According to the poll, skepticism that has plagued many climate change champions in recent years has given way to greater acceptance and growing concern amongst the general population.  The resurgence comes at a pivotal time in the battle to solve the climate crisis and prevent further, perhaps irrevocable damage to the Earth and its ecosystems and wildlife.

Will voters rise up en masse to tell politicians to say no to dirty deeds like tar sands and coal exports?

Digging Into the Numbers

• Gallup reports that an average of 58%of Americans say they are worried a “great deal” or “fair amount” about global warming.  While below the apex of 72% reported between 1999 and 2001, it’s up sharply in the last two years from the 51% recorded in 2011.
• 78% of Americans professed some level of concern about global warming with 33% having said they worried “a great deal,” 25% “a fair amount,” and 20% “only a little.”
• 54% of Americans believe that global warming has already started to alter the climate which is also an upward trend after a recent dip in belief over the last several years.    At the same time, Americans are also reporting higher confidence in media coverage of global warming and acknowledging a broadening consensus amongst scientists.
• Up 10% over the past four years, 62% of Americans believe that scientists are in agreement that global warming is in fact occurring; this is the closest public opinion has gotten to the peak of 65% observed between 2006 and 2008.
• The new poll also shows human accountability trending back upward as 57% of Americans say they believe global warming to be the result of human activities.  This represents a 7% rebound since 2010 in which 50% of the population felt similar responsibility.

To round out the current picture of the American public’s opinion on climate change is the question of whether Americans feel as if all this has any effect on their lives. How immediate do average Americans feel the threat actually is to themselves and their families?  Or to stick with the AC/DC theme, do voters think we’re on a “highway to hell?”

Not Enough Concern

The results to this question are more disparaging to the climate change debate as the upward trend in this case means more people feel climate change isn’t a serious threat to them in their lifetime.  Those who believe otherwise make up a mere 34%, which matches the historical average.  In other words, there has been no change in this line of thinking since these polls began in 1998.

So with all this progress and getting back in black, we’re not there yet.  Moving forward, the challenge that remains in keeping things on a positive upswing in the mind of the public and the health of the planet, is getting public opinion in concert with real-time events like the recent Superstorm Sandy or the ongoing and very immediate changes happening right now to the climate and the balance of its ecosystems and the wildlife they sustain.

If you’re feeling thunderstruck that anyone could doubt the connection between man-made carbon pollution and climate change, it’s in your hands to help spread the scientific truth.  If someone mentions weird weather–from droughts to heat waves to wildfires–mention global warming and that you hope our leaders act to cut carbon pollution.  You don’t need to know every single scientific fact–send them to nwf.org/ExtremeWeather and climate scientist Dr. Amanda Staudt will do the heavy lifting for you.

So whatever motivates you best—whether it’s protecting wildlife, working to save the planet, positive cash flow, or simply rockin’ out—keep on keepin’ on, because our work isn’t done here and good work never is.

The Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing historic limits on the industrial carbon pollution that’s fueling climate change.  Tell President Obama:  For those about to act, we salute you.

Flooded wetlands in Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge after Hurricane Sandy (Flickr / US FWS)

The budget proposal says that the role of the federal government is to protect our communities and our families from “many dangers: rising health-care costs, a stagnant economy, a massive debt, an uncertain world,” and that “the first job of the federal government is to secure the safety of its citizens from threats at home and abroad.” We agree, and NWF works every day to better protect people, property, and the environment. However, NWF believes that certain policies outlined in Rep. Ryan’s budget proposal put Americans at greater risk.

Climate change and extreme weather impacts - wildfires, droughts, floods, superstorms, all of which are intensifying – are some of the greatest threats facing Americans today. According to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, continuing to ignore the impacts of climate change puts to federal government—and the country—at high risk of financial loss.

The budget plan focuses on aiding the vulnerable and their communities, yet this budget, by ignoring and potentially worsening the effects of climate change, puts millions of vulnerable Americans at risk. NWF agrees that we need to seek a balanced approach to deficit reduction; however, we cannot ignore the direct public health and safety impacts of a federal budget that turns a blind eye to the reality of climate change.

Specifically, NWF is concerned that the House Budget Resolution:

• Proposes increased investment in fossil fuels while gutting support for developing clean energy sources.  It recommends increased drilling on federal lands and on the Outer Continental Shelf, something that will increase our dependence on dirty fuels, endanger critical habitats, and jeopardize the robust outdoor recreation economy dependent on public lands.  The plan also proposes eliminating incentives for clean energy development, undermining our progress towards a clean energy future and energy security.  No mention is made of oil and gas subsidies, despite the fact that eliminating them could raise billions of dollars in revenue.  Continuing to invest in fossil fuels while cutting incentives for developing clean energy sources puts Americans at incredible risk from extreme weather and other climate impacts.
• Discredits the importance of strong protections for clean air and water, such as the current proposed Environmental Protection Agency limits on industrial carbon pollution. A clean environment is critical for both economic growth and public health. Between 1970 and 1990, actions to reduce air pollution, at a cost of $523 billion, saved the nation $22 trillion in health care expense and lost productivity—a 40-1 benefit-cost ratio. These regulations are crucial to reducing carbon pollution and ensuring public health and safety.
• Proposes selling off public lands and diverting revenue from public land sales away from the Department of the Interior.  In addition to undermining our rich national conservation legacy and restricting the revenue-generating activities of millions of outdoor recreationists, this removes land acquisition as a key tool the Department of the Interior can use in mitigating damage from future natural disasters.
• Urges approval of the Keystone pipeline.  This would dramatically increase production of the Canadian tar sands—a fuel that emits 14-20% more greenhouse gases than typical crude oil—and would endanger property, ecosystems, and wildlife all along the 2,000 mile pipeline.   In the words of NASA scientist James Hansen, building the Keystone pipeline would mean “game over” for the climate.

At the same time that the budget proposal undermines national progress towards reducing the impacts of climate change, it slashes funding for programs that safeguard our communities, ecosystems, and wildlife.  Many of these programs not only protect the clean air and water and public lands enjoyed by millions of Americans: they also mitigate the effects of natural disasters by protecting and enhancing natural barriers.

Source: Center for American Progress

These cuts came on top of decades of underfunding for conservation programs, and under the proposed budget this scenario gets even worse. The budget would extend the Budget Control Act caps on spending for another two years—until 2023—and making huge cuts in discretionary spending.  By 2023, the plan funds discretionary programs at $47 billion less than current projected spending levels. Although the current plan does not go into detail about the distribution of discretionary cuts, past budget proposals issued by Chairman Ryan strongly suggest that conservation programs will bear a disproportionate amount of these cuts.

By cutting programs that reduce carbon pollution and mitigate the effects of climate change, this budget fails to invest in the future health and safety of Americans.

Especially since 2012 was the hottest year ever recorded, the arctic sea ice extent set a new record low in recorded history, the northeast was devastated by Hurricane Sandy, and drought and wildfires struck all over the western part of the United States.

But there is one group who may just need a report to actually show them that climate change is real and is happening now. You guessed it, it’s Congress.

Back in 1990 when the U.S. Congress passed (and President George H.W. Bush signed) the U.S. Global Change Research Act, it actually mandated that federal agencies produce just such a report every four years. The latest installment of this National Climate Assessment was recently released in draft form for public review.  This draft report is the most comprehensive review of U.S. climate impacts to date. It includes analyses of how climate change is already affecting specific regions and sectors of national relevance, from agriculture to health to transportation.

Flickr simm0ns777

It’s like the kid who has a math book with all the answers in the back, but refuses to do the work to find the solutions. That kid usually fails the class. In this case, Congress is failing its country. Let’s make them do the math.

So when the President addressed climate in his Inauguration speech, saying,

“We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves, but to all posterity.We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.

“Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.

“The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries—we must claim its promise. That is how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure—our forests and waterways; our croplands and snow-capped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared.”

I think he’s saying, “Hey, we can’t deny or ignore science any longer. It is time to take action.”

As we know, action is not something that Congress is particularly keen on these days. That’s why we’ve got to push them. Right now is the time to raise our voices so that when the report lands on their desks next year they know what to do with it. And they know we’re paying attention.

Tell Congress to limit carbon pollution contributing to climate change!

Cherry blossoms flowering on the grounds of the Washington Monument during President Obama’s Second Inauguration, January 21, 2013. NWF photo by Bruce Stein.

Climate scientists at NOAA recently announced that in the continental United States, 2012 was the hottest year since record-keeping began 118 years ago, blowing past the previous record by a full degree. The effect of these increasingly warm temperatures is already showing in our woods and meadows. Just last week scientists reported record early flowering times for dozens of spring wildflowers in the eastern United States. Using notes from famed naturalists Henry David Thoreau and Aldo Leopold, research teams documented that flowering is now occurring up to three weeks earlier than in Thoreau and Leopold’s time, 160 and 80 years ago respectively.

While an early spring may not sound too bad to winter-weary New Englanders, many plants and animals depend on the linked timing of other species to survive—for instance, the timely emergence of insects for birds to feed to their chicks, or the arrival of bees or hummingbirds to pollinate flowers. Accelerate or delay one side of the interaction and the other can suffer in response. This form of ecological mismatch is just one example of the impacts of climate change on species and ecosystems that were summarized in a recent report to the National Climate Assessment, on which I was a co-author.

As I stood on the grounds of the Washington Monument with thousands of others yesterday, I was thrilled to hear President Obama speak very directly about the need to finally confront the dangers climate change poses to America. “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.” He then noted that “some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.” Indeed, the science is now clear; it is only the political science and our will to act that is in doubt.

Early this morning as I stepped outside to walk my dog, temperatures in Washington hovered around 19 degrees, a dramatic dip from the previous day’s relatively mild temperatures. Such cold days are now becoming a rarity in Washington, and I found myself savoring the bite of the winter air. I couldn’t help but think, though, about the now-frozen petals on the National Mall, and the young trees that, come spring time, would be without cherry blossoms. Washington’s cherry blossoms long have been a national treasure. It’s time we listened, as the president clearly did, to what they are telling us.

Speak up for wildlife, like polar bears, and support limits on carbon pollution from power plants!

Let’s take a look at these new results:

Climate Had a Role in Superstorm Sandy

Q: Do you think climate change is adding to the severity of recent extreme weather such as Superstorm Sandy and the summer droughts?

57.2% Yes             27.9% No       14.8% Not Sure

Deeper Dive: Superstorm Sandy impacted the public across the country not just in the Northeast. At least 54% responded “Yes” in each region of the country (East, South, Central/Great Lakes & West). According to veteran pollster John Zogby:

These results show the dramatic impact 2012′s extreme weather has had across party lines, with half of Republicans, 73 percent of independents and 82 percent of Democrats saying they’re worried about the growing cost and risks of extreme weather disasters fueled by climate change. It’s a major change from our December 2009 poll, which showed two-thirds of Republicans and nearly half of political independents saying they were ‘not at all concerned’ about global climate change and global warming. The political climate has shifted and members of Congress need to catch up with their constituents.

69% Concerned Over Costs & Risks of Climate Change

Aerial views of the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy to the New Jersey coast (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Mark C. Olsen).

• 22.3%  I am worried a great deal
• 46.7% I am somewhat worried
• 15.9% I am not very worried
• 11.3% I am not worried at all
• 3.8%  Not sure

Deeper Dive:  Concern over climate fueled extreme weather spans the political spectrum. 58% of those sympathetic to the Tea Party are greatly or somewhat concerned about climate change.  82% of those sympathetic to Occupy Wall Street are concerned.

More Than 65% Want Elected Officials to Act Now to Address Climate Change

Q: Do you believe elected officials should take steps now to reduce the impact of climate change on future generations, or wait until there is more evidence?

• 65.3%   Take steps now
• 27.3%  Wait until there is more evidence
• 7.3%   Not sure

Deeper Dive:  The call for action from elected officials spans across all generations. 74% of those in the age group 18-29 say take steps now; 68% in the age group 30-39 want action; 64% of those between 50-64 years old want action; and 52% of 65+ say take steps now.

Don’t Roll Back the Clean Air Act

Q: Which of the following proposals offered by candidates do you think should be the highest priority to help solve America’s energy challenges?

A:  When given a number of choices, only 3.5% wanted to “relax clean air standards to promote more electricity from coal.”

Deeper Dive: In comparison, 38% want political leaders to do more to encourage the development of renewable forms of energy like wind and solar power.  This choice had more than double the support of any other choice.

Voters Are Tired of Polluters Trying to Influence Elections

courtesy oliveventures.com

• 41.7%  Very concerned
• 35.1% Somewhat concerned
• 14.2% Not very concerned
• 4.6%   Not at all concerned
• 4.5%   Not sure

Deeper Dive: The concern over polluter contributions spans the political spectrum.  81% of Democrats, 70% of Republicans and 77% of independents are very/somewhat concerned about the role of polluter money in campaigns.

Ignoring the Call for Climate Leadership

The polling results as a whole continue to show that a failure to lead or take action on climate will put political leaders at odds with the public. And while this is true across the political spectrum, after the election some political leaders are not getting the message.

House Majority Leader John Boehner has once again decided to hide behind the phony debate over climate science. Responding to question about climate he said:

“I don’t think there’s any doubt that we’ve had climate change over the last 100 years. What has initiated it, though, has sparked a debate that’s gone on now for the last 10 years. I don’t think we’re any closer to the answer than we were 10 years ago.”

Similarly, House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton was asked whether he would consider a carbon tax as part of the fiscal cliff negotiations and responded, “I don’t like the idea.” Let’s remember that Congressman Upton has also opposed the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade legislation and last Congress led legislative efforts in the House to strip the EPA of its authority under the Clean Air Act to deal with carbon pollution. All of which means that the Congressman is running out of options to support that will actually tackle the climate problem.

This lack of leadership on climate is woefully out of alignment with where voters are after Superstorm Sandy and the recent election. It is past time for of our elected officials of all strips to look to the future: whether for the sake of addressing the growing impacts of climate change or even if it is for their own political future.

Help protect crucial habitat from worsening superstorms—take action to support limits on carbon pollution from coal-burning power plants.

Aerial views of the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy to the New Jersey coast taken during a search and rescue mission by New Jersey Army National Guard, Oct. 30, 2012. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Mark C. Olsen)

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, the first priorities for federal, state, and local governments are to prevent additional loss of life, assist those in need with all resources possible, and begin the difficult recovery process.  But once the recovery process begins my family and friends, along with countless others up and down the eastern seaboard, will begin to consider how to repair, rebuild and strengthen their homes and business properties.

As we move towards the repair and recovery phase, NWF has identified a 10 ways to better prepare for extreme hurricanes: five national policy changes that can be made right now to make all us safer, and five activities that must be stopped to avoid and minimize future storm-related catastrophes.  These recommendations all have one thing in common – they promote protection and restoration of natural defenses that are critical for safe, affordable, and sustainable protection from storms and floods.

Five Actions to Protect People, Property and Wildlife from Storm and Flood Damages

High water in the wetlands of Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge. Flickr photo courtesy U.S. FWS.

1. Promote Climate Readiness. Many federal, state, and municipal agencies have taken steps to develop climate-adaptation plans, which chart a path toward preparing for and coping with extreme weather events and other climate impacts. Most of these plans have yet to be implemented, though, and will require political will and adequate funding to truly create more climate-resilient communities. And Readiness is the key word here—the best time to protect against and plan for natural catastrophe is long before it happens. We can start by implementing the recommendations of the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force.
2. Make Flood Insurance Reform Real. Hurricane Sandy destroyed countless properties across the Northeast, including many that belonged to people who had no idea their property was located within a floodplain and therefore did not have flood insurance. Thankfully, the just passed Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act made great strides towards updating how we map flood zones by taking into account increased storm frequency and intensity. By updating our maps and requiring more people to purchase flood insurance we’ll protect more properties, and also send a market signal that there are smarter, safer and better places to develop than in the middle of a floodplain. We can do this if we fully fund and implement the Flood Insurance Reform Act. 
3. Protect Our Natural Defenses. Natural features like wetlands reduce storm intensity and protect nearby properties from flooding. In fact, a single acre of wetland can store 1–1.5 million gallons of flood water. We must capitalize on these benefits and ensure that government helps protect these beneficial and cost-effective flood control features. The Obama Administration took several new steps to meet this goal. It has created new guidance and intends to pursue rulemaking to reinstate crucial Clean Water Act protections for wetlands and streams, and is also poised to release new water resources planning guidelines.
   
4. Encourage Better Stormwater Management. During major rain events, like Hurricane Sandy, stormwater and sewer systems are often inundated.  New storm water rules and guidance allow us to address these serious storm water concerns for communities across the country—especially those with aging infrastructure. We must update stormwater regulations to require that major sewer system upgrades in urban areas account for projected increases in rainfall and provide adequate holding basins to protect towns and communities from flooding, while protecting water quality at the same time.
5. Reduce Carbon Pollution. To avoid increased damage from super storms and other severe weather events, Americans must begin taking steps to reduce carbon pollution. The administration must follow through on its efforts to use the Clean Air Act to limit carbon pollution from power plants and other sources. And it must accelerate development and deployment of innovative clean energy solutions. Until we solve the problem at this level, we’ll be playing catch up after every storm. See my colleague Joe’s Mendelson’s recent piece for more details.

Five Actions that put People, Property and Wildlife at Risk from Storm and Flood Damages

The aftermath of Hurricane Sandy in Rodanthe, North Carolina. Flickr photo by North Carolina Dept. of Transportation

1. Government Subsidization of Development in High Risk Areas. Earlier this year, the Congress passed and the President signed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 which made significant steps towards ensuring that property owners pay actuarial- or market-based rates for flood insurance. This is important as it helps people understand their risk and lessens floodplain development via the free market. But the bill didn’t go far enough. There are still countless properties that receive federal subsidies for flood insurance, including home owners living behind decertified and failing levees. Until we ensure everybody pays according to risk, we should continue to expect dangerous coastal development.
2. Failure to Prioritize & Harmonize Civil Works Projects. While some improvements have been made to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers planning process, the Corps continues to plan and operate projects that increase flood risks and destroy natural features that protect communities from flooding. Moving forward, Congress must consider the flooding impacts of all projects regardless of their primary purpose. For instance, we must consider the flooding impacts of navigation projects and have the political courage to veto them if these projects put people and property at risk.
3. Destruction of wetlands and streams.  Actions by the Supreme Court, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency over the last decade undermine the Clean Water Act’s ability to prevent destruction of many wetlands and small streams by developers and others. Similarly, lax enforcement of the Farm Bill’s Swampbuster restrictions has exacerbated wetlands loss.  Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, and Missouri have each lost 85-90 percent of their wetlands and countless headwater streams. Between 1998 and 2004, coastal watersheds in the eastern United States lost almost 1 percent of their freshwater wetlands. Just a 1–percent loss of a watershed’s wetlands can increase total flood volume by almost 7 percent.
4. Backstop State and Federal Insurance Programs: Subsidized government insurance—like the National Flood Insurance Program of Florida’s Citizens Property Insurance Corp—mask risk and encourage unsafe development. And still legislators across the country continue to call for an expansion of these subsidies by creating federal backstops or bailouts for these poorly run programs. We must not move towards this type of dangerous policy.
5. Build with Concrete instead of Mud and Grass: The WRDA 2007 national water policy proposed to “protect the environment” by “protecting and restoring the functions of natural systems and mitigating any unavoidable damage to natural systems,” and by “seeking to avoid the unwise use of floodplains.” The Corps is ignoring these requirements by continuing to promote environmentally destructive and costly structural projects even where less costly and environmentally protective nonstructural and restoration measures would provide better solutions. We need a major change of course to stop building structures that protect those directly behind them and exacerbate downstream flooding and instead use natural, open floodplains to allow rivers room to expand and cover their banks without impacting property.

How You Can Help

By going to the polls this Tuesday, we can show Big Polluters their money is no match for millions of Americans who have the power to elect leaders that will stand up to protect wildlife and fight climate change. Get ready to vote by locating your polling place today, deciding now what time you will vote and making sure that your friends and family have rides to the polls. Let’s Pack the Polls for Wildlife.

Hurricane Sandy destroyed crucial habitat for imperiled piping plovers. Photo: Richard Seeley

Ready, Set, Vote!

Voting for wildlife-friendly candidates is bigger than any one race on November 6th. It means looking at your ballot before you go to the polls, researching candidates’ positions on key issues for wildlife, and making sure you have a plan to vote in person on November 6th or by absentee ballot.

Know Who and What You’re Voting For

Look at your ballot and compare candidates’ positions at Vote411.org. You can take notes with you into the polls on which candidates and proposals you plan to vote for.

In addition to voting for pro-wildlife candidates, residents in a number of states will have the opportunity to vote for ballot initiatives that have potential to shape the future of our wildlife and wild places. For example, residents of Michigan can vote YES on proposal 3 to help more of the state’s energy come from renewable sources such as wind and solar.

Know When and Where to Vote

Locate your polling place for voting and make a plan for what time you will vote on Nov. 6th.

Help Pack the Polls

Studies have shown that people are more likely to vote if they hear that their friends and neighbors will be voting, too. So please encourage your friends and family to vote, and make sure they have rides to the polls!

Defeat Big Polluters at the Polls

This past July, I saw record fires blaze through communities near my home in Colorado and severe droughts leave local black bears desperate for food. And just last week, Hurricane Sandy devastated not only communities across the East Coast, but also wildlife–crossing more than one hundred National Wildlife Refuges and destroying crucial habitat for imperiled piping plovers and many more shorebirds.

Yet, as these record-breaking extreme weather events–all with clear links to climate change–become more and more common, the fossil fuel industry continues to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into attacking pro-environment candidates and pushing a reckless agenda that puts their profits before the safety of communities and wildlife.

By researching candidates’ positions and voting, people like us who care about wildlife and vote can fight back against Big Polluters whose reckless behavior is increasingly putting wildlife in harm’s way.

Please SHARE with your friends to make this the largest voter turnout for wildlife ever!

Thanks for making your voice heard for wildlife this election!

We have entered a new era where climate disruption is reality and the scientific predictions have struck home.  We shouldn’t be surprised any longer as the improbable becomes the norm. As NWF Senior Scientist Dr. Amanda Staudt explains, “Global warming is putting hurricanes on steroids and we’re beginning to see the effects.”  The near-record warmth of the Atlantic waters that spawned the storm is the new normal, thanks to the warming caused by one trillion tons of carbon pollution that has been dumped in our atmosphere from burning oil, coal and gas.  More water in the atmosphere is the new normal, because warm air holds more water.  Higher sea levels from warmer waters and melting ice shelves are the new normal, amplifying the impacts of storm surges.

NASA GOES image of Sandy’s approach to the Eastern U.S. seaboard.

“What do you want to do if we think the future has sea level rising four inches, six inches? Where are the impacted areas, and what do you want to do to adapt to that? And as human beings as a — as a — as a species, that’s why we’re all still here. We have spent our entire existence adapting, OK? So we will adapt to this. Changes to weather patterns that move crop production areas around — we’ll adapt to that. It’s an engineering problem, and it has engineering solutions. And so I don’t — the fear factor that people want to throw out there to say we just have to stop this, I do not accept.”

At the same event, Tillerson criticized the American public as being too ignorant to embrace ExxonMobil’s vision of a fossil-fuel dependent future:

“Ours is an industry that is built on technology, it’s built on science, it’s built on engineering, and because we have a society that by and large is illiterate in these areas, science, math and engineering, what we do is a mystery to them and they find it scary. And because of that, it creates easy opportunities for opponents of development, activist organizations, to manufacture fear.”

Tillerson’s attack on the public as the problem, rather than offering responsible solutions to reduce pollution, was both insulting and frightening.  When do we stop letting oil companies write America’s energy plan because they think the drought that devastated farmers this summer and the storms ravaging our coasts are simply an engineering challenge?  What do you suppose Mr. Tillerson is doing today? I imagine it is just another day at work in Texas (earning $100,000 per day).

Where is the accountability for the decades of junk science Exxon funded to create confusion about the impact of burning fossil fuels on our climate, just as tobacco companies for so long funded efforts to deny the link between cigarettes and cancer?  Instead, Exxon and other oil companies are even now pursuing plans to make our fuel supply even dirtier and more dangerous than conventional oil, especially in Canada, where tar sands oil production creates three times as much carbon pollution as conventional oil extraction.

We can no longer afford to let Tillerson and his pals write the rules that put the rest of us in harm’s way. Right now, ExxonMobil and other companies don’t pay a penny for the carbon pollution that is pumped into the atmosphere from their products.  The rest of us, however, are paying an increasing cost.  Farmers are losing their crops.  Food prices have shot up.  Families are devastated by storms.  Governments spend billions of taxpayer money in emergency relief.  Insurance customers face higher premiums, if they can get insurance at all.  Until we have a fair system where companies pay a reasonable price for carbon pollution, cleaner energy alternatives will be bullied out of the way by big oil, and the bill we all pay from climate impacts will go up and up.

Tillerson is right about one thing: we need to better prepare for climate change.  The forecasters and emergency responders have done exceptional work to prepare for and respond to Sandy.  But long-term preparation should start with restoring natural systems such as wetlands that are the best coastal defense against storms.  We should have started 20 years ago, when Exxon was instead investing in its deception machine.  But we can make progress if communities and government agencies come together around common sense preparedness.  Where Tillerson is fundamentally wrong, however, is that adaptation alone can protect us.  Bailing only works if you aren’t making the hole in the bottom of the boat bigger. ExxonMobil’s energy vision would superheat the planet and sink the ship.  Instead, we should be working now to accelerate deployment of alternatives to oil and coal to safeguard our children’s future.

Donate now to help protect wildlife

Right now, Craig Newmark of Craigslist.org is matching donations made to NWF through CrowdRise.com in support of NWF’s efforts protect wildlife and continue our work to highlight the impacts of climate change. Give today at CrowdRise.com/NationalWildlifeFederation to have your gift for wildlife go twice as far.

Scattered to the Winds

Seagoing Northern Gannet: U.S. FWS

Sea birds and waterfowl are most exposed in hurricanes.  Songbirds and smaller woodland birds, by contrast, have less difficulty. They are specially adapted to hold on, lay low and ride things out. In very strong winds, their toes automatically tighten around their perch. This holds them in place during high winds or when they sleep.  Woodpeckers and other cavity nesters will, barring the destruction of the tree itself, ride out storms in tree holes.  Shorebirds, such as sandpipers, often move to inland areas. In a unique effect of cyclonic hurricanes, the eye of the storm with its fast-moving walls of intense wind can form a massive “bird cage” holding birds inside the eye until the storm dissipates.  It is often the eye of the storm that displaces birds, more than its strong winds.  Sandy’s eye was less well-defined when compared to other hurricanes.

Birds are not the only species affected by the winds.  Sea mammals can be harmed too.  While many can seek shelter in open water or in near shore shelter, some dolphins and manatees have actually been blown ashore during major storms.

Flattened Forests

The “tree toll” of Sandy has not yet been tallied but in 1992, Hurricane Andrew generated incredible wind velocities onshore and knocked down as many as 80 percent of the trees on several coastal Louisiana basins, such as the Atchafalaya. Tree loss during Hurricane Katrina in 2005 caused even more extensive damage. Loss of coastal forests and trees can be devastating to dependent wildlife species and migratory species. Many wildlife species have very specialized niches in these forests, and specific foods can disappear too. High winds will often strip fruits, seeds and berries from bushes and trees.

Want to help? Donate to NWF through CrowdRise and Craig Newmark will match your donations up to $25,000.

Dune and Beach Loss

Sandy has clearly been tough on the Midatlantic’s sand shoreline. Storm surges, wave action, and winds cause beach and dune erosion and that can severely affect wildlife species. Many wildlife species live in ecological niches in the sandy areas and dunes of coastal barrier islands.  In some cases the storm can cause a beach area to fully disappear.  Sea turtle nests, for example, are dug right in to the beach and can be washed out, or a water surge, called a “wash over” can submerge these nests or nearby tern and plover nesting areas.

Saltwater in Freshwater Areas

The sustained and powerful winds of a hurricane will cause salty ocean water to pile up and surge onshore.  Sandy pushed water into lower Manhattan and that has gathered most of the headlines but coastal marshes and bays can litterally be poisened by too much salt.  These “storm surges” can be huge. Hurricane Irene’s surges, in 2011, brought water levels that were as much as 8 feet above normal high tide and Sandy’s peaked between 10 and 13 feet.  Katrina, in 2005, pushed a 30 foot high surge onto the coast.  In addition to the physical damage this causes, the salt contained in sea water dramatically shifts the delicate balance of freshwater and brackish wetland areas such as in the Chesapeake Bay and along the Atlantic Coast.  Creatures and vegetation that are less salt-tolerant will be harmed and many will not survive the influx of sea water. Marsh grasses, crabs, minnows, fish hatchlings, insects, and myriad creatures of freshwater and estuarine environments are harmed by a surge. The salt water intrusion in these some of these areas does not drain off very quickly and can even harm or kill off bottomland forests and other coastal trees.

Massive Flooding of Rivers, Bays and Wetlands

The reverse is true too.  The heavy rains generated by hurricanes will dump water in coastal area river basins (called watersheds) and this, in turn, can send vast amounts of fresh water surging downstream into coastal bays and estuaries.  This upsets the delicate and finely tuned freshwater/salt water balance that can be so vital for the health of these ecosystems.  In 1972, Hurricane Agnes sent such massive amounts of freshwater into the Chesapeake Bay.  A similar thing is happening with water from Sandy’s eight to 10 inches of rainfall.  The normally brackish (partially salty) water of the Bay was fresh for months following Agnes placing great pressure on the species living there.

Dark, Muddy Water

Heavy rainfall in upstream areas also washes soil, sediment and many pollutants into coastal and marine environments.  After Hurricane Agnes, the turbidly or cloudiness of the water became so severe in the Chesapeake Bay that the native grasses growing on the bottom of Bay died off in huge quantities.  These grasses provided critical habitat from crabs, fish spawning and many species.  It took the Bay years to recover. Similarly, sediment can wash over coral reefs, blocking needed sunlight and even causing algae to grow.

Violent Waters Everywhere 

Hurricane Irene, like other hurricanes, generated massive waves and violent action on the surface.  When hurricane Andrew hit Louisiana the government estimated that more than 9 million fish were killed offshore.  Similarly an assessment of the effect of that same storm on the Everglades Basin in Florida showed that 182 million fish were killed.  Hurricane Katrina also had a huge effect on dolphin species.  Many dolphins were hurt during the storm and were rescued and underwent rehabilitation.

Climate Change

The prognosis for wildlife surviving hurricanes can be hard to assess. There are many success stories and also accounts of major devastation. The question remains, however, about whether wild creatures will. like humans, be experiencing more catastrophic hurricanes in the future. Amanda Staudt, NWF’s climate scientist, posted a piece at Wildlife Promise a couple of days ago that looks at how continued warming through climate change may be fueling major hurricanes and may have been a factor with Sandy.

What Can You Do?

The forces of hurricanes, such as Sandy, are so immense that they deserve tremendous respect.  So the first thing you can do is to stay safe yourself. Heed public safety warnings, prepare your property by collecting and storing lose items outside, be prepared for power outages and use common sense. Following a storm, birders and wildlife enthusiasts can help by keeping their eyes peeled for unusual or rare species that turn up. It is useful for wildlife agencies to hear about rare appearances.  Wildlife rescue organizations should be contacted if someone sees a creature that was injured in a storm. It always recommended to avoid trying to handle and injured animal on your own unless you have had specific training.  If you usually feed birds at your home, the post storm calm is a good time to fill up those feeders. Your pals will probably be hungry and tired after waiting out the storm.

In addition, be wildlife friendly during this election and demand action on climate change. Urge our candidates to tell us their plans to address climate change now.

Satellite image of Hurricane Sandy off the shores of Florida and an approaching cold front across the Midwest. (NASA GOES, 10-25-2012)

Meteorologists did not pick the name Frankenstorm only because of the Halloween timing. The name also reflects the highly unusual nature of this storm. Here’s what the meteorologists are forecasting right now:

• Sustained winds of at least 50-60 mph for a large swath of the coast for at least 24 hours, with windy conditions for as long as a week.
• Rainfall totals of 4-8 inches or more for a large region. Many areas will experience rainfall amounts maybe only seen once a century.
• Storm surge of 3-6 feet resulting from days of winds blowing sea water toward the coast combined with full moon conditions.
• Collision with an eastward moving cold front, setting up conditions even worse than the famous “Perfect Storm” of 1991.
• Mountainous areas are likely to get snow.
• Sandy is already huge – extending more than 500 miles across – and expected to grow before making landfall.

If the forecasts are correct, chances are very good that this is a storm that no Americans alive today have ever witnessed. In other words, if you live along the coastal areas where landfall is expected and think you know what to expect, think again.

The Frightening Forecast

Folks, this storm is exactly the sort of thing climate scientists have been worried about for years. Global warming is putting hurricanes on steroids and we’re beginning to see the effects:

• Global warming puts more energy into storms. This means stronger winds and larger storms. And this means storms that sustain their powerful winds longer as they make their way out of the tropics.
• A warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture, meaning that storms bring more rainfall.
• Higher sea levels – resulting from thermal expansion, melting glaciers and ice caps – lead to higher storm surge and more flooding damage. Sea levels along the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic are rising up to four times faster than the global average.
• From power outages to oil rig disruptions, extreme weather threatens America’s energy infrastructure.

With the record-setting temperatures we’ve had in 2012, getting a big hurricane comes as no surprise. Globally and for the United States, 2012 is on track to be the hottest year on record. Sea surface temperatures along the hurricane’s forecasted tract are about 5°F above average, providing continued energy to this storm as it moves northward.

Unusual and Extreme Are Becoming the New ‘Normal’

Every time another one of these disasters begin unfolding, I think that maybe this will be the one that makes people realize that global warming is something we need to address now. How many lives must be lost and billions of dollars of losses incurred before we start taking real action? How many people must have their homes threatened by wildfires, their livelihoods decimated by drought, or their families in the crosshairs of a Frankenstorm before we realize that global warming is not a hoax or a joke? But so far, mainstream media coverage has completely ignored Sandy’s connection to climate change.

I live in Reston, VA – right in Sandy’s current forecast path. This weekend, I’ll be getting my kids ready for Halloween: making sure that all the parts of their costumes are in order, carving pumpkins, and loading up on candy. But I’ll also be preparing for another kind of fright, by stocking up on water, food and batteries, while stowing our outdoor furniture and other things that could easily blow away.

The timing of this storm also happens to coincide with a chance that we as Americans can make our voices heard. We need to let political candidates know – from the Presidential race to local elections – that our nation needs to have a plan to protect our communities by addressing the root cause of climate change, as well as the effects. If we don’t take steps to curb carbon pollution, these sorts of freak storms will be a more and more frequent part of our reality.

Take Action

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were never asked about climate change or extreme weather at the presidential debates. Take a moment to urge Obama and Romney to tell us their plans to address climate change now.