GOP Leadership Wants to Drill Here, There, and EVERYWHERE

On Wednesday, the House Natural Resources Committee will mark-up three bills that would require the Administration to drill, baby, drill, and use the revenues from the expanded drilling to fund the transportation bill.

If enacted, the proposal, at best, would produce less than 1% of the revenues needed to fund the transportation bill at the cost of opening virtually every acre of our outer continental shelf (OCS) to oil and gas development.

Indeed, the “Energy Security and Transportation Jobs Act” (H.R. 3410), which the House Republican leadership plans to marry with their version of the transportation bill, represents a staggering assault on our ocean and coasts.  Without regard for the millions of people who depend on a healthy ocean for their livelihoods, such as fishermen and tourism operators, this bill would systematically ensure that we drill off of every coastline in the country.

Here’s a breakdown of the destruction this bill would inflict upon our oceans.

• Title I – Title I would require the Secretary of Interior to lease at least 50% of all unleased acreage for oil and gas drilling every five years, essentially doubling oil drilling every five years until our entire OCS is subsumed. To be clear: this bill doesn’t just makes these acres available for drilling—it actually requires leasing to occur, no matter what, until all OCS areas along both coasts are leased. But that’s not enough for House Republicans. No—they want to ensure that this environmental destruction will be completed quickly. That’s why Title I also requires that the OCS off the Atlantic coast, Pacific coast, and in the Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska, be made available for leasing in the 2012-2017 oil and gas leasing program.  That means drilling would commence off of every coastline in our country by 2017 at the latest – from Maine to Florida, off California, in the Gulf, and in America’s Arctic.

• Title II – Apparently, even 2012-2017 is too long for the GOP to wait when it comes to drilling.  That’s why Title II requires lease sales before 2014 in sensitive areas the Administration has put off limits to drilling.  Indeed, the bill would force the Administration to reopen a lease off Virginia that the Administration cancelled in an effort to employ lessons learned from the BP oil disaster.  It would also mandate lease sales off Southern California, despite the fact that President Obama excluded this area from his OCS leasing proposed program for 2012-2017, and prevent the state of California from weighing in on this decision.  Finally, it would mandate drilling in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, which President Obama put under a moratorium in 2010 due largely to the fact that it’s home to a billion-dollar salmon fishery. 

• Title III – Title III would repeal the current legislative moratorium on oil and gas leasing in the Eastern Gulf that is contained in the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (GOMESA).  Moreover, the bill would mandate three lease sales in the Eastern Gulf—all of which would occur before 2016 and could lie near Florida. 

• Title IV – To top it all off, Title IV forces revenue sharing. Oil and gas resources on the OCS are owned by the American people, and the revenues they generate belong to all Americans. However, TItle IV would send a cut of the income generated from selling our nation’s ocean resources directly to states to use for any purpose, with no accountability to the federal taxpayer.  Worse, revenue sharing serves as an inducement to states to support harmful drilling, regardless of the consequences. 

If the House GOP leadership were serious about jobs, like they keep saying they are, they wouldn’t hold up a transportation bill our country needs with a monstrosity like this that has absolutely no chance of ever passing the Senate.  To call this a jobs bill, is akin to saying the BP oil spill clean-up was a boon to the Gulf Coast economy—not only is it false, it’s just plain insulting.

Last Week in Whales: Mass Stranding of Dolphins in Cape Cod; Dolphins Are...

News in the world of whales last week (or close to it).

Okay, let’s start with some dolphin news.

• The big news last week was the mass stranding of dolphins that continued throughout the week in Cape Cod.  It started on January 14 with the stranding of about 30 dolphins and appears to have ended at the close of the weekend after a total of 90 dolphins stranded, making it the largest dolphin beaching in years.  Rescuers not only saved dolphins that were trapped on shore, but also helped about 300 dolphins swim out of Wellfleet Harbor, where they were at risk of stranding.  Scientists do not know why the animals strand, but it is not unusual for a high number of dolphins to strand this time of year on the Cape, although these numbers are startling. 
• Speaking of dolphins, while I am not a fan of “swim with dolphin” attractions  (I think all marine mammals that are capable of making it in the wild should be released and those that can’t shouldn’t be exploited for our entertainment), if they are going to exist I’m glad that swimming with dolphins provides wounded soldiers some solace. 
• One of the reasons I don’t support dolphin attractions is because of research showing how intelligent and self-aware they are.  This article discusses the research and rightfully questions why such studies aren’t mentioned on SeaWorld’s website (which devotes enormous space to discussing and disseminating other information on marine mammals but omits any research that indicates the intellectual and emotional sophistication of these animals).  It’s unethical to exploit such species for our entertainment in light of this research.  According to Thomas I. White, a Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, “There is now ample scientific evidence that capacities once thought to be unique to humans are shared by these beings.  Like humans, whales and dolphins are ‘persons’.  That is, they are self-aware beings with individual personalities and a rich inner life.  They have the ability to think abstractly, feel deeply and choose their actions.  Their lives are characterized by close, long-term relationships with conspecifics in communities characterized by culture.  In short, whales and dolphins are a who, not a what.”  Yeah, what he said. 
• In defense of our laws protecting dolphins, it’s great to see that the US is appealing a WTO ruling against US dolphin-safe tuna labeling. 
• Finally in dolphin news, a Hong Kong conservation group has set up a DNA bank for the rare Chinese white dolphin.  There are about 2,500 Chinese white dolphins in the body of water between Macau and Hong Kong and experts say their numbers have dropped significantly in the past few years because of the usual litany of problems:  increase in maritime traffic, water pollution, habitat loss, and coastal development.  So, the Ocean Park Conservation Foundation Hong Kong has joined hands with a Chinese university to set up a DNA bank.  According to Judy Chen, the foundation chairwoman, “We hope to offer the scientific community a standardized genetic analysis platform to assess the sustainability of Chinese whit dolphin populations.  The collected datat will provide important reference to governments in the region for developing critical strategies of Chinese white dolphin conservation.”  I hope it’s not too little, too late. 
• Let’s kill seals, they’re eating our cod.  Yep, you read that right.  A study has come out showing seals should be blamed for cod’s failure to recover off Nova Scotia.  Turns out that seals love to eat.  Go figure.  And they’re eating lots of cod.  Of course, this will only support the Canadian government’s proposal to wipe out about 70 percent of the grey seals in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence.  Ah, Canada, just when I thought you couldn’t have an even more horrible conservation record. 
• Very interesting news coming out of Britain.  I’m not going to jump for joy just yet, until I do more research, but it looks live British naval ships could be forced to scale back its use of sonar off Cornwall’s coast to protect dolphins and whales.  If this turns out to be true, it will be a significant step in the right direction.
• A Western Pacific gray whale from Russia just passed through Southern California waters.  The female whale, Varvara, is from a critically endangered population of fewer than 100 individuals.  It’s becoming increasingly clear that the Western Pacific gray whales use the same breeding and calving area as the Eastern Pacific gray whales (Baja California), although their summer feeding grounds are different. 
• Wow, during the past ten years alone, cetacean bycatch in South Korean waters accounted for 33% of global large whale mortality from bycatch.  According to a new study, Cetacean By-Catch in the Korean Peninsula—by Chance or by Design? by Douglas MacMillan and Jeonghee Han, this high level of bycatch is no accident, but is actually deliberate and supported by South Korean laws that ban whaling outright but allow the sale of whale meat and other products if the whales are caught “accidentally” when fishing.  This legal loophole also encourages the illegal hunting of whales, which can then be sold on the market described as bycatch.  Ugh. 
• In a surprising turn of events, the circle of life is alarming some scientists as orcas and other predators are targeting and killing Steller sea lion pups.  Okay, I jest, it’s not the circle of life that’s alarming them, it’s the status of endangered Steller sea lions and how this predation may set back their chance of surviving as a species.  According to researchers, there are not enough Steller sea lions born each year to rejuvenate their populations, which has declined by 80 percent from a peak about forty years ago.  Markus Horning, a marine mammal expert at Oregon State University’s Hatfield Marine Science Center says, “As the density of more ‘profitable’ adults declines, more juveniles may be targeted and never grow to adulthood, which makes rebuilding their populations problematic.”  It’s a classic vicious cycle.  Let’s hope these sea lions find a way to break it.

Meanwhile, this week in Wales…

First Minister Carwyn Jones says that austerity’s not working.  He’s right; the British government’s economic policy has been a disaster.  Responding to GDP figures showing contraction in the final quarter of 2011, the First Minister said, “The figures confirm what we have been telling the UK Government for some time – their economic policies are simply not working.  The cuts being imposed on Wales are too deep, too fast – and we now face the very real prospect of a double dip recession.”  Yep, heckuva job George Osborne.

Could wolves help songbirds weather climate change?

A new study has documented a decline in songbird populations in Arizona as a result of climate change.  What gets less attention in this story is that this decline is caused by elk over-browsing the plants that provide cover and nesting sites for the birds.  With warming temperatures leading to decreased snow pack over the last 22 years, elk have been staying at higher elevations for longer periods of time, leading to the intensive browsing and resulting reduction in songbirds.

We know that songbirds also declined in the Yellowstone area due to over-browsing of streamside habitat by elk. However, the reintroduction of wolves 15 years ago has facilitated the return of both the habitat and the songbirds, as well as a host of other species such as beavers and frogs. 

Given the role that wolves played in restoring the ecosystem in and around Yellowstone, one can’t help but wonder whether the beleaguered Mexican wolf population might be able to help mitigate the Arizona songbirds’ decline if only they were able to recover across the Southwestern landscape.  By keeping elk on the move, wolves would likely reduce the potential for over-browsing in any particular area.  This is supported by the researchers’ finding that in areas where elk were experimentally excluded and vegetation was allowed to recover, there were three times the numbers of songbirds than in areas that were browsed by elk. 

If Mexican wolves were able to reduce the browsing pressure in Arizona and enable the return of some of these songbirds, it wouldn’t be the first example of wolves helping to lessen the impact of climate change for other species.  Back in Yellowstone, researchers have found that wolves also provide a year-round supply of food for scavengers of all kinds, including ravens, eagles, coyotes, and bears.   In the absence of wolves, winter elk deaths were largely dependent on snow depth, and in years with less snow few elk would die—leading to a food shortage for many of the park’s animals.  With the reintroduction of wolves, however, there is now a steady supply of food throughout the winter – regardless of whether the season is mild or severe.   

The authors of that study credit the wolf – and predators in general – for buffering the ecosystem from climate change, stating: "We're finding that ecosystems that have lost a keystone predator may exhibit less resilience to the impact of climate change.”

The lessons we have learned from the return of wolves to Yellowstone show us what we are missing in the areas where top predators have been intensively removed.  Each new study adds to the already overwhelming amount of evidence that predators are a key part of our ecosystems and their presence is essential to maximizing adaptability to changing environmental conditions for all species. 

The Mexican wolf population has been struggling to recover in the wild after facing decades of political resistance, but a new recovery plan is currently in the works.  And the evidence suggests that if the wolves are allowed to succeed, we’ll ultimately be recovering much more than just the wolf.

Photo credit: USFWS Mexican wolf

Report Announces Top 10 Species Imperiled by Fossil Fuels

When we turn on the heat in our homes or start our cars, most of us don’t think about the creatures that may be harmed as a result.  But the fact is that oil, gas, and coal extraction is one of the leading threats to our nation’s wildlife.

The Endangered Species Coalition’s new report, Fueling Extinction: How Dirty Energy Drives Wildlife to the Brink, extrapolates upon this point by highlighting the top ten animals, plants, birds, and fish most jeopardized by the development, storage, and transportation of fossil fuels.

At number one is the endangered bowhead whale, which is threatened by potential oil spills and noise from offshore drilling—a danger that will increase significantly if President Obama’s 2012-2017 proposed program for outer continental shelf (OCS) oil and gas drilling, which opens the Arctic to drilling for the first time, is finalized.

Other species the pursuit of fossil fuels is pushing to the brink include the endangered whooping crane, which overcame near extinction in the 1940s, but would suffer at the hands of the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline, which would run alongside the crane’s migratory path, destroying resting places and food sources. Additionally, the Kemp’s ridley sea turtle’s population is dwindling as a result of the BP oil disaster’s lingering impacts, which are destroying the sole breeding ground of this lovable critter. And the polar bear is likely to become extinct due to melting sea ice, seismic testing, icebreaking, and vessel movement—activities that will only increase in the polar bear’s Arctic home if President Obama’s proposed program is finalized.

The extinction of our nation’s wildlife is simply too high a price to pay for energy we could obtain via less destructive means: renewables and increased efficiency. The tools to build a clean energy future are within reach, but to make it a widely available option, we must urge our lawmakers to stop subsidizing oil and gas companies and help pave the way for clean energy investments.  Indeed, congressional action is necessary since, while we can each try to reduce our own personal reliance on fossil fuels, the fact remains that we currently have little choice when it comes to our energy source.

Let's create a future where turning on a light in our houses doesn’t mean turning off the lights for wildlife.

State Department sets the record straight correcting jobs creation numbers

The State Department’s admission this week that a senior official misstated the job creation numbers forecast for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is notable, given widespread and unbalanced media reporting on the number of jobs created by the pipeline.   In testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday,  Assistant Secretary of State Dr. Kerri-Ann Jones should have said the pipeline’s indirect job potential was 3,500 annual jobs but instead she said 35,000. The State Department did the right thing in setting the record straight.  But far more troubling is the widespread media coverage that continues to report inaccurate job creation numbers according to Media Matters and the Columbia Journalism Review.  Even more disturbing is the media’s underreporting of the potential for a major oil spill from the pipeline or that TransCanada’s Keystone 1 pipeline has already had 14 spills in the first year of operation in the United States.  These environmental risks prompted President Obama to deny the pipeline which was the right decision for the American people. 

In the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the pipeline, the State Department reported the pipeline would create 20 permanent jobs and 5,000-6,000 construction jobs over the two year construction period for the pipeline.  These undisputed job creation numbers are far lower than what is claimed by TransCanda, the American Petroleum Institute, and others.  The Obama administration in explaining the denial of the pipeline in a report to Congress also said “the project would not have significant impact on long-term employment in the United States” and acknowledged that claims that over 100,000 jobs would be created by the pipeline were “inflated” based on a misinterpretation of the analysis conducted by TransCanada.

Unfortunately, the media has often repeated industry’s inflated job creation numbers despite the fact they have been debunked by the Cornell University Global Labor Institute.  Other independent analyses have called industry’s job claims “dead wrong” and “meaningless.”  Media Matters in a comprehensive review of media cover between August and December 2011 reported the media often covers oil industry’s job claim numbers without any mention of the criticism of these figures.  The Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) also reported that TransCananda’s own admission of job creation numbers to the State Department were far lower than what they reported publicly relying on an unsubstantiated study. 

The public deserves accurate reporting both on the number of jobs created to understand the true benefits of the pipeline but also more coverage of the extraordinary environmental risks that could impact the water supply for millions of Americans.  In the end, President Obama chose the health and safety of the American people in denying the pipeline which was the right decision.

Lois Lane--Environmental Superhero!

(left to right: Joanie Kresich, Frances Stewart, Margot Kidder, and actress Tantoo Cardinal)

On a recent trip to the hair salon, I had the good fortune to run into Margot Kidder, one of Livingston’s colorful local celebrities.  If you were raised during the ‘70s and ‘80s, you are well aware of Margot’s film career—most notably, her role as Lois Lane in the original Superman series starring Christopher Reeve.

For decades, Margot has been a highly visible member of the small community of Livingston, Montana and over the years I would bump into her at various local events, never really having the chance to speak with her one-on-one.  It seems that everyone in Livingston knows Margot (or Margie as she likes to be called).  She can be seen regularly pedaling her bike through town, stopping to chat with the locals on her way to do whatever Hollywood actresses do… I imagine that it’s something very glamorous!

But to know Margie, as so many in this community of just over 7,000 people do, is to know that she is more than just a successful actress—she is an amazing force and committed activist for countless causes.  As a founding member of Montana Women For, a non-profit organization that encourages women to participate in democratic processes, she has tackled such issues as health care, mental health issues, and energy development. Her work on energy has focused most recently on fighting the development of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline—the now infamous 2,000 mile pipeline that would stretch from Canada to the Gulf Coast, passing through Montana, which NRDC has also worked hard to block. 

Leaning back in a chair while my stylist Staci worked her magic, Margot shared stories of her recent travels around the country including one story of her arrest during the August protest of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline in Washington, D.C.  (This is the kind of excitement you hope to get when you go to the hair salon!)

It was a hot August morning.  Margot was flanked by friends that had traveled with her from Montana to protest the development of the pipeline.  All were prepared to be arrested and each was ready with bail money—Margot secreted her money away in her bra.  After her arrest, she was contained inside a “paddy wagon” (remember…this is D.C. in August), to await transport to a police station where she would be able to post bond.  When the time came to pay her fine, Margot reached into her bra and extracted a very soggy $100 bill which she then handed over to the officer.  The officer pinched the corner of the bill holding it up and away from his body with a less than enthusiastic “thank you Miss Kidder.”  For months, Margot wore her police bracelet with the number one written on it in sharpie.  She was the very first person arrested that day.

The stories about Kidder’s activism are legendary—I’ve heard many tales about the bravery she has shown in the face of heated opposition—moments where she has walked straight into the heart of rival protest groups, facing harsh words and anger, only to come out unshaken and even more committed to her cause.  Months after our chance meeting in the hair salon, I finally get the chance to sit down and talk with her in more depth—I ask how she does it.   She just laughs and credits her 63 years on this planet and a childhood spent in the mining camps of the Northwest Territories.  I imagine years of public scrutiny have a role to play in shaping this firebrand as well.

Speaking with her, I’m struck by her immense depth of knowledge on issues ranging from electoral politics to the environment—particularly energy development.  She only half-jokingly credits much of her knowledge about the oil and gas industry on her new favorite periodical, Downstream Today, an industry magazine.  When I ask her about the recent decision by President Obama to reject the permit that would have allowed the construction of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, she seems happy, but cautiously so, noting that the Canadian oil and gas industry is ruthless. She seems genuinely distraught by the vast amount of misinformation that has permeated the public discourse related to the pipeline—energy independence and job creation being chief among the myths perpetuated by the industry and other pipeline proponents.  She challenges the claims made by the oil and gas industry estimating that 20,000 jobs would be created in building the pipeline, while the government estimates construction job creation would be more in the range of 5,000.  And as for energy independence, Kidder notes that most of the tar sands oil flowing through the pipeline would be refined for export to countries in Asia and South America, not the U.S.  

Sitting with Margot, I find it impossible to disagree with her.  I’m inspired by her outright courage to stand up for what she believes and her dedication to help build a better future for everyone.  If you’ve spent time on the “front lines” of any social movement, you know how difficult it is to summon the strength to put yourself in the line of fire, and for someone who has spent so much of her life under the glare of the spotlight, I find her activism all the more stunning.  I know there is much to be learned from this woman born in the wilds of Canada, raised in the wilds of Hollywood, and given to the wilds of conservation and social justice.  I feel confident knowing that she is out there—walking into the heart of opposition, facing arrest, threats and hostility—that she is there standing up for the rights of the people to live in a free and just society.

Who knows what the next chapter of her life holds, but I’m sure it will be a blockbuster!  Actress, teacher, grandmother, environmental superhero!  That covers it… for now!

State of the Union: Nebraska landowner response accuses Republicans of...

In giving the official Republican response to tonight’s State of the Union address, Indiana Governor Daniels pushed a tar sands pipeline that would put our health and safety at risk to benefit the oil industry. Echoing the wildly exaggerated jobs numbers, Governor Daniels missed the point that TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is not a national jobs plan, but a project whose few hundred permanent jobs need to be weighed against the risks from oil spills and climate change.  President Obama was right to reject Keystone XL as not in the national interest just last week.

Keystone XL would bring tar sands oil from where it is strip-mined and drilled from under Canada’s Boreal forest to the Gulf Coast where much of it would be turned into diesel and exported. Keystone XL would put American farmlands at risk from oil spills so that the oil industry can get a better price for its product in the international market. And with a tar sands pipeline it is not a question of if but when a spill will happen. TransCanada’s first Keystone tar sands pipeline has already leaked 14 times in its first year of operation and it was also supposed to have state of the art safety standards in place.

Responding to Governor Daniels, Nebraska landowner Randy Thompson said:

"As a registered Republican for over forty years I am appalled at the course of action that my party has chosen to take in regards to the Keystone XL pipeline. The politicians may find the Keystone XL to be some kind of a political game, a political football of sorts, to be casually punted about, but for those of us who live and work along its proposed pathway, it is anything but a game. It is instead viewed as a threat to our way of life that has in many instances taken several generations of work to achieve."

Randy is right when he calls the boosting of a dirty energy project like the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline a cynical game. Despite what Governor Daniels says, nothing about the Keystone XL pipeline is good for us. Tar sands is expensive oil  and as a new analysis from Texas shows, even more expensive when sent almost 2,000 miles by pipeline to refineries on the other side of the country.

Tar sands extraction with its high use of energy and our continued dependence on oil also are making climate change worse. This is serious business in a year when we have seen the high cost of droughts, floods, fires and violent storms linked to climate change.

Despite all this, GOP Congressional leadership met with TransCanada to discuss a plan for trying to revive the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. And Congressional Republicans are proposing a bill that mandates approval and exempts the pipeline from many of our health and safety protections, even while pretending to give authority to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. You can read more about that bill here. And as the President said, we need to keep the next payroll tax credit bill clean – and that means clean of tar sands and any other environmentally harmful riders.

We need to move on from the Keystone XL pipeline and tar sands expansion. The President said, “We have subsidized oil companies for a century.  That’s long enough.  It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”  The oil industry is stifling homegrown U.S. energy, not those who would protect our farmlands, waters and climate, as Governor Daniels implied. The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is one more way in which the oil industry is pushing to increase its profits with the American people carrying the risks. We can do better with energy that doesn’t put our farms, water and climate at risk.   

Republican Keystone XL bill is not as advertised: Here are the facts

The Republican leadership’s latest gambit to force through TransCanada’s Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is a measure proposed by Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) in December. GOP leadership apparently decided to rally behind Terry’s bill, H.R. 3548, after discussing various options with TransCanada in a conference call. It’s easy to see why TransCanada would favor this bill. Why it’s in the interest of the American people is much less clear. But the Republicans must not feel too comfortable with this plan because they are offering misleading and woefully incomplete descriptions of the bill.

Here are two important things you should know about the bill:

1. Terry’s bill does not give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) authority to consider granting Keystone XL a Presidential permit. Instead, the bill mandates approval of the pipeline – it does not give FERC actual decision making authority.
2. Terry’s bill would exempt the pipeline from critical environmental requirements that apply to every other pipeline in the United States – laws that govern pipeline operators’ liability and clean up responsibilities for oil spills that contaminate the nation’s air and water.

Terry is selling his H.R. 3548 as a vehicle to take Keystone XL decision away from a political body and “letting the experts on pipelines make decisions on whether this is a sound pipeline.” There is a big problem with this argument. Terry’s bill only authorizes FERC to “approve” Keystone XL within thirty days – the bill doesn’t actually give the agency authority to deny a permit for the pipeline. If FERC does not act, Keystone XL would be approved under Congressional authority in thirty days. Terry is only interested in FERC if the agency agrees with him.

It’s only fair to point out that FERC doesn’t agree with Terry. The agency has pointed out that the Nebraska Congressman has misrepresented its expertise and jurisdiction. While not addressing Terry’s bill specifically, FERC’s spokeswoman noted that the agency does not oversee oil pipeline siting decisions or safety standards.

It is interesting that pro-Keystone XL Congress members haven’t discussed the second part of the Terry bill, which would exempt TransCanada from state and federal regulations that domestic pipeline operators must abide by. The bill would exempt TransCanada from any U.S. law other than the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHSMA) safety regulations and FERC’s authority to regulate pipelines rates.

That means TransCanada will be free to disregard the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act – laws that, among other things, make pipeline operators responsible for the spills that pollute the nation’s air and water. Republican leadership has not made the case why TransCanada should be exempted from the laws with which U.S. pipeline companies must comply. It’s a hard case to make, given that Keystone I, the first crude pipeline owned and operated by TransCanada, spilled over 22,000 gallons and was the newest pipeline to be shut down by pipeline regulators as an imminent threat to public safety and the environment.

Our lawmakers need to take serious steps to achieve energy independence and get our country back to work. Investments and jobs in clean energy is something our country can get behind. So why is Speaker Boehner pushing a divisive project that isn’t shovel ready and threatens our country’s land and water? He seems to be playing politics with the concerns of Americans to benefit Big Oil.

NRDC Seeks to Protect Whales in the Pacific Northwest from Sonar

Today, NRDC is suing the government agency charged with protecting marine mammals from the Navy’s harmful use of sonar.  That agency, the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) has a statutory responsibility to manage, conserve, and protect living marine resources, like whales and dolphins, particularly those protected by the Endangered Species Act.  Unfortunately, when it came to protecting whales and other marine life from the harmful impacts of the Navy’s use of sonar in the coastal waters of the Pacific Northwest, NMFS simply didn’t do its job, authorizing more than 700,000 marine mammal “takes” from Navy activities in the area over five years without any meaningful mitigation.

It seems as if every time NMFS had a chance to do more for whales, it merely rubber-stamped the Navy’s analysis.  How else are we to understand NMFS’s failure to set aside one square inch of a Navy range the size of the State of California from sonar’s dangerous impacts?  How else are we to understand NMFS’s failure to set any mitigation for harbor porpoises – an extremely sensitive species that stands to bear 90% of the harm according to NMFS’s own analysis.  Instead of seeing this disproportionate impact as a sign that more must be done to protect harbor porpoises, NMFS used the species’ sensitivity as a reason to dismiss the high number of impacts. 

Make no mistake, mid-frequency active sonar can kill, injure, and disturb marine mammals.  The Navy and NMFS accept this fact.  It has definitively caused or been associated with multiple mass stranding events of whales and other marine mammals around the world.

Let’s go through the following slide show to understand a bit more about what’s at stake:

The first picture is a composite of four photos of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, a region of extraordinary biological diversity that is completely encompassed within the Navy’s Northwest Training Range Complex (“NWTRC”).  Twenty-nine species of marine mammals occur in the Olympic Coast NMFS, including eight threatened or endangered species of whales, pinnipeds, and otters.  The sanctuary provides important regular foraging habitat for humpback and killer whales, including the critically endangered Southern Resident killer whale, whose dramatic sensitivity to mid-frequency sonar was documented during a 2003 incident in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.  Gray whales use the sanctuary during biannual migrations between calving and feeding areas, and a small, possibly distinct, group of gray whales known as “summer residents” use the area for feeding every summer.  Oregon/Washington harbor porpoises have primary habitat within the coastal waters encompassed by the Sanctuary.

The second slide is a detailed shot of Southern California and shows the size of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary in relation to the area’s National Parks.  We don’t allow our military to have unfettered access to our National Parks for training purposes, for what I hope are obvious reasons.  Yet NMFS refused to put any restrictions on the Navy’s use of sonar in the Sanctuary.

The third slide shows the size of the NWTRC Offshore Area – 122,400 nm² – in comparison to the rest of the United States.  It covers an area equivalent to the entire state of California!  Do you think there may be small portions of this California-sized range where sonar shouldn’t be used because they are so biologically important?  NMFS apparently doesn’t think so, despite repeatedly acknowledging that keeping sonar out of important marine-mammal habitat is the most effective means of protecting marine mammals from sonar impacts.

The remaining slides are images of some of the marine mammal species that will be harmed by the Navy’s use of sonar:  minke whales, humpback whales, harbor porpoises, striped dolphins, pygmy sperm whales, California sea lions, gray whales, Dall’s porpoises, and Southern Resident killer whales.

Our suit, which we bring with other concerned organizations (InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the San Juans, and People for Puget Sound), asks the Court to send the approvals of the Navy’s activities back to NMFS for further work, with instructions to get it right – do your duty under the law, do more to protect marine mammals.

I look forward to keeping you updated on our challenge in the months ahead.

Click this link if you'd like to read a copy of our press release, Navy Training Blasts Marine Mammals with Harmful Sonar. 

Expensive, dangerous and risky - what do Congressional Republicans gain...

After the State of the Union address tonight, we can expect Governor Daniels’ GOP response to sing the praises of the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline which would put Americans at risk to benefit multinational oil companies. Keystone XL was rejected by the President last week as not in the national interest. This is a project through America, not to America. It is a project that would put our farms, waters, and climate at risk so that the oil industry could get a better price for tar sands in overseas markets. The President showed leadership in rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline – we have cleaner energy options than tar sands.

We don’t have to look far to see what is driving the GOP lawmakers in their praise of this dirty energy project. Jack Gerrard the head of the American Petroleum Institute, which counts the major tar sands oil players among its members, threatened serious political consequences if Keystone XL was not approved. And, instead of standing up for American health and safety and for American workers, the GOP Congressional staff met with the Canadian pipeline company TransCanada, planning ways to force approval of this project even to the extent of once again attaching it to a bill to extend the payroll tax credit.

Farmers, scientists, business-leaders, religious leaders, workers, mayors and many others know the truth about the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.  Congressional Republicans might tell us that Keystone XL will create tens or even hundreds of thousands of jobs. These wildly inflated numbers do a disservice to American workers who deserve a jobs plan that doesn’t put the health and safety of our children at risk. The GOP might tell us that Keystone XL is necessary for our security. But we know better when we see that the oil industry wants this pipeline to get higher prices for tar sands by having access to overseas markets from the Gulf Coast. And against expectations, Keystone XL would actually raise oil prices in the Midwest by diverting oil from that region to the Gulf for export. This is a simple calculation of supply and demand and another reason why the oil industry wants this pipeline so badly. TransCanada has admitted to Canadian regulators that Keystone XL will increase the price that the U.S. pays for Canadian oil by up to $4 billion.

Expensive, dangerous, and risky – what do GOP members of Congress have to gain from supporting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline? Certainly, farmers, landowners and people all across the United States already suffering the high cost of floods, storms and fires caused by climate change have much to lose and nothing to gain from this dirty energy project. What we need are more ways to decrease our dependence on oil. It is through clean energy that we will create jobs, increase our security and protect the health and safety of our children.