Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said in response:

This shortsighted bill will leave Americans at greater risk of flooding, damage our rivers and wildlife, and fleece taxpayers. Apparently, all it takes is a classic Washington pig roast to break the gridlock in the Senate.

It would cost an estimated $60 billion to build all the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects currently on the books. Today, the Senate has added to the backlog while undermining the process that identifies which projects provide real value. Time and time again, commonsense environmental reviews have shed light on expensive, damaging proposals that are not in our national interest.The Water Resources Development Act is vital for helping to restore national treasures like the Everglades and the Mississippi River Delta. Unfortunately, language in this bill undermines the bedrock environmental principle that the federal government should look before it leaps. For example, this bill will allow the Army Corps to fine other federal agencies up to $20,000 a week if they aren’t able to meet the new rushed deadlines for environmental review.

Now the debate moves to the House. We look forward to working with our representatives to protect the integrity of the environmental review process, and to enact meaningful reforms that will prioritize low impact solutions and modernize the management of existing projects. This bill must be fixed before the President signs it into law.

Read more about the Water Resources Development Act:

• Will Senate Water Down Environmental Protections While the Midwest Floods?
• Black Bears and Wetlands and the Water Resources Development Act…Oh, My!
• Five Ways the Water Resources Development Act Harms Wildlife
• Congress and Water Projects in America: The Latest on the Water Resources Development Act

Today, spokespeople representing three different backgrounds and perspectives offered up their opinions of the Water Resources Development Act (S.601), which is scheduled for a cloture vote at noon Tuesday ET.

Download the audio of the telepresser here.

Steve Ellis, Vice-President, Taxpayers for Common Sense: “We’re opposed to the Senate Water Resources Development Act because it cedes too much power to the administration and it costs too much money. When we are looking at enormous budget deficits, we have a $16.5 trillion debt, we have got to prioritize our investments and this bill does very little of that. It also adds to the $60 billion project backlog the Corps already has.” (Mr. Ellis speaks from 1:55 to 6:38 on the audio recording.)

Melissa Samet, Senior Water Resources Counsel, National Wildlife Federation: “The bill strikes at the environment by undermining protections that have been provided by the nation’s environmental laws for four decades. … The Corps has a long and well-documented history of fundamentally flawed project studies. The Corps also has a well-recognized institutional bias for constructing large scale projects that damage the nation’s rivers, coasts and wetlands even when less damaging options are available.” (Ms. Samet speaks from 6:38 to 11:24 on the audio recording.)

Michael L Davis, former deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Civil Works and vice president at Keith and Schnars: “There’s no evidence that these types of reviews substantially slow down projects…. One of the most critical things the water resources bill can do is set some priorities for our water resources portfolio in this country. Looking at the backlog and getting rid of the things that are no longer needed or ought not to be constructed with contemporary thinking about the environment. … It is naïve to believe that you can just streamline these processes without understanding one of the real issues, which is the funding and staffing of these agencies.” (Mr. Davis speaks from 11:24 to 17:00 on the audio recording.)

These cute, baby, Louisiana Black Bears are at risk of losing their habitat if the environmental review provisions are not removed from WRDA 2013 (photo credit: flickr/USDAgov)

However well-intentioned this bill is, there are extremely dangerous sections that threaten the safety and well being of the environment and the public – two provisions in particular will steamroll an integral environmental review process that has been in place for over 40 years.

In order to initiate projects that will protect the public and our natural resources, the Army Corps of Engineers needs this bill to be signed into law. But all the good projects that could be constructed could very well be negated by these harmful provisions. Streamlining the environmental review process does not reduce costs, does not protect the environment, and does not serve the greater good for the public. In fact, creating bureaucratic hurdles and fines will allow bad projects to slip through under the cover of darkness, and could jeopardize the very water resources we rely on for drinking water and commerce.

Stand Up For Your Water Resources!

In the first week of May the Senate is expected to vote on S. 601. If the destructive environmental provisions are not removed, the environment, wildlife, and people will face grave consequences. Please remove provisions in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that would significantly undermine the environmental review process – section 2032 on Study Acceleration and section 2033 on Project Acceleration.

Blue Skies on Capitol Hill

The Senate bill, S.761, carries the same extensive support that it did last year, though it reflects a trip back to the drawing board to rework a few points of contention that ultimately blocked its enactment. Now, the bill’s low-cost, mutually beneficial qualities have attracted the approval of more than 200 organizations. The bill works in three key areas (buildings, manufacturers, and the Federal government), and outlines financing strategies with which to meet its goals. It includes a plan to plant the seeds for sustaining its vision, by establishing university-based training programs to ensure that those entering the workforce will be equipped with current and progressive skill sets.

By incentivizing the transition to more efficient manufacturing technologies—a process that itself will create jobs in the short-term—companies will see energy cost savings that they can use to grow their businesses and hire long-term employees.  On another note of mass appeal, its requirements of the Federal government to retrofit its systems and address inefficiencies in its buildings and vehicle fleets, this legislation would ultimately save tax dollars from leaking through the cracks of outdated infrastructure.

Both Senators credit economics for their bill’s bipartisan popularity.  Senator Shaheen states simply that: “The cheapest energy is the energy we don’t use.  That’s why energy efficiency is something we can all support.” Introducing this bill urges their colleagues to act on the obvious in a Congressional climate that offers few opportunities for doing so, as was the central message of Senator Portman’s press release yesterday:

“We don’t often get legislation that brings Republicans, Democrats, business, labor and environmental leaders together, but with this bill we have. Energy efficiency is the fastest, most cost-efficient way to tackle our energy needs and keep our economy competitive all while creating needed and sustainable jobs.  Passing this bill would be a clear and quick win for the economy, taxpayers and the environment.”

If enacted, the ESIC Act has the potential to do more than grasp the low-hanging fruit of energy policy.  Rather, it strengthens a critical and politically useful argument that investing in energy-saving technologies pays for itself.  It reduces emissions that are polluting our water and our air and endangering wildlife.  And it gives us all something to shake hands on. Every step forward makes our leap of comprehensive climate policy more attainable.  The National Wildlife Federation applauds two Senators willing to orchestrate one of those steps.  May it inspire many more.

Tweet your Support! Congrats to @robportman and @SenatorShaheen for introducing a bill to create jobs and improve America’s energy efficiency!

Sportsmen Share Priorities With New Interior Chief

April 10 – A national sportsmen’s coalition looks forward to working with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell on continuing the important job of restoring balance to public-lands management and implementing oil and gas leasing reforms started by her predecessor.

Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development congratulated Jewell on her confirmation by the U.S. Senate Wednesday and urged her to provide strong leadership to conserve clean air and water, fish and wildlife habitat and preserve the public-lands legacy that has helped shape the nation’s economy and identity.

“SFRED and millions of sportsmen believe in responsible development of energy resources on our multiple use public lands. We are not, however, willing to sacrifice fish and wildlife habitat, populations, water resources, and recreational opportunities to poorly planned development,” the CEOs and presidents of the coalition’s three lead partners wrote in an April 10 letter to Jewell.

The letter lists the coalition’s top six priorities and was signed by Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation, Whit Fosburgh of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and Chris Wood of Trout Unlimited.

NWF: EPA’s McCarthy Deserves Fair Hearing, Clean Confirmation

April 10 – With the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee set to hold a hearing on the nomination of Gina McCarthy as Environmental Protection Agency Administrator on Thursday, the National Wildlife Federation urges a fair hearing and clean up-or-down confirmation vote.

“The Environmental Protection Agency will need her leadership as it continues working to confront the climate crisis,” said Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “While President Obama has made clear that he prefers to work with Congress to find bipartisan compromise on climate action, in the face of Congress’ continued failure to act meaningfully on climate change, it’s essential that the Environmental Protection Agency uses its Clean Air Act authority to finalize and implement limits on industrial carbon pollution.”

The National Wildlife Federation began an online campaign in key states on Monday urging U.S. Senate to support the clean water concerns of sportsmen and confirm McCarthy, part of a coalition campaign going online in 11 states. The ads read:

Clean water matters to [state]. It drives our economy and defines our values. No wonder 79% of sportsmen support the Clean Water Act. Tell Senator XX to stand strong for sportsmen and support Gina McCarthy for EPA.

• Click here to learn more about NWF’s efforts to advocate for wildlife-friendly renewable energy.

Water Bill Guts Environmental Review of Corps Projects

April 9 -  Fifty law professors from across the country have signed onto a letter asking for the removal of two provisions in the current version of the Water Resources Development Act that prevent effective environmental reviews of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposals.

“I have always considered Senator Boxer a friend to the environment and I’m shocked she would put her name on this bill,” said Holly Doremus, a professor of Environmental Regulation at the University of California–Berkeley School of Law. “The bill as it stands would allow the Corps to do an end-run around careful environmental review.”

This bill was co-sponsored by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator David Vitter (R-LA). The almost 300-page bill was introduced just three weeks ago on a Friday evening and voted on by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee the following Wednesday. The full Senate could vote on the bill as early as Thursday.

“The history of the Corps water program has all too often been a story of taxpayer dollars being poured into projects with greatly exaggerated benefits and massively underestimated costs,” said Zygmunt J.B. Plater, a law professor at Boston College. “As written, this bill puts the fox in charge of the hen house. If the bill passes, we’ll see even more taxpayer dollars sunk into dysfunctional projects that hurt the national interest.”

• Read the full letter here.

And now here are highlights from NWF in the news:

• Associated Press- Group: Dolphin, turtle deaths a sign of sick Gulf
• First Business News- Interview with Sara Gonzalez-Rothi
• Roll Call- Oil Pipeline Break Refocuses Keystone Debate on Risks of Spills
• The Hill- Green group ads urge vulnerable lawmakers to back EPA pick
• The Christian Science Monitor- What is killing California sea lion pups?
• Hawaii News Nows- Let Your Kids Have Fun in the Sun (and Rain)
• Baton Rouge Advocate – 3 years later, oil leak effects still unfolding
• Houston Chronicle’s Fuel Fix – Dolphin deaths still high after Gulf oil spill, environmentalists say Examiner.com Dolphins and turtles still in peril three years after BP oil spill and Louisiana coast frenetically eroding three years after spill
• Discovery News – Record Dolphin, Sea Turtle Deaths Since Gulf Spill
• New Orleans Times-Picayune – National Wildlife Federation says environmental effects of BP spill far from over

For more information, visit www.nwf.org/news

I sat a few rows behind her, beaming with Massachusetts pride.  Before moving to DC a couple of months ago, I had only ever resided in my home state, and as I frequently tell people: “Massachusetts is not an easy place to leave.”  I grew up on the beach and went to school in the mountains.  I enjoyed four seasons, lively sports, and model politics.  As did Ms. McCarthy, I appreciated the acclaimed public university system that our state has to offer.  Today, as I watched MA Senators Warren and Cowan introduce President Obama’s widely supported nominee, I enjoyed that unique inspiration that can only come from the renowned accomplishments of someone who shares your roots.

Gina McCarthy, nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency

Repeatedly commended for her pragmatism and common sense, McCarthy carries a set of qualities that appeal to everyone who sits across from her.  She reiterated her intentions, which have evidently guided her through much of her career: to act with integrity to the law and to science, and to keep an open door for all who are ready to work with her.  Upon the hearing’s question and answer segment, Ms. McCarthy proceeded to please those who supported her.  She addressed patiently and thoroughly any points of skepticism.

When it comes to the tasks our next EPA Administrator will face, Gina McCarthy is clearly a woman who gets it—all of it.  She speaks comprehensively of the overlapping needs to create jobs, protect people from environmental health threats, and respond to the overwhelming science of climate change.

McCarthy states with commanding simplicity that environmental protection is not a partisan issue, and her track record represents her confidence in partnering with officials on both sides of the aisle.   Her regulatory background reflects that she does not regard clean air and clean water as matters to compromise on.  She calls for accountability and expects others to require the same of her.  The severity of climate change demands that everyone accepts responsibility for their piece of the solution, and in Gina McCarthy we have an example.

Overall, Gina McCarthy’s hearing was just the event most had anticipated.  But as I walked off the Hill today, I noticed an extra skip in my step—and it came from more than the view of the Capitol, the 80 degree weather, or the shower of fluttering cherry blossom petals that surrounded me.  My skip was one of invigorated optimism, both for the future of environmental policy and in the leadership that will bring it to fruition.  I felt a motivating connectedness to a something that really worked.  During Senator Warren’s introduction, she called Gina McCarthy a “talented and hard-working daughter of Massachusetts.”  She and Senator Cowan spoke of President Obama’s nominee with more than approval.  They spoke of her with pride.  In camaraderie, I hurried back to my desk to do the same.

Remember the plume of dispersed oil that stretched from the wellhead and settled in the deep underwater canyon just south of the wellhead? It turns out the foul feature caused an oily sediment blizzard. Analysis of core samples taken from the canyon where the sediment blizzard came to rest showed the record die-off.

As the oil was flowing, David Hollander at USF was one of the first scientists to find that subsea dispersant application led to the plume of oily water. At the time, I was staffing Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) who sits on the Senate Oceans Subcommittee. Hearing what researchers like Hollander were finding, Sen. Nelson was gravely concerned about the impacts of dispersed oil particles on the Gulf food-web. He filed the Subsea Hydrocarbon Imagery and Planning (SHIP) Act to require the government to track the plume and develop a plan to clean it up. SHIP was never enacted.

Hollander was right to be concerned three years ago. Summarizing the results of the USF study, Hollander says, “Everywhere the plume went, the die-off went.”

Marine Foraminifera by Flickr user Pali Nalu

Gulf Killifish by Louisiana Sea Grant College Program, Louisiana State University

Gills serve fish the way lungs serve humans: they allow for oxygen to enter the bloodstream and remove carbon dioxide. In essence, they “breathe.” Healthy functional gill tissue has a uniform, parallel, accordion appearance. Louisiana State University researchers compared the gill tissue of killifish in an oiled marsh to those in an oil-free marsh. The results? The gill tissue from killifish in the oiled marsh was a mangled mess.

Reports that microscopic organisms and bull minnows were harmed by the disaster three years ago suggest there are more impacts to come. It took years after the Exxon Valdez oil disaster for the Pacific herring population to crash. Harm at the bottom of the food-web manifests incrementally. We may not know for years how top predators like tuna and dolphin will fare.

This week, BP began its defense in the Deepwater Horizon trial. One thing is clear: BP would like the American people and the Judge to believe the disaster is over. There is no doubt: BP will present a court case rivaling its public relations case in the court of public opinion. Gulf wildlife aren’t buying it. Neither should Judge Barbier, and neither should we.

If the Keystone XL pipeline is constructed and tar sands development continues unchecked, some herds of Woodland Caribou could disappear in as little as 30 years. (Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

The Good

Thanks to the help of the many NWF members and activists who influenced their Senators, we beat back many bad environmental amendments and saw the Senate pass some positive ones.  We were especially pleased to see a majority of Senators stand up for the Clean Air Act by voting down amendments that would have struck down the Mercury Air Toxins standard and blocked agencies from curbing the pollution driving climate change. The Senate also passed amendments to insure that critical funds are available to prevent the risk of wildfires, increase funding for ARPA-E, which provides research funding for innovative energy technologies, increase the amount of funding for weatherization and energy efficiency programs, and help homeowners and small businesses mitigate against flood loss.

The Bad

Unfortunately, several amendments with harmful consequences for people and wildlife did pass.  One passed amendment undermines federal efforts to avoid the need to list the greater sage-grouse  under the Endangered Species Act.   And another amendment weakens the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)—the landmark environmental law that requires every federal agency to consider the environmental impact of any government action—by saying that greenhouse gas emissions produced outside the United States by any good produced here (including fossil fuels) are not subject to the requirements of NEPA.

And finally, the Senate passed an amendment that expresses support for building the Keystone XL pipeline—something that will have a disastrous impact on the climate and on wildlife.

For more information on the Keystone amendment and to see how your Senator voter, click here and hold them accountable>>

The Amendments

Pro-environment actions

• Udall-Barasso Amendment 239 – passed by voice vote.  Ensures critical funds are available to help reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires, which threaten communities and natural resources across the country
• Merkley Amendment 398 – passed by voice vote.  Increases the investment of government research dollars under the Department of Energy ARPA-E program
  
• Reed-Collins-Merkley Amendment 482 – passed by voice vote.  Increases the budget for weatherization and energy efficiency retrofit programs
  
• Coats-Manchin Amendment 514 – failed 46-53.  Undermines the Mercury/Air Toxins Standard under the Clean Air Act.
• Inhofe Amendment 359 – failed 47-52.  Proposes funding cuts to block agencies from curbing the pollution driving climate change.
• Menendez 619 – passed by voice vote.  Helps homeowners and small businesses mitigate against flood loss.

Anti-environment actions

An offshore wind turbine in the Thames Estuary, U.K. Flickr photo by Phil Hollman

The Incentivizing Offshore Wind Power Act carries the legacy of a similar bill Carper, and Collins’s former colleague Olympia Snowe, introduced last year with a companion bill in the House by Pascrell and LoBiondo.  While much of the bill’s substance remains the same, its new timing makes it even more critical, both politically and environmentally.  As the fossil fuel industry continues to attack much-needed investments in clean energy, we need our congressional leaders to accept that it will always be far more expensive to ignore the urgent threat of climate change—and to produce legislation that guides investors to act accordingly.

The bill extends the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) for the first 3,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind production, to support first-movers in this new industry. Such essential encouragement will leverage private investment dollars to help bring the first offshore wind projects online.  Strategically supporting the establishment of a clean and sustainable energy foundation here in the United States will provide thousands of jobs and steer us toward a future in which we can meet our energy demands while minimizing risks to wildlife.

Crossing the Aisle in Both Chambers

Public demand to move away from dirty sources of energy is getting louder, and extreme weather continues to remind us that the impacts of climate change are not going to stall as we work through political stagnancy.  This legislation plants the seeds of our national potential to rise above gridlock and meet the challenges of our time.

These leaders understand that to support offshore wind development is to support a clean and prosperous future, where job growth is responsible and lasting, and investors are rewarded for putting their money in the right place.  Now, as we commend all original cosponsors—Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ), Menendez (D-NJ), Sherrod  Brown (D-OH), Angus King (I-ME), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), and William “Mo” Cowan (D-MA)—we must all urge our representatives in Washington, DC to take climate change seriously and to respond with bold and effective environmental policy that rapidly transitions America to a clean energy future.

Tweet a Thank-You to Offshore Wind Leaders

If you are on Twitter,  send a Tweet to thank the members of Congress who introduced the Incentivizing Offshore Wind Power Act — which will help bring the clean energy that is critical to helping wildlife threatened by climate change.

Share on Twitter: Congrats to @SenatorCarper @SenatorCollins @BillPascrell @RepLoBiondo for introducing an offshore wind bill to promote clean energy!

Today, a bipartisan group of Western representatives and senators introduced the Public Lands and Renewable Energy Development Act of 2013.

I am feeling giddy. Let me tell you why.

Growing up on the East Coast, our town playground and basketball court were the extent of my understanding of public lands. Though our eastern states also have their fair share of state and federal forest land and park systems, my first experience with real public lands came during a cross country bicycle ride. I fell in love with the wide open spaces I didn’t have in my backyard back home.

On a bike it’s easy to see how much use we get out of our federal public lands—like the 285 million acres managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Hunting, fishing, hiking, all forms of energy development, ranching, off-road vehicle use, and incredible wildlife habitat to boot. Experiencing our Western public lands in person made me proud to live in America.

I’ve since learned more about the pressures our public lands are feeling, particularly from a rapidly changing climate and energy development decisions. National Wildlife Federation’s recent report, Wildlife in a Warming World, highlighted the impacts of increased drought, wildfire, and invasive species on big game, sagebrush habitat, and other sensitive wildlife

A Framework for Renewable Energy Development on Public Lands

So that gets us back to the bill introduced today by Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) and others. It creates the framework for more efficient, responsible renewable energy development on public lands and would strategically direct the revenue from development to pay back local communities, fish and wildlife resources, and hunting and angling access potentially impacted by this clean energy development.

It’s a win-win for clean energy and wildlife conservation and you heard it right in the intro—supported by Westerners from both parties. That’s cause for celebration in and of itself!

In 2009, our public lands had zero approved solar energy projects and very few wind energy projects. With a lot of effort, this changed over the last three years, with now over 30 projects and 12GW permitted, enough power for 3-5 million homes per year.

To be frank, our current system for wind and solar development on public lands is woefully inefficient for every interested stakeholder—the clean energy industry and the wildlife advocate. It nearly always results in more conflict than necessary.

This bill helps solve these significant barriers to clean energy development and wildlife conservation. It also ensures some of the revenues from development on public lands goes back to impacted communities, particularly through a conservation fund for cumulative impacts to the landscape and sportsmen’s access.

As we embark on a clean energy future, there is a model to avoid. 140 years ago the U.S. Congress passed a law to promote mining and Western expansion, with provisions that hinder wildlife and habitat conservation to this day. For decades, campaigns have worked to fix that mining law.

Let’s not look back 30 years from now with the realization that we made the same policy mistakes in the rush to stop carbon pollution with wind and solar energy on public lands. Instead, let’s put in place now the right framework for efficient, sustainable development of wind and solar energy and help address its impacts with a conservation fund.

Learn more about NWF’s efforts to advocate for wildlife-friendly renewable energy >>