderness/status/1151253954006802432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 16, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p>"The federal government cannot manage what it does not measure, yet the Trump administration is actively seeking to suppress disclosure of the full sweep of climate emissions from fossil energy leases," reads the report.<br></p><p>The Trump administration, the Wilderness Society wrote, is currently discouraging BLM field offices from analyzing the potential effects of oil and gas extraction on public lands:</p><blockquote>In June 2019, Trump's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) released draft guidance on how federal agencies should consider [greenhouse gas] emissions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This guidance essentially allows federal agencies to avoid fully estimating emissions for these leases, enables agencies to skirt accounting for the cumulative effects of emissions across permitted projects, and fails to encourage agencies to identify lower-emitting alternatives.</blockquote><p>"As the world works to respond to the dire warning issued last fall by the global climate science body about the pace and scale of greenhouse gas emissions declines needed to avoid catastrophic warming," wrote the Wilderness Society, "the American public cannot even find reliable information about the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of how their resources are being put to use."</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">How the DOI Is Selling Off Public Lands <a href="https://t.co/DSWg4J4Uj9">https://t.co/DSWg4J4Uj9</a> <a href="https://t.co/9dca0JeUTl">pic.twitter.com/9dca0JeUTl</a></p>— Renewable Search (@RenewableSearch) <a href="https://twitter.com/RenewableSearch/status/1056938240274354176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 29, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/07/17/trumps-drilling-leases-public-lands-could-release-47b-metric-tons-carbon-more-all-28" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Senate Votes to Overturn Trump’s Emergency Declaration to Fund Wildlife-Harming Border Wall
15 March 2019
Politics
The fence along the U.S. / Mexican border near Douglass, Arizona. jeff foott / Getty Images
The U.S. Senate voted 59 to 41 Thursday to overturn President Donald Trump's emergency declaration to fund a border wall that would threaten 93 endangered species and devastate the environment and communities of the Lower Rio Grande Valley.
The Senate vote comes a little over two weeks after a similar vote by the House of Representatives. Trump announced his intention to "VETO!" the resolution on Twitter Thursday, and Congress needs a two-thirds majority to override a veto, which is seen as unlikely. Nevertheless, the Senate vote will be seen as an embarrassment for the president, BBC News reported.
<div id="b15b1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="K9DM7G1576662823"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1106272915488686080" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">VETO!</div> — Donald J. Trump (@Donald J. Trump)<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/statuses/1106272915488686080">1552590991.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Twelve Republicans broke ranks to vote with Senate Democrats against the emergency declaration. They were Mitt Romney and Mike Lee of Utah, Marco Rubio of Florida, Roy Blunt of Missouri, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Rob Portman of Ohio, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Roger Wicker of Mississippi.<br></p><p>The <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>, which has filed a lawsuit against the emergency declaration, celebrated the Senate's bipartisan rebuke.</p><p>"Today, 59 Senators put party aside, and put our democracy first. Senators on both sides of the aisle rejected the President Trump's attempt to violate the Constitution and circumvent Congress in order to drive his unpopular, hateful agenda," Sierra Club Legislative Director Melinda Pierce said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2019/03/sierra-club-applauds-senate-s-bipartisan-vote-terminate-trump-s-fake-national" target="_blank">statement</a>. "Sierra Club applauds the Senate for pushing back against the militarization of safe towns and more destructive border walls in communities."</p>
<div id="9566c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="L3IRMN1576662823"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1106324123729313794" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Big results in the U.S. Senate vote today to end the bogus 'emergency' on the border! #NoBorderWall It's doomed to… https://t.co/R9dt4bG0kY</div> — Sierra Club Borderlands (@Sierra Club Borderlands)<a href="https://twitter.com/SC_Borderlands/statuses/1106324123729313794">1552603200.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>However, many of the Republican rebels were not motivated by opposition to the border wall itself. Rather, they expressed concerns about what a future Democratic president would do with a precedent that allows the president to declare emergencies to fund favored political projects. Portman voiced fears similar methods would be used to take future environmental actions in particular, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/senate-vote-trump-national-emergency-declaration-resolution/index.html" target="_blank">CNN reported</a>.</p><p>"[A] future President may well say that <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a> is a national emergency and use emergency authorities to implement the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/green-new-deal" target="_self">Green New Deal</a>," Portman said, referring to a 10-year plan championed by progressive Democrats and climate activists to transition the U.S. away from <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuels</a> while creating jobs and tackling inequality.</p>
<p>Trump issued the emergency declaration <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-national-emergency-border-wall-2629034603.html" target="_self">last month</a> after Congress refused to authorize $5.7 billion in funding for the wall during a standoff that led to the longest <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/government-shutdown" target="_self">government shutdown</a> in U.S. history. However, the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> noted that the bipartisan bill that eventually funded the government did include almost $1.4 billion for around 55 miles of fencing in Texas' Rio Grande Valley, which will damage ecosystems and communities there. Trump has asked for $8.6 billion in wall funding in his 2020 budget.</p>
<div id="18cbe" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="1TARPB1576662823"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1096040473242886144" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">In a rare bipartisan push, the U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of a major public lands package on Tuesday… https://t.co/r7qYOSF7DH</div> — John Lundin 🌊 (@John Lundin 🌊)<a href="https://twitter.com/johnlundin/statuses/1096040473242886144">1550151386.0</a></blockquote></div>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
The headquarters of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ken Lund / CC BY-SA 2.0
President Donald Trump released his budget for fiscal year 2020 on Monday, to a general outcry from environmental groups who say it underfunds key programs and agencies.
EcoWatch has already reported on its biggest ask — $8.6 billion in funding for a border wall that would threaten borderland wildlife and communities — but the budget has been equally criticized for what it would cut, including a 31 percent decrease in funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and a nine to 14 percent decrease for the Department of the Interior (DOI).
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="d7b5f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="KG4B7X1576663067"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1105183541111988225" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#TrumpBudget proposes large cuts across a broad swath of public services.
While detailed budget figures are just… https://t.co/NqT1j6WyTE</div> — Center on Budget (@Center on Budget)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterOnBudget/statuses/1105183541111988225">1552331264.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>"In the face of a nationwide drinking water contamination crisis, a broken chemical safety net, and devastating hurricanes and wildfires, a rational and concerned president would seek more funding to protect Americans' health, keep our environment clean, and combat the threat of catastrophic <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>," <a href="https://www.ewg.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Working Group</a> President Ken Cook said in a <a href="https://www.ewg.org/release/ewg-trump-budget-would-be-disaster-water-air-and-public-health" target="_blank">statement </a>about the budget.<br></p><p>Here are some of the programs the president would like to ax. </p><p><strong>1. Endangered Species Funding</strong>: The budget for adding new species to the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species" target="_self">endangered species</a> list would be cut by about 50 percent, the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2019/trump-budget-03-11-2019.php" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) said</a>, while funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service overall would fall by 16 percent compared to 2019 levels. </p><p><strong>2. The Land and Water Conservation Fund</strong>: The popular Land and Water Conservation Fund uses money from offshore oil and gas drilling to create national parks, wildlife refuges and protected areas. It was re-authorized in a <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/public-lands-bill-2630182126.html" target="_self">bipartisan public lands bill</a> that Trump is expected to sign, yet his budget would reduce its funds by 95 percent, the <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/land-and-water-conservation-fund-trump-budget-interior_n_5c86d406e4b08d5b78648689" target="_blank">Huffington Post reported</a>.</p><p><strong>3. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative</strong>: Among the many potential EPA cuts, the Trump administration wants to massively reduce funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, which works to restore wetlands and improve water quality. The budget wants to cut $270 million of $300 million in funding, but the <a href="https://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2019/03/11/president-donald-trump-great-lakes-funds-new-budget/3129234002/" target="_blank">Detroit Free Press</a> notes this plan is unlikely to pass Congress because it is popular with both Republicans and Democrats representing Midwestern states. Cuts proposed to the program over the last two years were also voted down.</p><p><strong>4. Climate Change Prevention and Research</strong>: Many plans to study or deal with climate change would see cuts, <a href="https://psmag.com/news/trumps-2020-budget-would-slash-funding-for-epa-programs" target="_blank">Pacific Standard reported</a>. Those include a 90 percent funding decrease for the EPA's Atmospheric Protection Program, which reports on greenhouse gasses, and a 70 percent funding decrease for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.</p>This isn't the first time that Trump has proposed massive cuts to the EPA. His 2018 budget sought to cut its funding 31 percent and his 2019 budget aimed to slash it 23 percent. <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/433496-white-house-proposes-dramatic-cuts-to-energy-and-environment" target="_blank">The Hill</a> noted that Congress had declined to pass steep cuts to the EPA in previous years, and was even less likely to do so now that Democrats control the House. However, critics agreed that the budget reflected the administration's priorities.<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="7c5e2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="PFG9MT1576663067"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1105186635090747392" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">BREAKING: We respond to the Trump administration’s 2019 budget proposal which contains an unprecedented $2 billion… https://t.co/hkGzsU98Mu</div> — Center for Bio Div (@Center for Bio Div)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterForBioDiv/statuses/1105186635090747392">1552332001.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>"This environmentally devastating proposal shows Trump's government is composed only of special interests, run by special interests, for the benefit of special interests," CBD Government Affairs Director Brett Hartl said.<br></p>
From Your Site Articles
- 'Absolutely Unconscionable': Trump EPA Refuses to Limit Toxic ... ›
- U.S. Ranks 24th in New Environmental Performance Index, Near Bottom of Developed Countries - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
House Passes Resolution Against Trump's 'National Emergency' to Fund Border Wall That Endangers 90+ Species
27 February 2019
Politics
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds a press conference about a resolution to override Trump's national emergency declaration. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution Tuesday to overturn President Donald Trump's emergency declaration to fund the construction of a border wall that would put 93 endangered species at risk. Trump issued the declaration to secure around $8 billion in funding for the wall after a bipartisan spending bill passed by Congress Feb. 15 allocated only $1.375 billion to border security. Trump had originally requested $5.7 billion for the wall during a stand-off with Congress that resulted in the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.
<p>The resolution against the national emergency passed the House 245 to 182, with 13 Republicans breaking ranks to join with Democrats to pass the measure, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/26/politics/house-vote-trump-national-emergency/index.html" target="_blank">CNN reported</a>. </p><p>The <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> celebrated the news in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2019/02/sierra-club-applauds-house-vote-halt-trump-s-fake-national-emergency" target="_blank">press release Tuesday</a>.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="703b2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="W16QSF1576662813"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1100557016093712385" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#BreakingNews: House of Representatives passed a resolution to overturn Trump’s emergency declaration that would mo… https://t.co/oErfc3yxGz</div> — Sierra Club (@Sierra Club)<a href="https://twitter.com/SierraClub/statuses/1100557016093712385">1551228214.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>"Today, the House showed Donald Trump that Americans will not sit idly by as he steals taxpayer money, claims our country is in a non-existent emergency, and manufactures a humanitarian crisis on the border. All of these actions are the Trump administration's efforts to advance a twisted, racist, and cruel agenda built on inhumane deportations and a divisive, environmentally destructive, congressionally rejected border wall," Sierra Club federal policy director Melinda Pierce said in a statement.<br></p><p>The fight over the national emergency now moves to the Senate, where the passage of a resolution blocking it is less certain. Four Republican senators would need to vote with every Democratic senator to pass the resolution. So far, three Republicans have indicated they will support the measure: Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. </p><p>Tillis wrote a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/25/i-support-trumps-vision-border-security-i-would-vote-against-emergency/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5a96bea737b5" target="_blank">Washington Post op-ed</a> Monday announcing his decision, in which he said he supported Trump's desire to increase border security, but was worried about the precedent he was setting. Part of what concerned him was whether a future Democratic president would declare a national emergency to pursue sweeping action on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>. </p><p>"[Conservatives] should be thinking about whether they would accept the prospect of a President Bernie Sanders declaring a national emergency to implement parts of the radical Green New Deal," he wrote. </p><p>Environmental groups have been at the forefront of the fight against the border wall and the emergency declaration. The <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) tweeted urging followers to call their senators and encourage them to vote for the resolution against the declaration.</p><p>CBD has also joined with <a href="https://defenders.org/" target="_blank">Defenders of Wildlife</a> and <a href="https://aldf.org/" target="_blank">Animal Legal Defense Fund</a> to sue the Trump administration, arguing its use of an emergency declaration to divert funds for wall construction was not legal, as <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/430455-environment-groups-launch-lawsuit-against-trumps-border-wall" target="_blank">The Hill reported Feb. 18</a>.<br></p><p>"Separation of powers is at the heart of our democracy and the power of the purse is a critical check on the president. Trump's authoritarian attempt to build his destructive border wall is a flagrant abuse of that constitutional structure. If he gets his way, it'll be a disaster for communities and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_blank">wildlife</a> along the border, including some of our country's most endangered species," CBD senior attorney Brian Segee said in a statement reported by The Hill.</p><p>It is likely the issue will ultimately be decided in the courts, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47379991" target="_blank">BBC News</a> reported. That is because, even if the Senate passes the resolution, Trump has promised to veto it. At that point, a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate would be required to override the veto.</p><p>Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday that the Senate would vote on the resolution before its next recess the week of March 18, CNN reported.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="41004" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="V1SZRX1576662813"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="830536970677972992" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">A Guide on How to Call Congress https://t.co/j0gFCO4QfF @foe_us @Earthjustice</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/830536970677972992">1486850419.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trump to Declare 'National Emergency' to Fund Wall Threatening Borderland Communities and Wildlife
15 February 2019
Politics
Donald Trump delivers a national address on a border wall on Jan. 8. SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images
President Donald Trump will declare a national emergency to fund his proposed border wall, which one study found would put 93 endangered species at risk.
Trump made the announcement minutes before the House and Senate began voting on a bipartisan spending package that would keep the federal government open without allocating money for the wall, avoiding another government shutdown. The measure passed both houses, and Trump said he would sign it, but not without also declaring an emergency to secure around $8 billion in wall funding, something he could do as early as Friday, The New York Times reported.
<p>
"President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action—including a national emergency—to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, according to The New York Times.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="35a4b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="HW7Y4Q1576662814"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1096148250665644034" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">.@PressSec: President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take o… https://t.co/N0Bx1LZnOQ</div> — The White House (@The White House)<a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/statuses/1096148250665644034">1550177083.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>Trump plans to make the declaration at 10 a.m. Friday. Since it would reallocate money already earmarked by Congress for other purposes, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/15/politics/donald-trump-national-emergency-immigration-republicans/index.html" target="_blank">CNN's Stephen Collinson</a> called it "Trump's most striking assault yet on the system of constitutional order that he is sworn to preserve, protect and defend." If the emergency declaration is not blocked by the courts, it would also establish a precedent by which future presidents could bypass Congress. The move could backfire on Republicans, granting a future Democratic president the ability to run around Congress on issues like gun control or <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_blank">climate change</a>, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned.<br>
</p><p>
"If the President can declare an emergency on something that he has created as an emergency, an illusion that he wants to convey, just think of what a president with different values can present to the American people," she said Thursday, as CNN reported.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="28115" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9Y4U1U1576662814"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1096173818454761472" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">🔥👇🔥👇@speakerpelosi says that if Trump declares a national emergency over a manufactured crisis imagine what a futur… https://t.co/0nBaZsyaEr</div> — Clara Jeffery (@Clara Jeffery)<a href="https://twitter.com/ClaraJeffery/statuses/1096173818454761472">1550183178.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
Democrats, some Republicans and leading environmental groups have criticized the president's decision and promised legislative and legal opposition.<br>
</p><p>
"Donald Trump's illegal national emergency declaration is one of the most shocking, dangerous, and damaging abuses of power by any president in our country's history," <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> Executive Director Michael Brune said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2019/02/trump-s-illegal-emergency-declaration-dangerous-low-point-us-presidential" target="_blank">statement</a>. "It's a blatant violation of the Constitution's separation of powers—and all for an unnecessary, unwanted, and racially motivated border wall. This is one of the lowest lows for the institution of the presidency. The Sierra Club will take swift legal action against Trump's declaration."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="57976" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="SHRH7W1576662814"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1096186199805325312" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Tonight, Trump will declare an unlawful state of emergency, as well as signing a budget that includes more than 55… https://t.co/td0AYZThxA</div> — Sierra Club (@Sierra Club)<a href="https://twitter.com/SierraClub/statuses/1096186199805325312">1550186130.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
Environmental organizations also criticized the bipartisan spending package, which does allocate around $1.4 billion for around 55 miles of fencing in Texas' Rio Grande Valley, the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2019/border-wall-02-14-2019.php" target="_blank">reported</a>. While this falls far short of the $5.7 Trump sought for a barrier, it still puts borderland <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_self">wildlife</a> and communities at risk.<br>
</p><p>
"This despicable deal will wall off the Rio Grande Valley. It will permanently destroy spectacular ecosystems and wildlife habitat, and seize private land from Texas families," CBD public lands policy specialist Paulo Lopes said. "Trump and Republicans have doubled down on their racist agenda to build a monument to hate and fear. Anyone who votes for this is voting for Trump's border wall, no matter what euphemism they try to hide behind. This is an enormous waste of taxpayer money that will do nothing to stop illegal drugs or human trafficking."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="a09af" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="J25RW71576662814"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1096242729225465856" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump just announced he's planning to declare a national emergency to build his border wall. Share to say… https://t.co/AmhAGLZOnL</div> — Center for Bio Div (@Center for Bio Div)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterForBioDiv/statuses/1096242729225465856">1550199608.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
The emphasis on a border wall also sets a troubling precedent in an era of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>, which will likely force more and more people in the global South to migrate north as conditions deteriorate. Many of the immigrants traveling from Central America towards the U.S. border are driven partially by a prolonged <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" target="_self">drought</a> that <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-implications-migrant-caravan-2616282125.html" target="_self">could be related to climate change</a>, and the region is expected to suffer increased climate impacts in future years.
</p><p>"A quasi-fascist policy of fear-mongering about immigration and corresponding militarization of the border is clearly the major thrust of Trump's response to the mounting impacts of climate chaos," Ashley Dawson, <a href="https://www.versobooks.com/books/2558-extreme-cities" target="_blank">author</a> of<em> Extreme Cities: The Peril and Promise of Urban Life in the Age of Climate Change, </em>told the <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/trump-migrant-caravan-climate-change_us_5bd3374ee4b0d38b5882f000" target="_blank">Huffington Post</a> in October 2018.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="ddcef" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="WPPXS81576662815"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1086379746638917635" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The Pentagon has stated that #climatechange is real and is a national security issue. @repadamsmith https://t.co/raOF17aOuC</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1086379746638917635">1547848090.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Border wall prototypes near the Otay Mesa Port of Entry in San Diego. Mani Albrecht / U.S. Customs and Border Protection
A federal appeals court on Monday sided with the Trump administration's bypassing of numerous environmental laws to expedite border wall construction projects in southern California.
In a 2-1 decision (pdf), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an earlier district court ruling that determined the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has broad authority under the Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to waive statutes such as the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act and many more environmental rules to build border barriers.
<p>
"Because the projects are statutorily authorized and DHS has waived the environmental laws California and the environmental groups seek to enforce, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to DHS," judge M. Margaret McKeown wrote in the majority opinion.
</p><p>
<span></span>A Justice Department spokesperson told <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/429444-appeals-court-sides-with-trump-in-border-wall-prototype-dispute" target="_blank">The Hill</a> that the ruling was "a victory for the Trump administration, for the rule of law, and above all, for our border security."
</p><p>
<span></span>The lawsuit was originally <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2017/border-wall-09-06-2017.php" target="_blank">filed</a> in 2017 by multiple conservation groups and the state of California in response to the <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/08/01/dhs-issues-waiver-expedite-border-construction-projects-san-diego-area" target="_blank">federal government's waiver</a> of 37 environmental regulations to build prototypes of the planned border wall in the Otay Mesa area of San Diego County, as well as a replacement for existing border infrastructure along a 15-mile stretch of the U.S.-Mexico boundary south of San Diego.
</p><p>
<span></span>The<a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank"> Center for Biological Diversity</a>, one of the litigants, was disappointed by Monday's court ruling, especially as the challengers tried to take the case to the Supreme Court but was <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/419445-supreme-court-rejects-greens-challenge-to-border-wall-law" target="_blank">rejected in December</a>.
</p><p>
"Congress has ceded its authority to Trump, who has swept aside fundamental public safety and environmental laws to build walls that won't work," Brian Segee, a Center for Biological Diversity attorney, said in a statement to The Hill after the decision. "This lawlessness is destroying irreplaceable ecosystems and militarizing communities."
</p><p>
The Center found in a 2017
<a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/international/borderlands_and_boundary_waters/pdfs/A_Wall_in_the_Wild.pdf" target="_blank">study</a> (pdf) that more than 90 <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered</a> or threatened species would be threatened by proposed wall construction along the 2,000-mile border.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="0e401" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="689PR41576662558"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1095384451960446978" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">A 2017 study by the Center for Biological Diversity looking at the potential impact of the wall on 93 threatened or… https://t.co/wJzVEDBhA6</div> — Center for Bio Div (@Center for Bio Div)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterForBioDiv/statuses/1095384451960446978">1549994979.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
Environmental concerns about the controversial border wall are on full display in Texas, where
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/no-border-wall-butterfly-center-2628185754.html" target="_blank">construction is imminent</a> at the <a href="https://www.nationalbutterflycenter.org/" target="_blank">National Butterfly Center</a>—the most diverse butterfly sanctuary in the U.S.
</p><p>
A planned 5.5-mile section of concrete and steel border wall that was funded by the the 2018 Omnibus spending bill will cut off 70 percent of the 100-acre property.
</p><p>
Some 200 species of butterflies find a home there each year, including the Mexican bluewing, the black swallowtail and the increasingly imperiled
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monarch-butterflies" target="_self">monarch</a>.
</p><p>
On Monday, the nonprofit filed a temporary restraining order against the federal government to halt construction until a lawsuit filed by the center has been resolved, according to the
<a href="https://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Butterfly-Center-files-restraining-order-against-13609866.php" target="_blank">San Antonio Express-News</a>.
</p><p>
The Trump administration also waived 28 environmental laws including the Endangered Species Act in order to build 33 more miles of wall in the lower Rio Grande Valley, including the section through the butterfly center.
</p>
From Your Site Articles
- What Will It Take to Stop Trump From Bulldozing Most Diverse ... ›
- Border Wall Construction Imminent at Most Diverse Butterfly Center ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Center for Biological Diversity screenshot
Drone footage of new border wall in New Mexico shows that the Trump administration's border militarization is already damaging ecosystems and wildlife. Trump waived 25 laws that protect clean air, clean water, public lands and endangered wildlife to speed construction of 20 miles of new walls.
The video, taken by the Center for Biological Diversity and available for media use, shows the 18-foot-tall bollard-style barrier constructed in the remote Chihuahuan Desert. The wall replaced waist-high vehicle barriers that allowed wildlife to move back and forth across the border.
<p>"Trump's destructive wall is already being built, as this video shows," said Laiken Jordahl, the Center for Biological Diversity's borderlands campaigner, who helped shoot the video. "He just ripped a 20-mile scar through spectacular New Mexico landscape while Washington politicians fight over the difference between a 'fence' and a 'wall.' It's a ridiculous argument that's completely lost on wildlife harmed by these barriers. Congress shouldn't give Trump another cent for these devastating projects."</p><div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c3a04e1086847811e0a8e7a80470d5ed"><div class="fb-video" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/EcoWatch/videos/233315840943644/" data-allowfullscreen="true"></div></div><p>The remote wilderness of sagebrush and soaptree yucca is not a crossing point for drug smugglers or migrants. But it is home to rare animals, including the Mexican gray wolf and Aplomado falcon, as well as kit foxes, bighorn sheep and ringtail cats.<br></p><p>The new bollard-style wall blocks the natural migration of wildlife. The $73 million wall is also likely to cause <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/flooding">flooding</a> and erosion.</p><p>In March the Center for Biological Diversity <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/border_wall/pdfs/18-3-22-DC-Complaint_NM-Border-Wall-Waiver.pdf" target="_blank">sued</a> to challenge the New Mexico waivers. The organization also is challenging similar waivers used to rush wall construction in <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/border-wall-10-18-2018.php" target="_blank">Texas</a> and <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/border-wall-04-09-2018.php" target="_blank">California</a>.</p><p>This month the Trump administration is expected to break ground on more border-wall construction in Texas' Rio Grande Valley, using $1.6 billion approved by Congress last year. The Texas walls would cut through the <a href="https://www.fws.gov/refuge/lower_rio_grande_valley/" target="_blank">Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge</a>, <a href="https://www.nationalbutterflycenter.org/" target="_blank">National Butterfly Center</a>, <a href="https://tpwd.texas.gov/state-parks/bentsen-rio-grande-valley" target="_blank">Bentsen-Rio Grande State Park</a> and the grounds of the historic <a href="http://missiontexas.us/life-in-mission/attractions/la-lomita-chapel/" target="_blank">La Lomita Chapel</a>, as well as family farms and other private property.</p><p>Beyond jeopardizing wildlife, endangered species and public lands, the U.S.-Mexico border wall is part of a larger strategy of ongoing border militarization that damages human rights, civil liberties, native lands, local businesses and international relations. The border wall impedes the natural migrations of people and wildlife that are essential to healthy diversity.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="22a85" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="TTJEWL1576662816"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1084927084055670784" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">A Literal Wall Expert Explains Why Trump's Wall Won't Even Work https://t.co/RsiTtXCini</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1084927084055670784">1547501748.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
'As Trumpian As it Gets': Coal Lobbyist Andrew Wheeler Moves Closer to Full-Time EPA Spot
05 February 2019
Insights + Opinion
Win McNamee / Getty Images
Acting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head Andrew Wheeler is one step closer to deregulating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The former coal lobbyist, who critics say is even worse for the environment than his scandal-plagued predecessor Scott Pruitt, secured a key approval by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Tuesday, sending President Trump's nominee to the full Senate for approval.
<p>
The committee voted
<a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases-republican?ID=2A9ECE67-F5C9-4EE9-801C-04E0A852E2AF" target="_blank">11-10</a> along party lines to advance the nomination.
</p><p>
"Mr. Wheeler has done an outstanding job leading the Environmental Protection Agency these past six months," Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works,
<a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases-republican?ID=2A9ECE67-F5C9-4EE9-801C-04E0A852E2AF" target="_blank">remarked today</a>. "I urge my colleagues to vote in support of his nomination to be the administrator."
</p><p>
Wheeler has been at the post since Pruitt resigned amid a
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/scott-pruitt-resigning-scandals-2584354558.html">flurry of alleged ethical breaches</a> in July. But unlike Pruitt, whose tenure was sullied by <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/pruitt-epa-communications-2490136462.html">sketchy use of taxpayer money</a> on 'round-the-clock security, a soundproof phone booth and premium flights, the consummate Washington insider has advanced the interests of the fossil fuel industry and other corporate polluters by quietly weakening or rolling back federal regulations.</p><p>Civil fines charged to polluters under the Trump EPA fell 85 percent during the last fiscal year when compared to the average annual amount charged over the past two decades, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/civil-penalties-for-polluters-dropped-dramatically-in-trumps-first-two-years-analysis-shows/2019/01/24/7384d168-1a82-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html?utm_term=.fba827ddbf9a" target="_blank">The Washington Post recently reported</a>. That makes last year the lowest average year for penalties since 1994.</p><p><span></span>At his Senate Environment and Public Works Committee confirmation hearing last month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) asked if Wheeler agreed with the scientific community's belief that <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate change</a> is "one of the great crises facing our planet." </p><p><span></span>"I would not call it the greatest crisis, no sir," Wheeler responded. "I consider it a huge issue that has to be addressed globally." </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="132fd" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="W4C0OM1576662185"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092826151809093637" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Wheeler has relentlessly pushed to advance the pro-polluter agenda launched by Scott Pruitt, the worst administrato… https://t.co/t49nvNXStX</div> — NRDC 🌎 (@NRDC 🌎)<a href="https://twitter.com/NRDC/statuses/1092826151809093637">1549385032.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>Wheeler previously worked as a lobbyist for the coal mining conglomerate Murray Energy Corporation. His other previous clients include natural gas firms Xcel Energy and Bear Head LNG, uranium mining company Energy Fuels Resources and the Nuclear Energy Institute, according to <a href="https://www.bna.com/new-epa-chief-n73014477151/" target="_blank">Bloomberg BNA</a>.</p><p><span></span>As acting EPA administrator, Wheeler has not grasped "that saving coal is not part of that mission and not his job," said Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, as quoted by the
<a href="https://www.apnews.com/9ae7c505e3c240ffbfa7225133a6a84b" target="_blank">Associated Press</a>.<br></p><p>Environmental groups are in vehement opposition the nomination.<br></p><p>
"Putting a coal lobbyist in charge of the EPA is about as Trumpian as it gets," Paulo Lopes, public lands policy specialist at the
<a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>, told EcoWatch in a statement after the vote. "This isn't just the fox guarding the henhouse. This is unlocking the door, opening the cages and letting the fox waltz right in to have his way. It's going to be a disaster."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="07275" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="IO9A6F1576662185"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092809160599584768" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Key Senate Panel Approves Andrew Wheeler, Former Coal Lobbyist, To Be EPA Chief. "The man who recently said he’d ha… https://t.co/bz5VdVKYS7</div> — Ken Cook (@Ken Cook)<a href="https://twitter.com/EWGPrez/statuses/1092809160599584768">1549380981.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
A report from
<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-epa-wheeler-meetings/like-predecessor-trumps-new-epa-pick-packs-schedule-with-industry-meetings-idUSKCN1PQ5SR" target="_blank">Reuters</a> revealed that Wheeler has held nearly 20 times more meetings with companies or industry groups than with conservationists during his first two months on the job.
</p><p>
The
<a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> is urging the full Senate to reject Wheeler's nomination.
</p><p>
<span></span><i>"</i>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee should have voted unanimously to reject the nomination of a fossil fuel lobbyist who has spent his career undermining the vital safeguards that keep our air and water clean," Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2019/02/sierra-club-senate-must-reject-dangerous-wheeler-nomination" target="_blank">press release</a>. "As his nomination moves to the Senate floor, we urge Senators to consider the clean air and water protections their constituents rely on, among them safeguards from toxic mercury, PFAS pollution, and emissions from cars and trucks, and vote no on this dangerous nomination."<span></span>
</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trump Nominates ‘Walking Conflict of Interest’ David Bernhardt to Permanently Replace Zinke as Interior Secretary
05 February 2019
Politics
Donald Trump, Mike Pence and acting Interior Secretary David Bernhardt in Washington, DC on Jan. 21. MANDEL NGAN / AFP / Getty Images
President Donald Trump officially nominated David Bernhardt—a former energy lobbyist environmental groups have described as a "walking conflict of interest"—to officially take over as interior secretary after Ryan Zinke stepped down in December 2018 following various scandals.
<p>"It's a humbling privilege to be nominated to lead a Department whose mission I love, to accomplish the balanced, common sense vision of our President," Bernhardt wrote in a tweet responding to the president's announcement, also made on Twitter Monday.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="39d91" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3TVJOG1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092521879569686534" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">It’s a humbling privilege to be nominated to lead a Department whose mission I love, to accomplish the balanced, co… https://t.co/VHhYLGlHwN</div> — Secretary David Bernhardt (@Secretary David Bernhardt)<a href="https://twitter.com/SecBernhardt/statuses/1092521879569686534">1549312488.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>As deputy secretary, Bernhardt played an active role in the Trump administration's push to open <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands" target="_self">public lands</a> to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuel</a> and mining interests, and he is expected to continue this work if he is confirmed to permanently take over the department he has been running as acting secretary following Zinke's departure, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-interior-bernhardt/trump-to-nominate-ex-energy-lobbyist-bernhardt-to-head-interior-idUSKCN1PT24V" target="_blank">Reuters reported</a>.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTE0Njk2Ni9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MTU1NTI0MH0.9dcWNf8UtANYy5EW-CcyWXTtLNYHdB16rvGXHZEMxz4/img.jpg?width=980" id="d441c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="aedd65a177628837fd156c858675040e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt at a meeting of International Boundary and Water Commission officials from the U.S. and Mexico on Sept. 27, 2017</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/usbr/37326894776/" target="_blank">Bureau of Reclamation</a></small></p>
<p>In 2017, around 150 environmental groups wrote a letter to the Senate urging it to block his nomination to the position of deputy secretary, arguing that his work as a lawyer and lobbyist for oil and water interests at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck gave him too much past history with entities that could stand to benefit from Interior Department decisions. Despite this, he was confirmed 53 to 43, and now famously carries around a list of all his potential conflicts of interest, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-man-behind-the-curtain-interiors-no-2-helps-drive-trumps-agenda/2018/11/18/6403eb4c-e9ff-11e8-b8dc-66cca409c180_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ac58511cf14d" target="_blank">The Washington Post reported</a> in November of 2018.<br></p><p>"David Bernhardt is a walking conflict of interest who has no business overseeing America's public lands," <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> Executive Director Michael Brune said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2019/02/trump-nominates-walking-conflict-interest-david-bernhardt-be-interior" target="_blank">statement</a> opposing his permanent installation. "The Secretary of the Interior should be someone who respects the mission of the department and sees the value in our public lands and waters beyond their capacity to be drilled, mined, or fracked."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="0e7dc" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ZVZ93Z1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092531631917883392" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">David Bernhardt is a walking conflict of interest who has no business overseeing America’s public lands. https://t.co/jCJgnnDOPQ</div> — Sierra Club (@Sierra Club)<a href="https://twitter.com/SierraClub/statuses/1092531631917883392">1549314813.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>More recently, Bernhardt has come under fire for decisions made after he took over for Zinke as acting interior secretary. He was responsible for keeping <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/national-parks" target="_self">national parks</a> open to the public but understaffed during the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/government-shutdown" target="_self">government shutdown</a>, a move that put <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/government-shutdown-national-parks-2624954748.html" target="_self">both wildlife and visitors</a> at risk.<br></p><p>"Our National Park System is more expansive, diverse and reflective of the American story than ever before. But it's also a system facing many challenges, including threats from climate change, overcrowding, encroaching development and billions of dollars in needed repairs. And now, after the longest shutdown in US history, parks are dealing with a massive cleanup due to acting Interior Secretary Bernhardt's irresponsible decision to keep parks open with minimal staff," <a href="https://www.npca.org/" target="_blank">National Parks Conservation Association</a> President and CEO Theresa Pierno wrote in a statement opposing his nomination.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="ad23e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ARYRSC1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092532572817629187" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">BREAKING: "We have serious concerns with the nomination of David Bernhardt for Interior Secretary and cannot suppor… https://t.co/xsxdk99reX</div> — National Parks Conservation Association (@National Parks Conservation Association)<a href="https://twitter.com/NPCA/statuses/1092532572817629187">1549315038.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>Bernhardt also signed a memorandum <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/shutdown-national-parks-entrance-fees-2625335019.html" target="_self">authorizing parks to use visitor fees</a> to cover maintenance costs and day-to-day operations during the shutdown, a move that some Congressional Democrats said was illegal.<br></p><p>As deputy secretary, Bernhardt also <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/zinke-bernhardt-interior-environment-2625021502.html" target="_self">promoted efforts</a> to weaken the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species" target="_self">Endangered Species</a> Act and open the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/arctic" target="_self">Arctic</a> National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="00bbd" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6ZIGBB1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1092524470730919936" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump has selected yet another unqualified nominee to head the Department of the Interior. https://t.co/QUmDvPEed1</div> — Center for Bio Div (@Center for Bio Div)<a href="https://twitter.com/CenterForBioDiv/statuses/1092524470730919936">1549313106.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area in Arizona is a biodiversity hotspot. Bureau of Land Management
Conservation groups filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' approval of a permit that allows a huge master-planned sprawl development project near Benson, Arizona to proceed. The Villages at Vigneto would transform 12,167 acres of largely undeveloped habitat into 28,000 residences, 3 million square feet of commercial space, four golf courses, fountains, lakes and a resort.
<p>The development would rely solely on groundwater, draining the San Pedro River and harming millions of migratory birds, including threatened and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered species</a>. Yet the Corps refused to analyze these staggering impacts, confining its analysis to a small fraction of the development.</p><p>The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Tucson, says the Corps failed to prepare a comprehensive environmental analysis of the entire development in violation of the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. The groups are asking the court to invalidate the permit and order the Corps to complete the necessary environmental analysis.</p><p>"The San Pedro River is the last remaining intact natural river ecosystem in southern Arizona—an oasis in the desert that supports a rich array of species, including millions of migratory songbirds," said Peter Else, chair of the <a href="http://www.lowersanpedro.org" target="_blank">Lower San Pedro Watershed Alliance</a>, a landowner-based conservation association. "It is essential that we take every step to preserve this critical resource, protect <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> habitat and migration corridors, sustainable rural lifestyles, and valuable recreation opportunities."</p><p>The proposed development would depend solely on groundwater to satisfy the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/water">water</a> needs of approximately 70,000 people. That would dramatically increase demand on groundwater resources from approximately 800 acre-feet per year to a projected 8,427 acre-feet per year. </p><p>This magnitude of pumping would deplete surface flows along the San Pedro River and at the St. David Cienega, a groundwater-fed marsh within the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area. The development would also transform thousands of acres of upland habitat into impervious surfaces, increasing storm-water runoff, flooding and destructive sediment accumulation in the river.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTEzOTI0MC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NDA2MDQyMn0.Jwitufd-LWfEBjCptCNFa_016d_vH2k7Jdxyj9Llkys/img.jpg?width=980" id="4be5c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a06b5354a200c3406247b2e8c2a79b5c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">The San Pedro riparian area contains about 40 miles of the upper San Pedro River.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit..."><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/blmaz/26699461675/in/album-72157665367858893/" target="_blank">Bureau of Land Management</a></small></p>
<p>"Hydrology studies show that this development would suck the St. David Cienega dry and have a devastating impact on wildlife that depend on it for their survival," said Robin Silver, cofounder of the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. "The science is clear that this level of water pumping would irreversibly degrade the riparian habitat and harm migratory birds, including multiple endangered and listed species. The Corps has abdicated its responsibility to consider these significant impacts."<br></p><p>The San Pedro River depends on groundwater contributions from the regional aquifer, especially during the driest times of the year. In 1988 Congress expressly reserved water rights for the conservation area to protect the river's aquatic and riparian resources, including the St. David Cienega.</p><p>Reports already show that groundwater pumping is depleting the aquifer at an unsustainable rate, threatening the future of the river and riparian habitat that is essential to wildlife.</p>
<div id="a328d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="KFD8MX1576662461">
<a data-flickr-embed="true" data-context="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mypubliclands/20359080895/in/album-72157656736946885/">
<img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/314/20359080895_2f267c3c93.jpg" width="640" height="426">
</a>
<script async="" src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
<p>"What is most alarming about this proposal for those along the Lower San Pedro River is that a new upstream city of 70,000 people will be pulling water from the ground in an unsustainable way. Most of that water will never be replaced. It's a potential death sentence for the Lower San Pedro," said Pearl Mast, board member of the <a href="https://cascabelconservation.org" target="_blank">Cascabel Conservation Association</a>.<br></p><p>The Corps did not analyze the potential harm to the river or the conservation area caused by the development, claiming they are outside its "scope of analysis." The Corps confined its analysis to 1,919 acres, a small fraction of the proposed development. </p><p>"There is no rational basis for the Corps' refusal to consider the full impacts of the Vigneto development on these unique and critical resources," said Stu Gillespie, a staff attorney with <a href="https://earthjustice.org" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a>. "This is a clear example of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration trying to game the system and shirk its duty to consider and disclose the impacts of its decisions."</p><p>"The San Pedro River is this incredible asset to our state, providing habitat for a diversity of species, a flyway for migratory birds and a wildlife viewing paradise for people from around the world," said Sandy Bahr, director of <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/home" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>'s Grand Canyon Chapter. "Several species that are dependent on the river are also threatened or endangered due to habitat loss. Arizona has allowed development and other diversions to dry up and destroy several important rivers. We cannot, we must not, allow the San Pedro to join that list."</p><p>"The San Pedro River was the first Global Important Bird Area for the United States and both birds and birders continue to flock to the critical and unique habitat the river provides," said Nicole Gillett, a conservation advocate with <a href="http://tucsonaudubon.org" target="_blank">Tucson Audubon</a>. "A development of this scale and design is unsustainable and will damage not only the environment but the economy built around it." </p><p>The lawsuit was filed by the Lower San Pedro Watershed Alliance, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Tucson Audubon Society, <a href="https://www.maricopaaudubon.org" target="_blank">Maricopa Audubon Society</a> and Cascabel Conservation Association. The groups are represented by Earthjustice.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="25e7f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="WYRAWX1576662461"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="998951355200008192" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump Opens Door to Dangerous Fracking in Northern Arizona https://t.co/TOV5ngCmu9 #fracking #Arizona #publiclands… https://t.co/xPu1aUGS8G</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/998951355200008192">1527003537.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A monarch butterfly before migration to Mexico on Oct. 21, 2018 at the Mobile Botanical Gardens in Alabama. patricia pierce / CC BY 2.0
The yearly count of monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico, released Wednesday, shows an increase of 144 percent from last year's count and is the highest count since 2006. That's good news for a species whose numbers had fallen in recent years, but conservationists say the monarch continues to need Endangered Species Act protection.
The count of 6.05 hectares of occupied forest is up from 2.48 hectares last winter. The increase is attributable to favorable weather during the spring and summer breeding seasons and during the fall migration. Monarchs have lost an estimated 165 million acres of breeding habitat in the U.S. to herbicide spraying and development.
<p>"This reprieve from bad news on monarchs is a thank-you from the butterflies to all the people who planted native milkweeds and switched to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic">organic</a> corn and soy products," said Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. "But one good weather year won't save the monarch in the long run, and more protections are needed for this migratory wonder and its summer and winter habitats."</p><p>In 2014 conservationists led by the Center for Biological Diversity and the <a href="https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org" target="_blank">Center for Food Safety</a> petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the butterfly under the Endangered Species Act. The Fish and Wildlife Service's initial decision was that <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered species</a> protection may be warranted, and a final decision will be issued by June.</p><p>"The question is whether the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration wants to do <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/monsanto">Monsanto</a>'s bidding or protect monarchs for future generations," said George Kimbrell, legal director at the Center for Food Safety. "This year's count is a temporary reprieve that doesn't change what the law and science demands, which is that we protect monarchs under the Endangered Species Act before it's too late."</p><p>As recently as the mid-1990s, monarchs covered nearly 21 hectares of forest in their wintering ground, falling to less than 1 hectare in 2014. Scientists estimate that 6 hectares is the threshold to be out of the immediate danger zone of migratory collapse.</p><p>About 99 percent of all North American monarchs migrate each winter to oyamel fir forests on 12 mountaintops in central Mexico. Scientists from <a href="http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_offices/mexico" target="_blank">World Wildlife Fund Mexico</a> estimate the population size by measuring the area of trees turned orange by the clustering butterflies.</p><p>Monarch butterflies west of the Rocky Mountains overwinter on the coast of California. Their numbers dropped to fewer than 30,000 this year, down from 1.2 million two decades ago.</p><p>A recent study found that if current trends continue, the western population has a 63 percent chance of extinction in 20 years and more than an 80 percent chance of extinction within 50 years. The western population is now at the threshold of extinction. </p><p>The caterpillars only eat milkweed, but the plant has been devastated by increased herbicide spraying in conjunction with corn and soybean crops that have been genetically engineered to tolerate direct spraying with herbicides. In addition to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/glyphosate">glyphosate</a>, monarchs are threatened by other herbicides and by <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/neonicotinoids">neonicotinoid</a> insecticides that are toxic to young caterpillars.</p><p><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">Climate change</a> also threatens to disrupt the monarch's migration and render its overwintering habitats unsuitable by the end of the century.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTEzNjQyOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjA2MjE3N30.oe5oOw7WcI-wa2e2-8981jfHaI7ka_87xgUfbxp7zgM/img.jpg?width=980" id="b06de" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8ca07e8f528c639da5531a2bb3520fee" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Graph by Tierra Curry, Center for Biological Diversity</small></p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="1695e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="FGZGOT1576663068"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1067428243706470401" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">5 Ways to Make a Difference in the Life of a #Monarch @HFSciencePub @jnp_mn @BetteAStevens https://t.co/ZDP5MNdneR</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1067428243706470401">1543329699.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less
Return of Supersonic Planes Would Be a Dirty, Noisy Climate Disaster
30 January 2019
Insights + Opinion
A retired Concorde supersonic passenger jet on the roof of the Auto & Technik museum in Sinsheim, Germany. Gilbert Sopakuwa / Flickr
The return of supersonic airplanes would result in 96 million metric tons of carbon pollution per year, according to a new study released Wednesday by the International Council on Clean Transportation.
"In our era of runaway climate change, swapping fuel efficiency for speed is a devil's bargain," said Clare Lakewood, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. "The aviation industry should be reducing its massive carbon footprint, not enlarging it with exorbitant luxuries for the super-wealthy. Supersonics are catastrophic for the climate."
<p>Aviation startups envision a fleet of 2,000 supersonic planes, which will burn <a href="https://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Environmental_Supersonic_Aircraft_20180717.pdf" target="_blank">five to seven</a> times more fuel per passenger than standard airliners, serving 500 cities by 2035. The study estimates that this fleet would emit 1.6 to 2.4 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide over a 25-year service lifetime—eight times more than the entire U.S. aviation industry emits in a year.</p><p>Supersonic planes also create a loud roar, called a sonic boom, when they break the sound barrier. That continues along the entire supersonic flight route. The planes could double the area exposed to harmful noise pollution around airports compared to standard planes of the same size, the study found. Exposure to aircraft noise is linked to high blood pressure and heart disease, cognitive impairments in children, and life-threatening disturbance for sensitive and endangered <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a>.</p><p>U.S. airports expected to experience 100 or more supersonic landing and takeoffs per day include Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York's JFK. Parts of the country could be exposed to between 150 and 200 sonic booms per day, or up to one boom every five minutes over a 16-hour flight day.</p><p>In August 2018, 38 environmental, public-health and community groups successfully <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/transportation_and_global_warming/airplane_emissions/pdfs/Letter-to-US-Senate-Opposing-Authorization-of-Overland-Supersonic-Flight.pdf" target="_blank">urged</a> the Senate to reject a provision in the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill that would have lifted a 45-year ban on overland supersonic flight in the U.S. But the bill passed in October 2018 with a provision requiring the FAA to start setting certification standards that will let civilian supersonic planes fly in U.S. airspace—and to consider repealing the overland supersonic flight ban.</p><p>"Federal aviation officials should take a hard look at the science and set standards that keep these flying gas-guzzlers out of our skies altogether," Lakewood said. "Keeping the air we breathe clean and preserving a livable planet are simply more important than trimming flight times."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="8faeb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="HK205G1576661960"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1088885511807295489" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"This news is worrying and compelling." In my first @EcoWatch post today, the @metoffice has some scary predictions… https://t.co/gqzaSMG0Ky</div> — Olivia Rosane (@Olivia Rosane)<a href="https://twitter.com/orosane/statuses/1088885511807295489">1548445511.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less