Mt. Wonalancet, NH, not far from the route of the Portland-Montreal Pipeline (photo: Chris Schoenboem)

Fighting back against Big Oil

Fortunately, New Englanders aren’t known to let themselves get trampled on. Local conservation groups, public health experts and many others has been fighting back against Exxon, bringing widespread attention to the project — enough that we have the support of nearly the entire Congressional delegation from those three states (Senator Ayotte, we’re still waiting on ya). We even managed to get 1,500 people to a rally in Portland back in frigid January, the biggest gathering of any kind in 25 years. Suffice to say, New Englanders care, and we don’t want this dangerous substance pumped through our rivers and forests, threatening species like moose and black bears and contributing to climate change.

The problem is, the US State Department (which is tasked with overseeing the pipeline) doesn’t necessarily notice anything amiss and hasn’t the told the company it can’t proceed without a new permit. The State Department needs to make it clear: if Exxon wants to bring poisonous, climate-wrecking tar sands across Northern New England, the impacts are going to be given a hard look and approval is going to needed. It’s a common sense requirement, just making sure we know the threats and the particulars before giving the green light to Exxon, but State hasn’t gotten involved yet because the company hasn’t made a formal proposal.

And that’s the catch-22: unless the State Department tells them to formalize their plans, Exxon might never get around to filing the paperwork — and they’ve already told regional officials they don’t have to. They’re more than happy to act like the cartoon cat burping up feathers, shrugging its shoulders when you ask what happened to Tweety Bird. But this is real life, and New Englanders want to protect their region and wildlife from spills and climate change.  All risk and no reward does not interest New Hampshire, or Vermont or Maine for that matter.

Mr. Smith (and a bunch more) goes to Washington

New England and DC — culture-wise — may sometimes feel like oil and water, but when actual oil and actual water are in the mix, it’s worth a trip to the nation’s capitol. On Monday, a group from Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont came down to Washington, DC to tell their stories to State Department officials in person. It wasn’t your usual DC lobby trip: Fishermen, retired oil industry lawyers, and a handful of conservationists all made the rounds of Capitol Hill, meeting with agencies and Congressional offices with a simple request: Can someone PLEASE make sure this tar sands plan is carefully reviewed?

Our hometown lobby team at the State Department (photo: Peter LaFontaine/NWF)

Pushing toxic, spill-prone tar sands through Exxon’s pipeline across Maine is an all-risk, no-reward proposition. The health of Maine people, our economy, and our way of life, depend on clean water for drinking, tourism, our fishing industry, and recreation. - Lisa Pohlmann, Natural Resources Council of Maine

We plan to keep the heat on Exxon and the State Department, and our group also got a chance to sit down with (deep breath…) the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, to talk about updating our nation’s safety standards for tar sands projects like the Northeast pipeline and Keystone XL. After Mayflower — and Kalamazoo, before that — we can’t trust the industry to operate safely, or even to tell us what they have planned for our back yards.

It can be hard to tell with federal agencies, but I think State got the message.

Tell the US State Department to protect New England’s wildlife and communities from this dangerous and polluting project. Say “NO!” to the Portland-Montreal tar sands pipeline.

NTSB Photo – Ruptured Enbridge tar sands pipeline, Line 6B

Big Oil is trying to keep this project under the radar and avoid a scrutinizing presidential permitting process. A presidential permit is required for any project that crosses the American border and since the Exxon & Enbridge pipeline would cross into Canada, the permit requires that the administration assess the project and allow for public discussion (think Keystone XL).

Exxon & Enbridge Pipeline Project Under Scrutiny

Legislators from Vermont, Maine, & New Hampshire are joining tens of thousands of Northeast residents in speaking out against this proposed project. Out of the 12 northeast congressional members in the pipeline right of way states (VT, ME, NH), only Senator Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire has yet to stand with her community in opposing the project. Members are sending letter after letter after letter urging Secretary Kerry to require a new presidential permit for the proposed Exxon & Enbridge pipeline project.

When Senators Susan Collins and Angus King of Maine were visited by the tar sands lobby (including the pipeline director for the American Petroleum Institute) a few short weeks ago, the lobby were told to be prepared for lengthy and appropriate government scrutiny over the project.

King told the group that reversing the flow of the Portland-Montreal Pipe Line “is presidential-permit-worthy. And it’s up to the petroleum industry to convince me otherwise.”

Collins, in a prepared statement Tuesday, recalled that the pipeline officials “were not definitive in response to my questions” about exactly what they were up to.

“Should the company decide to seek approval for this new use,” Collins added, “I would expect that appropriate environmental impact reviews would be completed.”

Moose photo by Rick Libbey

Protecting Moose from Dirty Tar Sands

The Exxon & Enbridge pipeline project runs through important moose habitat in New England. If this dangerous project is not stopped, toxic tar sands oil would threaten the waterways where moose live–and would fuel more tar sands operations in Canada that are destroying the boreal forests and polluting fresh water.

Speak up against the risks that the Northeast tar sands pipeline poses to wildlife and our communities>>>

Winter activities like ice fishing are becoming a thing of the past, due to climate change driven by tar sands and other fossil fuels. (Photo: Tom Gill)

But my arrival in Portland, Maine gave me hope. Organizers from across the region had called on citizens to stand up and demand that a likely proposal by oil giants Enbridge and Exxon to use an existing 62 year-old pipeline to bring carbon intensive, dirty tar sands through a pipeline that runs through Canada, and into Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine for export be stopped. Tar sands are a thick, tarry substance mined in Alberta, the most extreme of “extreme oil.”  Mining them requires the vast destruction of pristine boreal forest habitat — the mines and their toxic waste ponds can be seen from space. However, this destruction is not the worst news about tar sands.  It is the climate impacts of tar sands that is so alarming. Tar sands are far more carbon intensive than conventional oil, and the tar sands region contains two times the amount of carbon that has already been emitted by human fossil fuel use, which is why leading climatologists  have warned that tar sands development would hurtle us past any hope for climate stability.

US Congresswoman Chellie Pingree addresses the crowd in Portland

Three days later, concerned citizens and groups in Vermont demanded that the same pipeline proposal be subjected to Vermont law that would give Vermonters the ability to reject this pipeline project.

Tar sands are part of a bigger picture, one that demands action to stem the tide of dirty fuels that are destroying our climate. No one under the age of 28 has lived to see a month where temperatures have been below the 20^th century average.  If we fail to act, crisp winter mornings may soon be a thing of the past in northern New England.  We can do better than that.  And the people of New England are demanding that now is the time to say no to dirty energy and yes to a clean energy future.

Help protect Northeast wildlife and communities from tar sands oil by urging the U.S. State Department to stop the Exxon/Enbridge pipeline!

Imperial and Suncor are among the largest developers of Canadian tar sands oil. This convoluted corporate maze of oil behemoths is in bed with Enbridge, the company behind the Kalamazoo River oil spill, the most costly onshore spill in U.S. history. Now, it apparently wants to pump tar sands oil from Alberta through Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine to the port of Portland for overseas markets. Tar sands oil is a heavy, corrosive, diluted bitumen and is known as one of the dirtiest, most-polluting, hardest-to-clean-up fuels on the planet. The tar sands business is booming in Canada and the corporate hawks are positioning to pounce on the profits they see in this dirty product by using New England communities as conduits to export markets.

It’s no wonder ExxonMobil doesn’t want to come clean. The company’s not clean. It was ExxonMobil that caused the infamous 1989 Valdez spill, a disaster that spewed 11 million gallons of oil into Alaska’s pristine waters. In July 2011, the company’s Silvertip Pipeline dumped 42,000 gallons of oil into Montana’s Yellowstone River.

840,000 of tar sands crude spilled into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River last year

National Wildlife Federation along with Vermont Natural Resource Council, CLF, Sierra Club and VPRIG held a press conference in Montpelier, VT, concerning a proposed project allowing a 61 year old pipeline to carry tar sands from Montreal through Vermont and New Hampshire to Portland, Maine.

Enbridge Energy’s environmental record is far from perfect—Enbridge is the same pipeline company that leaked approximately 1,000,000 gallons of oil into the Kalamazoo River near Marshall, Michigan in 2010.

“This really ancient pipeline has already spilled, including a spill 35 years ago that fouled Lake Memphemagog,” said Curtis Fisher of National Wildlife Federation. “The pipeline cuts across the Missisquoi, Black, Moose, and Connecticut Rivers, which all are critical wildlife habitats and attract a large number of tourists. Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom is known for being the state’s most pristine area. Vermonters do not want to risk our beloved natural resources to help dirty oil companies make billions and dramatically increase climate change.”

A broad coalition of organizations are defying plans from the Canadian oil pipeline company Enbridge Energy to build their “Trailbreaker” pipeline. These groups are stressing that the pipeline plan is unsafe and that a tar sands oil spill would harm Vermont’s waterways, wildlife and tourism economy.

“Vermont is pursuing a clean energy future in large part because Vermonters know that we depend on cold weather industries like skiing, and sugaring,” said Sandra Levine of Conservation Law Foundation. “Tar sands are a carbon bomb that will catapult us past several dangerous climate tipping points. It has no part in Vermont’s clean energy future.”

Tar Sands Too Risky

The proposed pipeline reversal scheme commonly referred to as “Trailbreaker” would reverse the flow of oil through an existing pipeline and would bring tar sands oil through Ontario, Quebec, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. A new NRDC report explains that unlike the conventional crude oil that currently flows through the pipeline, tar sands is far more corrosive, is more likely to spill, and much harder to clean up when it does spill.

“This pipeline plan puts Vermont’s rivers, lakes and streams in jeopardy and provides no benefits. The company behind it is responsible for the largest tar sands oil spill in U.S. history, which they still haven’t cleaned up,” said Johanna Miller of Vermont Natural Resources Council. “Oil giants don’t call the shots in here in Vermont and they can’t be allowed to put our state’s natural treasures in jeopardy.”

The tar sands industry has been in a desperate search for a port of export since the Keystone XL and Northern Gateway projects have become mired in controversy. The growing expansion of tar sands pipelines eastward raises concerns about the climate implications of a tar sands expansion to Central Canada and the U.S. Northeast. The U.S. Congressional Research Service recently released a report confirming tar sands as the most carbon-heavy oil on the planet (PDF), representing a significant increase in greenhouse gases from typical petroleums.

“Tar sands oil is like hot liquid sandpaper that corrodes pipelines, creating a greater risk of devastating oil spills along the route,” said Danielle Droitsch, NRDC Senior Attorney. “We cannot afford to blindly accept the climate and environmental dangers that come packed with ever-increasing amounts of tar sands being shoved south of the border. Trailbreaker isn’t alone—it is part of a stealth invasion of the U.S. from Canada’s dirty oil—it puts Central Canada and the Northeast squarely on the front lines.”

Click here to help protect Northeastern wildlife from dirty tar sands oil.

Well, that habitat includes my back yard, and yesterday one of the wild neighbors came by to snack at my bird feeder–and it was a bit bigger than a hummingbird.

That's not a bird eating bird seed. Photo Credit: Dan McGowan

I’ll admit…

I should have known better than to fill the feeders this time of year, living in black bear country. We’d had some alerts that bears were on the prowl and I’d seen signs of bears earlier this spring.

The good news is, (s)he came and went without incident (except the mangled bird feeder), and I got a few great photos of a healthy, beautiful black bear.

Who will win? The Black bear or the bird feeder? Photo Credit: Dan McGowan

And the Black bear won. Photo Credit: Dan McGowan

Lesson learned

I’ve removed the feeders, which I learned from this great National Wildlife article, is a good solution to avoiding regular black bear encounters. Fortunately, my Certified Wildlife Habitat is in bloom, so our birds and bees are still able to find plenty of food to keep them happy this summer. I’ll keep a look-out for the bear, since it looks like my raspberries and blueberries will be a bumper crop this season and I have a feeling the word will spread that it’s all-you-can-eat at our yard.

I wouldn’t have it any other way.

Cleanup crews are still working to repair the damage caused by Enbridge's 2010 spill in Michigan (photo: Mic Stolz)

Enbridge Inc.—which is known for its terrible safety record and is responsible for a massive tar sands spill in the Kalamazoo River in 2010—has asked the National Energy Board in Canada to allow for a partial reversal of its pipeline between Ontario and Montreal to allow oil in that pipeline to flow east. If this reversal is approved, it is highly likely Big Oil will soon seek to move tar sands through a pipeline that now flows west from Portland, ME to Montreal by reversing the flow of that pipeline as well.

Such a reversal, if approved, would open the way for this dangerous fuel, which is much more corrosive, acidic, and harder to clean up in the event of spill than conventional oil, to flow through Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.  The pipeline (called the “Portland to Montreal Pipeline” or PMPL) currently cuts through or borders some of New England’s most important waters, including Sebago Lake, the Connecticut River, and tributaries to Lake Champlain. While its safety record isn’t as abysmal as other companies’, the PMPL has suffered major spills, including one that fouled Lake Memphremagog, and is already much older than the projected lifespan of proposed new tar sands pipelines.

The Portland-Montreal Pipeline cuts through New England on its route to the coast.

But even as we take strides toward reducing global warming pollution, climatologists warn that tar sands are a carbon bomb in the process of being ignited. Because it takes so much energy to produce and refine, fueling cars with tar sands gasoline has about 20 percent more carbon emissions than fueling cars with gasoline from conventional oil. This means the use of tar sands will undermine any efforts in the Northeast to reduce carbon emissions from our transportation sector. Climate change threatens to make Vermont maple syrup and Maine lobsters things of the past. We need to turn to carbon-free sources of fuel now, not move in the opposite direction.

Sebago Lake -- one of Maine's biggest sources of drinking water -- would be put at risk by a tar sands pipeline (photo: Peter Hopper)

Tell Canada’s National Energy Board to stop the Trailbreaker pipeline proposal!

To hear NWF’s Jim Murphy talk about tar sands’ threat to Northeastern states, click here.

Read more about our work to fight back against Big Oil’s tar sands scheme at nwf.org/tarsands.

This blog is the story of George Gay, who works for the National Wildlife Federation in our Northeast Natural Resource Center in Vermont. He is the Senior Manager, Wildlife Conservation Programs.

A Father’s Legacy

My dad grew up as a single child in Baltimore in the 1930s. He spent his free time outdoors. He taught himself woodcraft, taxidermy, and how to make firearms. He made beautiful Kentucky rifles. He pushed me to believe, and it may seem old-fashioned, I should know my way around the woods, an axe and a dog. He also understood the web of life, and we talked often about the complexities of nature. He loved Aldo Leopold and John Muir. I remember him reading me books as a little kid, such as the biography of Francis Parkman, the man who explored the American West, and James Fenimore Cooper – the author of the Leatherstocking Tales.

Growing Up in Northern Virginia

My dad spent a lot of time with me when I was growing up in Northern Virginia just outside of Washington, DC. We went goose hunting on the eastern shore of Maryland and pheasant hunting in southwestern Virginia. He taught me how to trap muskrats. He drove me to school in McLean, Virginia. I remember stopping our car by a bridge off of Georgetown Pike or along the Potomac River. I would go down and my check traps. This was our routine every day that I had a trap line. No exceptions. This was a beautiful time in my life.

Later, in middle school, I “ran” my trap line by bicycle. I got up before the sun rose, put my pack basket on my back, rode to a nearby creek or pond, and walked into the woods with a flashlight or by moonlight. Normally, muskrats died instantaneously in body gripping Conibear traps. However, if I came upon an animal in one of my traps that was alive, I would dispatch myself. This was hard. But, I learned how to skin and flesh a furbearer. And, I learned what it meant to be a part of the web of life. I was exposed to the out-of-doors in a pretty intense way. I thought deeply about wildlife and wildlife habitat in an urban landscape.

Exploring the Maine Wilderness

When I was 14, my parents sent me to a camp affiliated with the Quaker religion in northern Maine. We canoed and camped, from river to river, lake to lake, all summer. There was one plane drop of food. Our group was small and isolated. Eleven kids and three counselors in the wilds. We were not in aluminum or fiberglass canoes, but canoes made from cedar and canvas. We learned how to patch them when we hit a rock. We came to love our boats and take care good of them. You have probably been in an automobile on a secluded road and thought “I really hope I don’t break down here.” We thought the same on the waters of the Allagash and St. Croix rivers. So, we worked hard to make sure our canoes were well cared for and would not break down.

After two months I remember coming out of the camp and meeting my dad in Augusta, Maine at the airport. He gave me an envelope and I thought “Oh great, some cash to use when I get home”. Instead, it was a year-long membership to the Wilderness Society. As a member, I received a copy of Wilderness every month. I read that magazine from cover to cover and learned what wilderness was. I decided then that I wanted to be a conservationist. In college at Virginia Tech I studied the things I loved – wildlife management and forestry.

Becoming a Naturalist and then a Lawyer

After college, I worked as a naturalist for the National Park Service in California. My duty station was Kings Canyon National Park, home of the Giant Sequoia, Sequoia sempervirens. I led evening programs and supervised hikes. I loved it.

I remember a speech by Ronald Reagan who was the governor of California at the time. He was commenting on a growing interest in the establishment of the Redwoods National Park. Governor Reagan said, “I don’t know why we need a national park. You’ve seen one redwood, you’ve seen them all.” I realized that if I really want to protect the out-of-doors, I better be involved in conservation policy. Science and education is one thing, but policy is where the rubber hits the road. So I went to law school and got an environmental law degree.

Falling in Love with the Appalachians and New England

I went to Vermont Law School. Right away, I was drawn to the maturity of the Appalachians – the oldest mountains of the world. They are roughed over. You don’t get the eye candy of the Sierra Nevadas. The Appalachians seem more enduring. They are like a warm glow in the fireplace rather than a house fire out of control.

It’s something about the accessibility of the Appalachians that I love. This is a place where we all live. From frugal New Englanders to the Scotch-Irish of the Carolinas, we are part of the Appalachian forests. Few people are truly living in western landscapes above 14,000 feet in the Sierras or Rockies. There, you go to visit. Here, in the Appalachians, human cultures are a real part of the landscape. I really like that.

My home town, Stowe, Vermont, is special. I wake up every morning and I go to my mailbox. I look over a river valley to the unbroken landscape of the Worcester mountains. The Worcesters are really close and I can look up in those mountains and imagine all kinds of wild stuff going on – bobcats, bears, martin, and fisher.  I often wonder – am I  looking at a mother and her young frolicking on the hill side right now? There is this mystery and wonder in the place. But it’s my place.

Fatherhood

I have three boys. I realized as a young parent that the outdoors is a great place to interact with a child. When my kids were 6, 8 and 10, we would be driving to a sporting event, perhaps an hour away. We would have really meaningful conversations. My eyes were on the road. There wasn’t a lot of eye contact. I wasn’t preaching to them across a table.

When you are having this outdoor experience, it’s the same thing. It’s a great canvas on which to paint the lessons of life. You don’t have to sit there and talk about the tree or a duck. You can talk about why it’s important to do well in school, or why you must reach out to the kid that other people are picking on. These life lessons are more easily taught when you are doing something together in the  outdoors. It’s a great place to be a parent. It’s better than the kitchen table or the couch in front of the TV set. It worked when Grandfather did it for my dad, and when my dad it for me and my four siblings – so I wanted to do that with my three sons.

Click here to view the embedded video.

I wanted them to be connected to nature. That was one of my commitments as a dad. I wasn’t going to push them to love it, but I wanted them to have familiarity with it to decide if it was for them.

There is a place near my house called Cotton Brook. It’s one of my favorite places. It is part of the Mount Mansfield State Forest. It has a small brook that connects to a large reservoir. As a family, we would fly fish there in the summer, mountain bike and enjoy the colors in the fall, and in the winter, we would cross-country ski. We’d go to bed thinking about this place.

My Sons Continue My Father’s Legacy

My oldest son is a gardener and a developer of organic foods and local things. He also sees hunting as a component of a locavore’s connection to the land. He sees the harvesting of game as equally important as the harvesting of a garden. He works for Vermont Senator Sanders and loves the out-of-doors. My middle son graduated from Dartmouth and lives at my house. He likes working outside. My youngest son is a sophomore at Boston College and he loves being outside doing things like cross-country skiing and hiking, so there is an athleticism connected to his outdoor experience.

Having Nature Nearby

Every parent realizes how much children enrich our lives. Every day you wonder “what would I be if I didn’t have these children in my life?” I feel the same way about natural places near my home. My life would be a little emptier. Being a parent, husband, or member of the local conservation commission would be a little harder. I could do it, but it would be a little harder without my special place or two or three. That’s what gets me going and I want to share it with other people and make sure they have a special outdoor retreat – a Cotton Brook. I think if everybody could have a deep  connection with the out-of-doors, then everyone would be a little happier. Our whole society would be a little more positive.

Having wild outdoors spaces close to home is critical. That’s what motivates me – all the exercise and bonding with children, awareness of fish and wildlife. It’s got to be close  so we have to make sure there are places like this in all communities. I am inspired by National wildlife Federation’s work realizing these places have to be in your backyard, for it to be part of the fabric of your family.

My place was Cotton Brook, and I want everybody to have a Cotton Brook in their lives.

Support Our Work

George works to create a safe place for wildlife in the Northeast United States. Your donation helps wildlife and protects habitat.

I was part of a group of NWF staffers in Vermont to meet with our northeastern state affiliates. During a break, I took a walk around the conference center and came across an unused outdoor pool with just a couple of feet of murky water left in it. I happened to peer over the edge and spotted what NWF naturalist David Mizejewski identified as a painted turtle trapped inside. Les Line once wrote in National Wildlife magazine that the painted is “probably the most familiar turtle in North America due to its unique coast-to-coast distribution, its vivid red and yellow markings and a habit of basking for hours on sun-washed logs and rocks.”

David warned that catching the turtle might not be such an easy task — turtles are as quick in the water as they are slow on land. Conference center staffers told us a maintenance worker had spotted the turtle a few days before and spent an hour trying to catch it with no luck. That deepened David’s concern about alarming the turtle before we had a solid plan for catching it. He circled the pool assessing the situation.

But Bill Dion, NWF’s communications manager for TV & radio production, used to live in Florida and is a veteran of many turtle rescues. As Bill and David stood on opposite sides of the pool, Bill spotted the turtle through the murky water and told David he thought we had a shot at snagging it. David said, “Don’t wait for me to get over there, he may not stay near the surface for long — if you think you can get him, do it.” Bill jabbed the net into the water with a speed & accuracy that reminded me of an egret fishing.

Sure enough, Bill made the save:

Click here to view the embedded video.

To learn more about making your backyard a place where wildlife can thrive, visits NWF’s Certified Wildlife Habitat program.

Flood damage in Bethel, VT after Irene (Flickr/US FWS)

The 2011 hurricane season may well be remembered most for flooding along the eastern seaboard, especially from Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee. The impacts were felt in places that typically don’t have to worry about hurricanes. That’s because some of the most significant damage and disruption was from inland flooding caused by heavy rainfall, rather than from wind or storm surge:

• During Hurricane Irene, floods ravaged communities from Puerto Rico, where one location recorded 22 inches of rainfall, all the way north to Vermont, where nearly every river flooded. Vermont’s roads were extensively damaged, with some communities cut off for days. Overall damages in the U.S. are estimated to range anywhere from $7 billion to $20 billion.
• Less than two weeks later, Tropical Storm Lee made its way across the country. Another large, slow-moving storm with heavy rainfall, Lee caused flooding from Louisiana to New York. Fairfax County, where I live and work in Virginia, sustained as much as $10 million worth of damages to roads and bridges. While my family made it through unscathed, the disaster made me feel like the impacts of global warming-fueled storms were hitting close to home.

It’s not unusual for tropical storms to bring inland flooding and many examples can be found from past years. What differentiates the storms this year is that the coastal impacts were somewhat less dramatic in comparison. It’s actually quite common for hurricanes and tropical storms to cause significant inland flooding. But that story often gets overshadowed by the spectacular images of wind and storm surge damages along the coasts.

Climate change could make inland flooding an even more prominent feature of future hurricanes. Climate models all project increased rainfall rates in hurricanes. This follows from the fact that warmer air can hold more moisture, so the atmosphere will have more water available for rain. And the projected increases by end of the century are nothing to sneeze at: on the order of a 20 percent increase in rainfall rates within about 60 miles of the storm center.

Let’s do a rough calculation of what that could have meant for rainfall totals during Hurricane Irene. Areas in North Carolina received 8 inches of rain. If the same storm came through in 80 years when the atmosphere is warmer, that total could be closer to 9.6 inches. Vermont had totals around 4 inches. Make that closer to 5 inches with a warmed over atmosphere.

The expected increase in hurricane rainfall rates is often overlooked in the debate about climate change impacts on hurricane wind speed or frequency. Yet the increased flooding potential should be on the radar screens of emergency managers across the eastern United States.

More broadly, factors like these should be a consideration as President Obama considers Environmental Protection Agency regulation of climate pollution under the Clean Air Act. And storms like this should serve as a wake-up call for Congress, which has yet to pass comprehensive climate legislation.

Learn more about the relationship between climate change and stronger storms at NWF.org/ExtremeWeather.