<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Ecological Society of America</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.esa.org/esa</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 12:15:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Zeal to ensure clean leafy greens takes bite out of riverside habitat in California</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7746</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7746#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 22:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Liza Lester</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Nature Conservancy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<b>Perceived food safety risk from wildlife drives expensive and unnecessary habitat destruction around farm fields.</b> Meticulous attention to food safety is a good thing. As consumers, we like to hear that produce growers and distributers go above and beyond food safety mandates to ensure that healthy fresh fruits and vegetables do not carry bacteria or viruses that can make us sick. But in California’s Salinas Valley, some more vigorous interventions are cutting into the last corners of wildlife habitat and potentially threatening water quality, without evidence of food safety benefits. <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7746">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>Perceived food safety risk from wildlife drives expensive and unnecessary habitat destruction around farm fields</h1>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Media Advisory</p>
<p>For release: <b>Monday, May 6<sup>th</sup>, 2013, 12:01 am EDT</b><b><br /> </b>Contact: Liza Lester (202) 833-8773 x 211; <a href="mailto:llester@esa.org">llester@esa.org</a></p>
<h2 align="center"> </h2>
<p align="center"> </p>
<div id="attachment_7750" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gennet-food-safety-fig-3-screen-grab.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-7750" alt="Field buffers: vegetation loss likely due to food safety measures. From Figure 3 of the paper." src="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gennet-food-safety-fig-3-screen-grab-300x193.jpg" width="300" height="193" /></a>
<p class="wp-caption-text">Farm-field buffers: vegetation loss likely due to food safety measures. From Figure 3 of the paper.</p>
</div>
<p>Meticulous attention to food safety is a good thing. As consumers, we like to hear that produce growers and distributers go above and beyond food safety mandates to ensure that healthy fresh fruits and vegetables do not carry bacteria or viruses that can make us sick.</p>
<p>But in California’s Salinas Valley, some more vigorous interventions are cutting into the last corners of wildlife habitat and potentially threatening water quality, without evidence of food safety benefits. These policies create tensions between wildlife preservation and food safety where none need exist, say scientists for The Nature Conservancy, writing in the Ecological Society of America’s journal <a href="http://www.esajournals.org/toc/fron/0/0"><i>Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment</i></a>. The study will be published online ahead of print on Monday, May 6<sup>th</sup>, 2013.</p>
<p>“Farming practices for food safety that target wildlife are damaging valuable ecological systems despite low risk from these animals,” said lead author Sasha Gennet.</p>
<p>Check the back of your bag of spinach or prepackaged salad greens, and you’ll probably find that they came from the Salinas Valley. Salad is big business in California.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of a deadly 2006 <i>Escherichia coli</i> serotype O157:H7 outbreak traced to California spinach, growers and distributers of leafy greens came together to create the California <a href="http://www.caleafygreens.ca.gov/">Leafy Green Handler Marketing Agreement</a> (LGMA) on best practices for the industry, enforced by third-party auditors and inspectors. The LGMA established standards for farm work hygiene, produce processing and transport, and proximity to livestock. About 99 percent of California leafy greens now come from participating farms.</p>
<p>But produce farmers in the Salinas Valley report pressure from some powerful buyers to take additional precautions not mandated by government or industry standards. These buyers insist that swathes of bare ground wider than a football field is long separate the leafy greens from rivers, wetlands and other wildlife habitat.  </p>
<p>Other precautions include treating irrigation water with chemicals toxic to fish and amphibians, and setting poisoned bait for rodents.</p>
<p><strong>“The California Leafy Green Hander agreement is transparent, flexible and science-based,” said Gennet.</strong> “Going above and beyond it just creates costs for farmers and doesn’t improve safety.”</p>
<p>It also creates costs for wildlife. Although scant evidence exists of risk of food-borne disease spread by wildlife, the risk of rejection of produce by major buyers is too much for most growers to bear, say Gennet and her co-authors. They measured changes in wetlands and riverside habitat in the Salinas Valley between 2005 and 2009, finding 13.3 percent converted to bare ground, crops or otherwise diminished. Widespread introduction of fencing blocked wildlife corridors. Low barriers even kept out the frogs.</p>
<p>Unlike the LGMA standards, individual corporate requirements for farm produce are generally not transparent to the public. But in surveys, farmers report pressure from auditors to implement fences and bare ground buffers around spinach, lettuce, and other leafy greens.</p>
<p>Such pressures have set back years of collaboration between growers and environmental advocates to make farm edges slim sanctuaries for wildlife, as well as buffers between agricultural fields and waterways. Fallow strips along streams and rivers provide corridors for migrating animals and birds.</p>
<p><strong>“This is an area that is already 95 percent altered – the habitat that remains is critical,” said Gennet.</strong> “Removing 13 percent of what is already heavily-impacted habitat and cutting off wildlife corridors is a significant loss.”</p>
<p>The Salinas River and its tributaries are an important rest stop on the Pacific Flyway, a major migration route for neotropical songbirds, and home to raptors and shorebirds. The waterways are also corridors for deer and other big animals moving between the high country of the Diablo Range and coastal Big Sur mountains that flank the valley.</p>
<p>Wetlands and buffers of trees, grasses, and shrubs help to keep runoff from fields out of the waterways, slowing erosion of soil and blooms of algae downstream. An overabundance of fertilizer has created problems for domestic drinking water as well as the ecosystems of the Salinas River watershed and its outlet, Monterey Bay.</p>
<p><strong>“California has a big problem with concentrated nutrients in waterways, and there is a lot of pressure on growers to reduce those inputs</strong> – so to the extent that riverside wildlife habitat could be a benefit all around, a coordinated approach to agricultural management and policy makes the most sense,” said Gennet.</p>
<p>“The policies that these distributors are forming are very narrow,” said <strong>Lisa Schulte Moore, an agricultural ecologist at Iowa State University who is not affiliated with the Nature Conservancy study.</strong> Nervous distributers are looking at specific risks in isolation, she said, and not asking “does the food system create a healthy human environment?”</p>
<p>Schulte Moore works with Iowa farmers to incorporate native grassland habitat alongside corn and soy fields. Her experiments look for native grass mixtures that don’t tend to invade the crops and are highly attractive to beneficial native insects, including the natural enemies of agricultural pests. <strong>“If we design the systems right there could be substantial benefits to the agricultural system as a whole,”</strong> she said.</p>
<p>The key word, Gennet says, is “co-management.” As a community, we need to approach food health, wildlife health, and water health in the Salinas Valley as parts of an integrated system. She would like to see California growers, buyers, and consumers rely on standards like the LGMA. “We think it’s been a good process, using the newest science and trying to take a constructive approach.  If everybody stuck to those standards, that would be a good outcome,” said Gennet.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><a title="abstract" href="http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/120243" target="_blank">Farm practices for food safety: an emerging threat to floodplain and riparian ecosystems</a>. (2013) Sasha Gennet, Jeanette Howard, Jeff Langholz, Kathryn Andrews, Mark D Reynolds, and Scott A Morrison. <i>Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment</i> (e-View 05/06/2013; print publication June 2013) doi:10.1890/120243</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Outside source:</b></p>
<p>Lisa Schulte Moore</p>
<p>Associate Professor of Landscape Ecology, Iowa State University</p>
<p>515-294-7339</p>
<p><a href="mailto:lschulte@iastate.edu">lschulte@iastate.edu</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.nrem.iastate.edu/landscape/">http://www.nrem.iastate.edu/landscape/</a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<hr />
<p><i>The Ecological Society of America is the world’s largest community of professional ecologists and a trusted source of ecological knowledge. ESA is committed to advancing the understanding of life on Earth. The 10,000 member Society publishes five journals, convenes an annual scientific conference, and broadly shares ecological information through policy and media outreach and education initiatives. Visit the ESA website at </i><a href="http://www.esa.org/"><i>http://www.esa.org</i></a><i>.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7746</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>May 3, 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7685</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7685#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 14:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>P E</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7685</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Sources: ClimateWire, Defenders of Wildlife, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&#38;E News PM, Environmental Defense Fund, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Science, Space and Technology Committee, LA Times, National Association of Manufacturers, Senate Appropriations Committee, &#8230; <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7685">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
<h2 class="thethe-toggle-group-title">In this Issue</h2>
<div id="thethe-toggle-1" class="thethe-toggle-group">
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-3006">NSF: SCIENCE COMMITTEE LEADERS WEIGH IN ON BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH INVESTMENT</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-3006" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>A letter to National Science Foundation (NSF) Acting-Director Cora Marrett from House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) received a sharp rebuttal from Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX).</p>
<p>In his letter, Chairman Smith expressed concern with how NSF prioritizes scientific research. “Based on my review of NSF-funded studies, I have concerns regarding some grants approved by the foundation and how closely they adhere to NSF’s ‘intellectual merit’ guideline,” he wrote.  “To better understand how NSF makes decisions to approve and fund grants, it would be helpful to obtain detailed information on specific research projects awarded NSF grants.” He then cited several social science studies, including research projects entitled “Picturing Animals in National Geographic,” “Comparative Network Analysis: Mapping Global Social Interactions,” and “Regulating Accountability and Transparency in China’s Dairy Industry” as “studies of interest” to the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. </p>
<p>Ranking Member Johnson’s response letter addressed to Chairman Smith came the following day. “Like you I recognize that NSF grants have a responsibility back to the taxpayers,” she noted. “But I also believe that: 1) the progress of science itself – across all fields, including the social and behavioral sciences – is in the interest of the taxpayer; and 2) that NSF’s Broader Impact criterion is the right way to hold the individual grantee accountable.”</p>
<p>Her letter included a sharp criticism of the chairman’s move as entirely unprecedented in modern history. “In the history of this committee, no chairman has ever put themselves forward as an expert in the science that underlies specific grant proposals funded by NSF. In the more than two decades of committee leadership that I have worked with – Chairmen Brown, Walker, Sensenbrenner, Boehlert, Gordon, and Hall – I have never seen a chairman decide to go after specific grants simply because the chairman does not believe them to be of high value.”</p>
<p>During recent remarks commemorating the 150th anniversary of the National Academy of Sciences, President Obama highlighted the importance of maintaining existing scientific merit peer review standards. “And what’s true of all sciences is that in order for us to maintain our edge, we’ve got to protect our rigorous peer review system and ensure that we only fund proposals that promise the biggest bang for taxpayer dollars.  And I will keep working to make sure that our scientific research does not fall victim to political maneuvers or agendas that in some ways would impact on the integrity of the scientific process,” said the president. “That’s what’s going to maintain our standards of scientific excellence for years to come.”</p>
<p>Recently, the Coalition for National Science Funding, in partnership with the House Research Caucus, sponsored a briefing that emphasized the importance of sustained investment in social and behavioral scientific research focusing on victims of natural and human-made disasters. For additional information on the briefing, click here:  </p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><a href="http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/briefing-highlights-importance-of-social-science-research/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Ecotone+%28EcoTone%29">http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/briefing-highlights-importance-of-social-science-research/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Ecotone+%28EcoTone%29</a></span> </p>
<p>To view Chairman Smith’s letter, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf">http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf</a></p>
<p>To view Ranking Member Johnson’s rebuttal letter, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf">http://www.cossa.org/CPR/2013/Rep.%20EBJLetter-toRep.Smith-Re-NSF-Grants.pdf</a></p>
<p>To view President Obama’s full remarks before the National Academy of Sciences, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/29/remarks-president-150th-anniversary-national-academy-sciences">http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/29/remarks-president-150th-anniversary-national-academy-sciences</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-8275">SENATE: APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE REVIEWS EPA FY 2014 BUDGET REQUEST</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-8275" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 24, the Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee convened for a hearing examining the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) budget request for FY 2014.</p>
<p>Committee Democrats expressed concern over proposed cuts to clean water and brownfield programs while Republicans, specifically Sens. Roy Blunt (MO) Mike Johanns (NE), took issue with agency surveillance programs. EPA Acting Director Bob Perciasepe testified that the aerial surveillance is used to monitor Clean Water Act violations and is not used to obtain information on law-biding citizens.</p>
<p>“I’m disappointment with the overall budget level. This is the fourth year in a row that the agency’s budget request has contracted,” noted Subcommittee Chairman Jack Reed (D-RI). Chairman Reed cited clean and drinking water state revolving funds, beach cleanup, brownfields clean up, and environmental education programs as troubling proposed cuts that would endanger public health and stifle economic and infrastructure productivity. While acknowledging that more funding is needed for water infrastructure overall, Perciasepe noted that past investment, including funding through the Recovery Act, has helped sustain funds. EPA will continue to work with states and local agencies to make better use of the funds, given current fiscal concerns, said Perciasepe.</p>
<p>Subcommittee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) expressed concern with certain EPA rulemakings and asserted that she hears more complaints from Alaskans about the agency than about any other federal agency. She asked about the status of Alaska’s Bristol Bay Watershed assessment, which seeks to identify the impacts of large scale mining on the Bay. Murkowski specifically inquired when the agency would be able to provide the committee with the overall cost of the assessment. Her concerns about getting the overall assessment completed in a timely fashion were echoed by Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK). Perciasepe said that a cost assessment should be available sometime in May.</p>
<p>View the full hearing here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/webcasts.cfm?method=webcasts.view&amp;id=47a2d012-529d-4fef-9999-35a7cab3b0e4">http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/webcasts.cfm?method=webcasts.view&amp;id=47a2d012-529d-4fef-9999-35a7cab3b0e4</a></p>
<p>Additional information on the Bristol Bay assessment is available here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www2.epa.gov/bristolbay">http://www2.epa.gov/bristolbay</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-2296">HOUSE: SCIENCE SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING REVISITS CLIMATE CHANGE</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-2296" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 25, the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Environment convened for a hearing entitled “Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context.” The hearing was the first of the subcommittee to focus on climate science for the 113<sup>th</sup> Congress.</p>
<p>Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-UT) re-emphasized the contention among some congressional Republicans that there is debate as to the degree to which the planet is warming and the factors at play. “The number and complexity of factors influencing climate—from land and oceans to the sun and clouds—make precise long-term temperature predictions an extremely difficult challenge.  Contrary to the predictions of almost all modeling, over the past 16 years there has been a complete absence of global warming,” said Stewart. “When we encounter those who claim to know precisely what our future climate will look like, and then attack any who may disagree with them, we have stepped out of the arena of science and into the arena of politics and ideology.”</p>
<p>House Science, Space and Technology Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) was slightly more reserved in his skepticism in his opening statement. “Climate change is an issue that needs to be discussed thoughtfully and objectively. Unfortunately, it’s sometimes surrounded by claims that conceal the facts and hinder the proper weighing of policy options,” he asserted. “I believe in the integrity of science. And I find it unfortunate that those who question certain scientific views on climate have their motives impugned. Challenging accepted beliefs through open debate and critical thinking is a primary part of the scientific process. To make a rational decision on climate change, we need to examine the relevant scientific issues along with the costs and benefits and better understand the uncertainties that surround both.”</p>
<p>Full Committee Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), while not present at the opening of the hearing, released a statement for the record criticizing global warming skeptics.  “The science surrounding this issue reached a consensus a long time ago, and that consensus is that the world is warming and most of that warming is being caused by humans…Unfortunately, many of my colleagues in the majority don’t seem to have gotten the memo.  Many openly dispute the science or allude to some unspecified but supposedly vast scientific conspiracy.  Others, while less conspiratorial, insist that nothing can be done about the problem.  This is a failure of leadership of the highest order.”</p>
<p>The majority of witnesses testifying during the hearing said that existing federal efforts to address climate change were harmful to the economy and of marginal benefit. Bjørn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, criticized the Kyoto treaty and carbon tax proposals and stated that the US should fund research for new carbon capture technologies that would be less expensive than conventional fossil fuels. <strong>Judith Curry</strong>, Professor of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology, echoed concerns that there is inadequate understanding of the cause and nature of climate change to assess the costs and benefits of taking policy action.</p>
<p>The lone witness invited by committee Democrats was William Chameides, Dean at the Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University, who argued that uncertainty should not be used as a roadblock against taking action. “We, as individuals and as a society, often act in the face of uncertainty.  And often we choose to take a conservative path, and rightly so,” he argued. “I, for example, cannot predict if, let alone when, there will be a fire in my house, but I pay for fire insurance.  Similarly, in the face of uncertain but substantial risks from climate change, a prudent course of action is to develop and implement a risk-based and flexible response to the climate change challenge.”</p>
<p>Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Suzanne Bonamci (D-OR) illustrated various examples, peppered with a local perspective, of how climate change is affecting the economy. She noted the role of wine grapes in Oregon’s economy and how even minor temperature changes can adversely impact production of pinot noir wine grapes. She also pointed to the negative impacts of increased ocean acidification, caused by climate change, on the Pacific Northwest shellfish industry.</p>
<p>“As a nation, we are becoming too familiar with the consequences of waiting until the eleventh hour to develop solutions to the problems we face,” stated Bonamici. “Let’s not make that mistake with something as serious as climate change. And even though we may have differences of opinion about what is causing climate change, but we can still discuss the economic gains we can make by investing in a clean energy economy, modernizing our infrastructure, and seeking energy independence.”</p>
<p>View the full hearing, here:</p>
<p><a href="http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-environment-hearing-policy-relevant-climate-issues-context">http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-environment-hearing-policy-relevant-climate-issues-context</a><b></b></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-1926">WHITE HOUSE: OBAMA ANNOUNCES NOMINATION FOR NEW COMMERCE SECRETARY</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-1926" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On May 2, President Obama announced Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker as his pick to lead the US Department of Commerce. Pritzker, a longtime fundraiser for Obama, is also the daughter of the founder of the Hyatt Hotel chain. If confirmed, Pritzker would be the wealthiest secretary in Obama’s cabinet, with a net worth of $1.85 billion.</p>
<p>Pritzker currently serves as Chief Executive of PSP Capital Partners and its affiliate, Pritzker Realty Group. She has previously served as a member of the president’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness and also worked on the administration’s Skills for America&#8217;s Future initiative, an effort to improve industry partnerships with community colleges to develop job skills for students. Pritzker attended Harvard University and received law and business degrees from Stanford.</p>
<p>As Commerce Secretary, Pritzker would oversee the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, one of the federal government’s key science agencies and the single largest federal bureau under the department’s jurisdiction. Several key positions have remained vacant at NOAA in the time between the final year of the administration’s first term and the onset of his second-term. Foremost among them is the position of NOAA administrator, left vacant by the departure of Jane Lubchenco, a former president of the Ecological Society of America.</p>
<p>Both industry and environmental advocates expressed optimism about the nomination. “Manufacturers welcome the nomination of Penny Pritzker to lead the Department of Commerce,” said National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) President and CEO Jay Timmons in a press statement. “Penny brings to the table an extensive business background and understands what it takes for businesses to create jobs. She comes from a family with a rich history in manufacturing as her uncle, Bob Pritzker, served as chairman of the NAM.”</p>
<p>“The direction and vision set by the Commerce Department are crucial to managing our nation&#8217;s fisheries,” stated John Mimikakis, Associate Vice President of the Environmental Defense Fund’s Oceans Program. “EDF looks forward to Ms. Pritzker&#8217;s leadership as secretary and will continue to work with fishermen, regional councils and NOAA to develop solutions that will end overfishing while protecting the business and sport of fishing for future generations.”</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-9353">FWS: GRAY WOLF TO BE DELISTED FROM ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT PROTECTIONS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-9353" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>The US Fish and Wildlife Service recently began efforts to remove the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act.</p>
<p>Federal protections would be removed for most wolves across the continental United States. Protection would remain in place, however, for a subspecies of Mexican wolves in Arizona and New Mexico. The removal would be the culmination of a series of regional and state efforts that have been enacted in recent years. Members of Congress from western states that represent hunters and ranchers have also frequently pushed delisting efforts over recent years. </p>
<p>Environmental groups have expressed dismay regarding FWS’s intention. In a press statement, Defenders of Wildlife President and CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark accused the Obama administration of “giving up on gray wolf recovery before the job is done.” Defenders of Wildlife contends the move is premature given that recovery efforts in the Pacific Northwest are just beginning and the fact that there are no wolves in the states of Colorado and Utah. “Gray wolves once ranged in a continuous population from Canada all the way down to Mexico, and we shouldn’t give up on this vision until they are restored,” contended Clark.</p>
<p>Federal protections for the gray wolf are expected to be lifted this year. Once delisted, wolf management efforts are predominantly provided by individual state governments. Federal agencies will continue to monitor the status of the species and have the capability to reinstate federal protection if numbers dwindle to a point that scientists consider dangerously low.</p>
<p>To view the Defenders of Wildlife press release, click here:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.defenders.org/press-release/feds-propose-abandoning-gray-wolf-recovery-across-most-united-states">https://www.defenders.org/press-release/feds-propose-abandoning-gray-wolf-recovery-across-most-united-states</a></p>
<p>For additional information on FWS gray wolf recovery and monitoring efforts, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D">http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-2927">ESA: SOCIETY’S DIVERSITY PROGRAM RECEIVES NSF AWARD</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-2927" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>The National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded the Ecological Society of America’s (ESA) “Diverse People for a Diverse Science” project with a $183,158 grant.</p>
<p>The ESA initiative seeks to increase diversity participation in the field of ecology. In addition to funding existing program components such as research fellowships, the grant will also support an independent evaluation of ESA’s Strategies for Ecology Education, Diversity and Sustainability (SEEDS) program.</p>
<p>The professional evaluation will assess SEEDS program activities between 2002-2012, documenting outcomes, effectiveness of program components and identifying opportunities to strengthen the program. The evaluation will determine to what degree program participants’ knowledge of ecology as increased, how it has buttressed career opportunities and influenced ESA members who have served as mentors during its existence.</p>
<p>Formative Evaluation Research Associates (FERA) is conducting the SEEDS program evaluation. FERA is a woman-owned firm with experience evaluating NSF-supported and other science education programs focused on engaging underrepresented groups. </p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-761"><b>PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: NOAA’S FIVE YEAR RESEARCH PLAN RELEASED</b></a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-761" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On May 3, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released its five year research and development (R&amp;D) plan.</p>
<p> The plan provides a roadmap for research implementation at NOAA from 2013-2017 in support of goals related to monitoring the status of climate, weather, oceans and coastal areas. The plan will help NOAA and partnering organizations understand how to adapt and respond to change, provide a common understanding between NOAA and its various stakeholders of the purpose of NOAA R&amp;D as well as develop a framework for making mission-oriented decisions and setting targets on how to measure progress and the degree of stakeholder engagement.</p>
<p> For additional information on the plan, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://nrc.oarhq.noaa.gov/CouncilProducts/ResearchPlans/5-YearRDPlan.aspx">http://nrc.oarhq.noaa.gov/CouncilProducts/ResearchPlans/5-YearRDPlan.aspx</a></p>
<p><b> </b>To provide comments go here: <a href="https://docs.google.com/a/noaa.gov/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEV3WkYyWVdhTzREcHlJR21nVDREQ2c6MQ#gid=0">https://docs.google.com/a/noaa.gov/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEV3WkYyWVdhTzREcHlJR21nVDREQ2c6MQ#gid=0</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-6138">PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: PROTECTIONS PROPOSED FOR WESTERN AMPHIBIANS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-6138" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 24, the US Fish and Wildlife Service announced that it was considering adding new amphibians in the Sierra Nevada region for protection under the Endangered Species Act.</p>
<p>The Yosemite toad and the mountain yellow-legged frog would be listed as “threatened” under the proposed rule. The distinct population segment of the Sierra Nevada yellow frog would be included in this listing. FWS cites these three species as being threatened by “habitat degradation, predation, climate change, and inadequate regulatory protection.” The proposal would also designate a combined two million acres of critical habitat for the animals, largely across California and 16 counties in the Sierra Nevada.</p>
<p>Public comments will be accepted through June 24, 2013. Comments can be submitted via email at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/">http://www.regulations.gov</a> using docket number FWS–R8–ES–2012–0100 for the listing and docket number FWS–R8–ES–2012–0074 for the critical habitat rule.  Comments can also be mailed to the following address:</p>
<p> Public Comments Processing</p>
<p>Attn:  FWS–R8–ES–2012–0100 or FWS–R8–ES–2012–0074<br /> Division of Policy and Directives Management<br /> U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service<br /> 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM<br /> Arlington, VA 22203                            </p>
<p>For additional information, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.fws.gov/ventura/newsroom/release.cfm?id=93">http://www.fws.gov/ventura/newsroom/release.cfm?id=93</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-6503">CURRENT POLICY</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-6503" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p><b>Considered by House Committee/Subcommittee</b></p>
<p>On April 25, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Insular Affairs held a hearing on the following bills:</p>
<p><em id="__mceDel"><b>H.R. 638, the National Wildlife Refuge Review Act</b> – Introduced by Fisheries, Wildlife and Insular Affairs Subcommittee Chairman John Fleming (R-LA), the bill would require congressional approval of any expansion of the National Wildlife Refuge System.</em></p>
<p><b>H.R. 1300, to reauthorize the volunteer programs and community partnerships for the benefit of national wildlife refuges</b> – Introduced by Rep. Jon Runyan (R-NJ), the bill reauthorizes community partnerships and volunteer programs for the National Wildlife Refuge System. The bill is cosponsored by Subcommittee Ranking Member <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&amp;Db=d113&amp;querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Rep+Sablan++Gregorio+Kilili+Camacho))+01962))">Gregorio Kilili Camacho</a> Sablan (D-Northern Mariana Islands).</p>
<p><b>H.R. 1384, the Wildlife Refuge System Conservation Semipostal Stamp Act of 2013</b> – Introduced by <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&amp;Db=d113&amp;querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Rep+Sablan++Gregorio+Kilili+Camacho))+01962))">Subcommittee Ranking Member</a> Sablan, the bill would provide for the issuance of a Wildlife Refuge System Conservation Semipostal Stamp. </p>
<p><b>Approved by House Committee</b></p>
<p>On April 24, the House Natural Resources Committee approved the following bill:</p>
<p><b>H.R. 3, the Northern Route Approval Act</b> – Introduced by Rep. Terry Lee (R-NE) – the bill would remove the  requirement of a presidential permit for approval of the XL Keystone pipeline. The bill would deem the environmental impact statement issued by the Secretary of State on August 26, 2011, coupled with a final evaluation report, sufficient to satisfy all requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and of the National Historic Preservation Act. The bill was approved in committee by a vote of 24-17.</p>
<p><b>Considered by Senate Committee</b></p>
<p>On April 23, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks considered several bills, including the following:</p>
<p><b>S. 155, to designate a mountain in the State of Alaska as Denali</b> – Introduced by Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would rename a mountain named for President McKinley as Denali, the name it is referred to by Alaskan residents.</p>
<p><b>S. 156, Huna Tlingit Traditional Gull Egg Use Act</b> – Introduced by Ranking Member Murkowksi, the bill would allow for the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people within Alaska’s Glacier Bay National Park. Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) has cosponsored the bill.</p>
<p><b>S. 219, Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area Act</b> &#8211; Introduced by Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) the bill would establish the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania.</p>
<p><b>S. 225,  Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks Study Act</b> &#8211; Introduced by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), the bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of alternatives for commemorating and interpreting the role of the Buffalo Soldiers in the early years of the national parks.       </p>
<p><b>S. 349, Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Protection Act</b>  -  Introduced by Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the bill would designate a segment of the Beaver, Chipuxet, Queen, Wood, and Pawcatuck Rivers in the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.</p>
<p><b>S. 486, Preserving Public Access to Cape Hatteras Beaches Act</b> – the bill bars imposition of any additional restrictions on pedestrian or motorized vehicular access to any part of the Recreation Area for species protection beyond those outlined in an interim management strategy issued by the National Park Service in 2007.  The bill comes in response to a National Park Service plan issued in Feb. 2012 that bans off-highway vehicle use in the Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina for the purpose of protecting nesting sea turtles and birds.</p>
<p>For a full listing of bills considered during the hearing, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=9df237db-2a0f-4e28-9476-b1c5b43d454a">http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=9df237db-2a0f-4e28-9476-b1c5b43d454a</a></p>
<p>On April 25, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on the following bills:</p>
<p><b>S. 340, the Southeast Alaska Native Land Entitlement Finalization and Jobs Protection Act</b> – Introduced by Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the bill would transfer 70,000 acres of the Tongass National Forest to Sealaska Corp. Among its concerns with the bill, the Obama administration claims the legislation could imperil wildlife in the region, including wolves and goshawks.</p>
<p><b>S. 27, the Hill Creek Cultural Preservation and Energy Development Act</b> – Introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the bill would authorize a land swap intended to protect the cultural rights of the Ute Tribe in eastern Utah while allowing expanded access for oil and gas drilling.</p>
<p><b>S. 28, the Y Mountain Access Enhancement Act</b> – Introduced by Sen. Hatch, the bill would provide for the conveyance of a small parcel of National Forest System land in the Uintah-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah to Brigham Young University.</p>
<p><b>S. 159, the  Lyon County Economic Development and Conservation Act</b> – Introduced by Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV), the bill would designate the Wovoka Wilderness as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System and provide for certain land conveyances in Lyon County, NV to facilitate construction of a copper mine.</p>
<p><b>S. 241, the </b><b>Rio Grande del Norte National Conservation Area Establishment Act</b> – Introduced by Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), the bill would establish the Rio Grande del Norte National Conservation Area in New Mexico.</p>
<p><b>S. 255, North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2013</b> – Introduced by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), the bill would protect the North Folk of the Flathead River in Montana from future mineral claims and oil and gas development.</p>
<p><b>S. 312, the </b><b>Carson National Forest Boundary Adjustment Act of 2013</b> – Introduced by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM), the bill would adjust the boundary of the Carson National Forest in New Mexico to incorporate 4,990 acres of land identified as the Miranda Canyon Boundary.</p>
<p><b>S. 341, San Juan Mountains Wilderness Act</b> – Introduced by Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), the bill would designate certain lands in San Miguel, Ouray and San Juan counties in Colorado as wilderness.</p>
<p><b>S. 342, the Pine Forest Range Recreation Enhancement Act of 2013</b> – Introduced by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the bill would designate the Pine Forest Range Wilderness area in Humboldt County, NV as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.</p>
<p><b>S. 353, Oregon Treasures Act of 2013</b> – Introduced by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), the bill would designate certain land in Oregon as wilderness and make additional wild and scenic river designations in Oregon.</p>
<p>For additional information on bills considered during the hearing, click here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=5832cf6a-fd18-4046-bb7c-5c4ba9ae7853">http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=5832cf6a-fd18-4046-bb7c-5c4ba9ae7853</a></p>
<p><em id="__mceDel"></div>
</div>
<p></em></p>
<hr />
<p> <em id="__mceDel"><strong>Sources</strong>: ClimateWire, Defenders of Wildlife, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&amp;E News PM, Environmental Defense Fund, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Science, Space and Technology Committee, LA Times, National Association of Manufacturers, Senate Appropriations Committee, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington Post, the White House</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7685</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>May 27, 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7683</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7683#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 12:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>P E</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7683</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7683</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ESA’s Diversity Program receives NSF Award</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7635</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7635#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 22:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Liza Lester</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEEDs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Ecological Society of America’s (ESA) long-standing program to diversify the field of ecology recently got another boost from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The federal research agency awarded ESA a grant of $183,158 to support the Society’s “Diverse People for a Diverse Science” project. Not only will the funding go to key existing program components, such as research fellowships, it will also fund an independent evaluation of SEEDS. <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7635">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/seeds-logo.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-7636" alt="ESA SEEDs logo" src="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/seeds-logo.jpg" width="212" height="145" /></a></p>
<p>Media Advisory</p>
<p>For immediate release: May 2, 2013</p>
<p>Contact: Nadine Lymn, <a href="mailto:Nadine@esa.org">Nadine@esa.org, </a>202.833.8773, ext. 205</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>The Ecological Society of America’s (ESA) long-standing program to diversify the field of ecology recently got another boost from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The federal research agency awarded ESA a grant of $183,158 to support the Society’s “Diverse People for a Diverse Science” project. Not only will the funding go to key existing program components, such as research fellowships, it will also fund an independent evaluation of SEEDS.</p>
<p>“As a longtime SEEDS supporter and current advisory board member, I&#8217;ve always been convinced we could make a real difference for ESA and the field of ecology by doing all we can to promote diversity within our profession,” said Mark Brunson, professor at Utah State University. “So as a researcher, I&#8217;m excited that now with this grant we&#8217;ll be able to get a scientifically rigorous, expert assessment of what we&#8217;re doing so we can increase our momentum toward our diversity goals.”</p>
<p>The professional evaluation will assess SEEDS program activities between 2002 and 2012, documenting outcomes, effectiveness of program components and identifying opportunities to strengthen the program. Among other questions, it will explore to what extent SEEDS has increased participants’ knowledge about ecology, pathways to enter the field and increased engagement within ESA and in community-based activities. Evaluators will also look at the ways in which SEEDS has influenced the many ESA members who have served as student mentors over the years.</p>
<p>The NSF grant will also allow ESA to initiate two new regional field trips to connect students with opportunities and researchers in their own communities.</p>
<p>The mission of <a href="http://www.esa.org/seeds2/">SEEDS</a> (Strategies for Ecology Education, Diversity and Sustainability) is to diversify and advance the ecology profession through opportunities that stimulate and nurture the interest of underrepresented students to participate, and to lead in ecology. Focused mainly at the undergraduate level—with extension services for communities, high schools, graduate students, and international collaborations—the program envisions wide representation in the ecology field. Key activities include Undergraduate Research Fellowships, leadership development, travel awards to ESA’s Annual Meeting and a national field trip.</p>
<p>Jeramie Strickland, who also serves on the SEEDS Advisory Board, is an alum of the program. Now a wildlife biologist for the Fish &amp; Wildlife Service, Strickland credits SEEDS for helping him on the path to his chosen career. “SEEDS has made significant progress in bringing diversity into ecology by providing professional development and mentoring opportunities for underserved students. Working with SEEDS helped me get my foot in the door for graduate school and with the US Fish and Wildlife Service.”</p>
<p>Formative Evaluation Research Associates (FERA) is conducting the SEEDS program evaluation. FERA is a woman-owned firm with experience evaluating NSF-supported and other science education programs focused on engaging underrepresented groups.</p>
<hr />
<p><i>The Ecological Society of America is the largest professional organization for ecologists and environmental scientists in the world. The Society’s 10,000 members work to advance our understanding of life on Earth, directly relevant to environmental issues such energy and food production, natural resource management, and emerging diseases. ESA works to broadly share ecological information through activities that include </i><i>policy and media outreach, education and diversity initiatives and projects that link the ecological research and management communities and help integrate ecological science into decision-making.</i><i>  The Society also organizes scientific conferences and publishes high-impact journals.</i> <i>Visit the ESA website at </i><a href="http://www.esa.org"><i>http://www.esa.org</i></a><i>.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7635</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 19, 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7582</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7582#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7582</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sources:AAAS, ClimateWire, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&#38;E News PM, Environmental Protection Agency, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, the Washington Post, the White House]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2 class="thethe-toggle-group-title">In This Issue</h2>
<div id="thethe-toggle-2" class="thethe-toggle-group">
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-9516">BUDGET: SCIENCE RECEIVES HIGH PRIORTY IN WHITE HOUSE FY 2014 PROPOSAL</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-9516" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 10, the White House released its Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 budget proposal, which includes significant increases for scientific research. The proposal sets different priorities than the proposed budgets put forward by Congressional leaders, particularly those of the House majority.</p>
<p>The budget takes into account spending caps instituted through the Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25). However, it does not take into account implementation of sequestration and compares program funding levels to those of FY 2012, before sequestration was implemented. Obama’s budget proposes to nullify budget sequestration with $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction. This would include $580 billion in revenue through closing tax loopholes, $400 billion in healthcare savings, $200 billion in mandatory spending programs that would include agriculture and retirement contributions and $200 billion in discretionary savings. The remaining $430 billion would come from cost-of-living adjustments and reduced interest payments on the debt. Congress needs to come up with $1.2 trillion in savings to eliminate the existing sequester cuts.</p>
<p>In total, the White House FY 2014 budget request includes $142.8 billion for federal research and development (R&amp;D), a 1.3 percent increase over FY 2012. In his official message on the budget, President Obama sought to tie science investment to economic development. “If we want to make the best products, we also have to invest in the best ideas,” he asserted. “That is why the budget maintains a world-class commitment to science and research, targeting resources to those areas most likely to contribute directly to the creation of transformational technologies that can create the businesses and jobs of the future.”</p>
<p>The president touted the importance of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education. “To further ensure our educational system is preparing students for careers in the 21st Century economy, the budget includes additional measures to promote STEM education, such as launching a new STEM Master Teacher Corps, to leverage the expertise of some of America’s best and brightest teachers in science and mathematics, and to elevate the teaching of these subjects nationwide.” said Obama</p>
<p>Overall, STEM education programs would be funded at $3.1 billion in FY 2014, a 6.7 percent increase over FY 2012. However, the administration’s reorganization effort includes a 50 percent reduction in the total amount of STEM education programs. The proposed budget reduces the number of federal STEM education programs from 226 to 112. Programs are redirected to be primarily under the jurisdiction of the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The Smithsonian Institution would also benefit from the reorganization, garnering $25 million to expand its non-classroom science education activities.</p>
<p>Other agencies, including the US Departments of Commerce, Defense, Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, would have their STEM education programs undergo significant cuts under the president’s FY 2014 budget proposal. Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren has said that priority STEM education programs that reach out to women and underrepresented groups would be maintained.</p>
<p>The president’s budget would provide OSTP with $5.65 million for FY 2014, an increase from $4.5 million in FY 2012. In the president’s proposal, many federal agencies that invest in scientific research would garner large boosts, compared to what was enacted in FY 2012:</p>
<ul>
<li>National Science Foundation: $7.6 billion (an 8.4 percent increase)</li>
<li>US Geological Survey: $1.2 billion (a 9 percent increase)</li>
<li>National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: $5.4 billion (an 8 percent increase)</li>
<li>Department of Energy R&amp;D: $12.7 billion (an 18 percent increase)</li>
<li>National Aeronautics and Space Administration R&amp;D: $11.6 billion (a 2.6 percent increase)</li>
<li>US Global Change Research Program: $2.7 billion (a 6 percent increase)</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>NSF</strong></p>
<p>NSF’s $7.6 billion request includes $760.58 million for biological research, a 6.8 percent increase over FY 2012. Within that amount $148.97 million would be dedicated to environmental biology (a 4.5 percent increase over FY 2012) and $126.46 million would fund biological infrastructure (a 5.9 percent increase over FY 2012). The agency reports that the number of undergraduate students, graduate students, post-doctorate, researchers and other professionals involved in biological research was 17,439 in FY 2012 and is estimated to be 18,700 in FY 2014.</p>
<p>The proposed budget also includes $63 million for <strong>Integrated NSF Support Promoting Interdisciplinary Research and Education</strong><strong> (</strong>INSPIRE), more than triple the $20.35 million enacted in FY 2012. The request includes $222.79 million for the Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES) program, a 65 percent increase over FY 2012. The FY 2014 budget request for the National Ecological Observatory Network is $98.2 million, an increase from $60.3 million enacted in FY 2012.</p>
<p><strong>NOAA</strong></p>
<p>For FY 2014, NOAA would receive $5.4 billion, an 8 percent increase over FY 2012. A large portion of that funding is directed towards the agency’s satellites. NOAA R&amp;D programs would receive $722 million, a 28 percent increase over FY 2012. The growth of funding for climate and weather satellites has drawn bipartisan concern from members of the House and Senate. The agency is currently working toward the development of the next-generation Joint Polar Satellite System set to launch in 2017.</p>
<p>Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), who also  chairs the Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Subcommittee, stated that she intends to take several actions to address the growth of spending on NOAA satellites, including hosting a roundtable and possibly commissioning an independent review. Chairwoman Mikulski contends that increased funding for the satellites could eventually crowd out investment for other priorities.</p>
<p><strong>DOE</strong></p>
<p>DOE R&amp;D would receive $12.7 billion for FY 2014, an 18 percent increase over FY 2012. For DOE’s Office of Science, the White House requests $5 billion, a 2.4 percent increase over FY 2012. For the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program, the request includes $379 million, a 37.8 percent increase over FY 2012.</p>
<p>The budget proposal also includes $2.8 billion for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. This funding includes a 75 percent increase for development of advanced vehicles, a 42 percent increase for advanced biofuels and biofuel refineries and a 29 percent increase in clean and renewable energy projects.</p>
<p><strong>USDA</strong></p>
<p>USDA’s Agricultural Research Service discretionary spending would be funded at $1.3 billion under the president’s request, an increase from $1.095 billion in FY 2012. Within this amount $219 million is requested for environmental stewardship programs, an increase of $189 million enacted in FY 2012. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture would receive $1.293 billion in discretionary spending, an increase from $1.2 billion in FY 2012.</p>
<p>The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service would receive $801 million in discretionary spending, down from $839 million in FY 2012. There has been concern from Members of Congress regarding this proposed reduction. During a recent budget hearing, Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME) specifically cited the $27 million reduction for APHIS’s efforts to mitigate pests of specialty crops and forests , asserting a reduction would hinders efforts to manage invasive species like the Emerald Ash Borer.</p>
<p>The US Forest Service would receive $4.858 billion in discretionary spending for FY 2014, a decrease from $4.846 billion enacted in FY 2012. The Natural Resources Conservation Service would receive $813 million in discretionary spending, a decrease from $1.067 billion in FY 2012.</p>
<p>Additional information on the White House FY 2014 budget request is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview">http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview</a></p>
<p>Information specific to the White House’s scientific research budget proposals is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/rdbudgets">http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/rdbudgets</a></p>
<p>Information specific to the White House’s proposal for STEM programs is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/2014_R&amp;Dbudget_STEM.pdf">http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/2014_R&amp;Dbudget_STEM.pdf</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-2178">BUDGET: PRESIDENT’S PROPOSAL INCLUDES FUNDING BOOST FOR INTERIOR PROGRAMS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-2178" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>Under the White House’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2014, the US Department of Interior would receive $11.7 billion in discretionary spending, a four percent increase over FY 2012. Research and development at DOI would be funded at $960 million in FY 2014, an 18 percent increase over FY 2012.</p>
<p>The budget proposal would fund the US Geological Survey at $1.2 billion in FY 2014, an increase of $98.8 million over the enacted level in FY 2012. This would include $71.7 million for agency climate science programs and $18.6 million to fund research on  environmental consequences of hydraulic fracturing. Other research initiatives include a $1.5 million increase in funding White-nose Syndrome research, and a $5.4 million increase in invasive species research.</p>
<p>The FY 2014 USGS budget also includes $180.8 million understand ecosystem functions to better manage natural resources and address hazards that affect the natural environment (a $22.5 million increase over FY 2012). For climate change and land use programs, the budget request would provide $156 million, a $14.6 million increase over FY 2012.</p>
<p>Additionally, under the president’s budget request, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) would be funded at $900 million annually in mandatory spending funds. Traditionally, the program has relied on annual appropriations funding and royalties from offshore oil and gas production to fund its land management and conservation efforts. Mandatory annual LWCF spending would help provide stable funding for natural resource managers. The proposal is likely to be met with opposition from key House Republicans, including House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Chairman Rob Bishop (UT).</p>
<p>Additional funding for bureaus and programs under Interior’s jurisdiction include:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>America’s Great Outdoors:</strong> $5.3 billion, a $179.8 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
<li><strong>Bureau of Indian Affairs:</strong> $2.6 billion, a $31.3 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
<li><strong>Bureau of Land Management:</strong> $1.2 billion, a $32.6 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
<li><strong>Bureau of Ocean Energy Management:</strong> <strong> </strong>$169.4 million, a $71.5 million increase over FY 2012. </li>
<li><strong>Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement:</strong> $222.1 million, a $24.8 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
<li><strong>US Fish and Wildlife Service:</strong> $1.6 billion, a $76.4 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
<li><strong>National Park Service:</strong> $2.6 billion, a $56.6 million increase over FY 2012.</li>
</ul>
<p>The funding increases for Interior programs are paid for partly through increased fees on inspections for oil and gas drilling facilities, onshore oil and gas permits, surface mining and reclamation permits and administrative grazing. The proposed fee increases have already garnered opposition from House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) who maintains they will stifle energy production and consequently lower federal revenue.</p>
<p>Additional information on DOI’s budget is available here:<strong> </strong><br /> <a href="http://www.doi.gov/budget/appropriations/2014/highlights/index.cfm">http://www.doi.gov/budget/appropriations/2014/highlights/index.cfm</a><strong> </strong></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-4297">BUDGET: EPA FACES MORE FUNDING CUTS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-4297" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>The White House’s proposed budget would fund the Environmental Protection Agency at $8.2 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014, a 3.5 percent ($296 million) cut from FY 2012.</p>
<p>This marks the fourth straight year the administration has proposed to lower overall funding for the agency. The administration’s budget would eliminate $54 million in funding for what it refers to as “outdated, underperforming, or duplicative EPA programs.”</p>
<p>Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Funds would receive $1.9 billion in FY 2014, a decrease of $472 million over FY 2012. The funds are geared toward water quality protection projects that treat wastewater and preserve groundwater and other potable water resources for communities across the United States. The administration states that it intends to target state revolving fund assistance towards smaller and underserved communities.</p>
<p>EPA’s research program would be funded at $554.1 million in FY 2014, a $13.4 million reduction from FY 2014. Specific agency research initiatives would see funding increases and decreases within this overall reduction. STAR Graduate Research Opportunity Fellowships would be reduced by $16.4 million, drinking water research would be reduced by $2.3 million and research on beaches would be reduced by $1.1 million. Hazardous chemical disposal research would be increased by $4.1 million, climate change research would be increased by $3.2 million, green infrastructure research would be increased by $1.8 million and biofuel production research would be increased by $1.3 million.</p>
<p>Another EPA initiative that would receive a funding increase is the agency’s  climate protection program. The program would receive $106.2 million in the president’s FY 2014 budget, an increase of $6.8 million over FY 2012. This would include a $2.4 million increase to the agency’s ENERGY STAR program and a $2.4 million increase for the greenhouse gas reporting program.</p>
<p>Programs that focus on several key US water bodies would also see funding increases under the president’s budget. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative would receive $300 million in FY 2014, a $500,000 increase over FY 2012. EPA’s Chesapeake Bay program would receive $73 million, a $15.7 million increase over FY 2012. Wetlands programs would receive $27.7 million, an increase of $6.5 million over FY 2012.</p>
<p>Additional information on EPA’s budget is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2014">http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/fy2014</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-625">HOUSE: SCIENCE COMMITTEE REVIEWS WHITE HOUSE BUDGET REQUEST</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-625" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>This week, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee held hearings to review the White House’s scientific research priorities in its proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2014.</p>
<p>During the morning of April 17, the committee heard from White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren on the administration’s proposed research initiatives, including one to consolidate and reorganize federal agency Science, Technology, Engineering  and Mathematics (STEM) education programs so that they are primarily implemented under the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation (NSF). That afternoon, the Research Subcommittee met with NSF Acting Director Cora Marrett and National Science Board Chairman Dan Arvizu to discuss NSF’s FY 2014 budget request.</p>
<p> “As this Committee has long emphasized, the best approach to supporting across-the-board innovation and long-term economic growth is to invest in a broad and balanced research portfolio – one that will produce not just planned-for and predictable benefits to the Nation, but also the entirely unexpected windfalls for society and the world,” stated Director Holdren.</p>
<p>Among committee leadership, there was bipartisan support for science and the general mission of NSF. Majority committee leaders expressed qualified support for the agency. “The NSF has great potential to help American science flourish and thus contribute to our economy and the well-being of our country,” asserted Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX). “Our focus should be on how the federal government, including the NSF, can maximize the returns from taxpayer-funded research,” he continued.</p>
<p>“I strongly support NSF funding in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, engineering, cyber security, and STEM education,” stated Research Subcommittee Chairman Larry Bucshon (R-IN). “Although the scientific community is not facing an ideal fiscal environment, I still believe that America’s best and brightest scientists will continue to persevere and produce the innovations and discoveries of tomorrow. We should support the hard-working scientist who stays up all night to repeat her experiments and doggedly pursues her ideas, because she believes she is onto a great discovery and will answer the big questions in her field.”</p>
<p>However, committee Republicans took issue with certain initiatives, such as increased funding for climate research through the administration’s Global Change Research Program and investments in alternative energy research. There was also a general sentiment among Republican committee members that there is a need to weed out studies which appear frivolous at first glance. In his opening statement for the afternoon hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Buchson inquired, “Do we really need a study entitled ‘The International Criminal Court and the Pursuit of Justice’?”</p>
<p>Research Subcommittee Ranking Member Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) acknowledged the need to address the nation’s burgeoning debt, but hoped that policymakers account for the fact that prioritizing science funding has multifaceted payoffs for society. “Sometimes priority-setting means increasing investments in areas that deliver real returns for taxpayers by improving our quality of life, protecting our population from natural and man-made threats, and ensuring our economic competitiveness,” stated Lipinski.   “Therefore, I am pleased that the administration’s FY14 budget request continues to emphasize science, innovation, and STEM education generally, and the National Science Foundation in particular.”</p>
<p>To view the OSTP hearing, click here:<br /> <a href="http://science.house.gov/hearing/full-committee-hearing-review-president%E2%80%99s-fy-2014-budget-request-science-agencies">http://science.house.gov/hearing/full-committee-hearing-review-president%E2%80%99s-fy-2014-budget-request-science-agencies</a></p>
<p>To view the NSF hearing, click here:<br /> <a href="http://science.house.gov/hearing/research-subcommittee-hearing-overview-national-science-foundation-budget-fiscal-year-2014">http://science.house.gov/hearing/research-subcommittee-hearing-overview-national-science-foundation-budget-fiscal-year-2014</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-2292">WHITE HOUSE: JEWELL CONFIRMED AS INTERIOR SECRETARY</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-2292" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 12, Sally Jewell was sworn in as the 51st Secretary of the Department of Interior. Jewell will be responsible for 70,000 employees and a wide range of initiatives that include federally protected lands, fish and wildlife preservation, energy development and various conservation initiatives.</p>
<p>The Senate confirmed Jewell April 10 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 87-11. All Democrats and Independents supported the nominee. Republicans who voted against her included John Barrasso (WY), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Tom Coburn (OK), Mike Enzi (WY), Deb Fischer (NE), Mike Johanns (NE), Mike Lee (UT), Mitch McConnell (KY), Marco Rubio (FL), Tim Scott (SC) and David Vitter (LA). Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) had temporary placed a hold on the nominee out of concern over whether Interior would support Idaho’s sage grouse management plan. Sen. Risch removed the hold when outgoing Interior Secretary Salazar sent a letter to the state government, clarifying the agency’s support for the plan.</p>
<p>Secretary Jewell commented on her new role in a DOI press statement: “Our public lands are huge economic engines for the nation,” she said. “From energy development to tourism and outdoor recreation, our lands and waters power our economy and create jobs. I look forward to working with you all to ensure that we are managing our public lands wisely and sustainably so that their multiple uses are available for the generations to come.”</p>
<p>Secretary Jewell was sworn in at the US Supreme Court. Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor administered the oath of office. Jewell and O'Connor worked together on the National Parks Second Century Commission, an independent commission tasked with developing a 21st Century agenda for the National Park Service.</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-9347">WHITE HOUSE: ADMINISTRATION RELEASES FINAL OCEANS PLAN</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-9347" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 16, the Obama administration released its plan for implementing its National Oceans Policy initiative. The plan outlines a strategy to improve coordination between federal agencies in the management of ocean and coastal resources as well as improve dissemination of scientific information for the betterment of industry and communities.</p>
<p>The goals of the plan include improving forecasting of ocean conditions to protect public safety, improving severe storm and sea level data sharing, improving prioritization in regional marine planning, habitat restoration and improving capability to predict various impacts of climate change. The plan also includes a goal to develop regional marine plans by 2017.</p>
<p>The plan has already been met with opposition on Capitol Hill. “What is certain is that this policy represents a significant step towards the mandatory zoning of our oceans and is a backdoor attempt to control the way inland, coastal and ocean activities are managed,” asserted House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) in a press statement.  “If implemented, it will inflict red tape and economic damage both onshore and offshore across a wide-range of activities including agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, mining, oil and natural gas, and renewable energy.”</p>
<p>Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) praised the effort, noting its bipartisan origins. “I’m proud to have supported the Oceans Act in 2000 that led to sweeping bipartisan recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy,” he stated. “The administration’s thoughtfully revised implementation plan marks a new and practical step in over a decade of federal ocean policy efforts and I look forward to working together with the administration to move the implementation plan forward.”</p>
<p>For additional information on the plan, click here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/04/16/obama-administration-releases-plan-promote-ocean-economy-and-resilience">http://www.whitehouse.gov//blog/2013/04/16/obama-administration-releases-plan-promote-ocean-economy-and-resilience</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-4758">POLICY ENGAGEMENT: BIOLOGISTS ADVOCATE FOR FEDERAL SCIENCE PROGRAMS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-4758" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 11, 2013, biologists from across the US fanned out across Capitol Hill, visiting over 55 congressional offices to talk about how federal investment in science research yields benefits to society.  Organized each year by the Ecological Society of America (ESA) and the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS), co-chairs of the Biological Ecological Sciences Coalition (BESC), this springtime event helps raise awareness among policymakers about federal science programs, from NSF to NOAA to USDA. ESA’s President Scott Collins and this year’s four ESA Graduate Student Policy Award recipients, Matthew Berg, Lindsay Deel, Caitlin McDonough MacKenzie and Carlos Silva were among the 30 participants.</p>
<p>ESA President Scott Collins, together with AIBS President Joe Travis, presented the BESC Congressional Leadership Award to 2013 recipients Reps. Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) and David Reichert (R-WA). Both Members of Congress have been steadfast supporters of key science legislation such as the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-358) as well as various legislative efforts to maintain science’s role in informing biological policy decisions.</p>
<p>Participants in the BESC Hill visits came prepared with personal stories about how federal funding aids their research, how their work helps them advance their professional development and benefits the communities in which they reside. While firm commitments to support science funding varied office to office, the graduate students and other participants mostly received welcome receptions from Congressional staff and elected officials and were able to use their local commonalities to relate with the policymakers.</p>
<p>The day before the Hill visits, the students met informally with several federal agency scientists to learn more about their role and mission.   Federal entities represented at the briefing included the United States Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US Botanical Garden and the National Science Foundation. The federal ecologists also gave tips on how to pursue careers in the federal government. That afternoon the scientists were briefed from representatives of ESA and AIBS on the federal budget process and protocols regarding meeting with congressional offices on Capitol Hill.</p>
<p>For more on the congressional visits, click here:<br /> <a href="http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/scientist-citizens-biologists-on-capitol-hill/">http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/scientist-citizens-biologists-on-capitol-hill/</a></p>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<p><strong>Sources:</strong>AAAS, ClimateWire, Department of Interior, Energy and Environment Daily, E&amp;E News PM, Environmental Protection Agency, Greenwire, the Hill, House Natural Resources Committee, House Science, Space and Technology Committee, Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, the Washington Post, the White House</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7582</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>asd</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7284</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7284#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:17:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7284</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7284</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This month in ecology: oysters, big rivers, biofuels</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7314</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7314#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 21:10:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Liza Lester</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ecological dimensions of biofuels: a report on the state of the science. Looking to tributaries for conservation gains: a case study in large river fish of the Mississippi Basin. Oyster reefs buffer acidic inputs to Chesapeake Bay. <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7314">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2 style="text-align: left;" align="center"><strong>April highlights from Ecological Society of America journals</strong></h2>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Ecological dimensions of biofuels: state of the science</strong></p>
<div id="attachment_7316" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Pracheil-Frontiers-fig3.gif"><img class="size-medium wp-image-7316 " alt="Mississippi Basin - Pracheil et al. fig. 3" src="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Pracheil-Frontiers-fig3-300x198.gif" width="300" height="198" /></a>
<p class="wp-caption-text"><b>Mississippi River Basin</b>. Green tributaries have sufficient flow for large-river specialist fishes, and long stretches unobstructed by obstacles of civilization. Blue tributaries fall below a critical flow threshold. Yellow tributaries discharge enough water, but are blocked by dams. From Figure 3 of Pracheil et al. Contact ESA for reuse.</p>
</div>
<p>Are biofuels a renewable, environmentally friendly energy source? The Ecological Society of America reviews bioethanol and biodiesel in conventional production as well as feedstocks still in development. Biofuels in commercial scale production are made from the sugars and oils of food crops, and share the ecological impacts of high intensity agriculture. Corn, the primary biofuel source in the United States, demands a lot of fuel to produce fuel. It needs nitrogen fertilizer, fixed using energy-intensive industrial processes. Much of that nitrogen ends up in waterways, where it causes problems for fish and fisheries. In some of the drier western states, farmers are drawing down groundwater resources to irrigate corn for biofuel. Cornfields are usually tilled, which releases greenhouse gasses stored in soil, loses topsoil to erosion, and loses water to evaporation.</p>
<p>Much hope has been placed in the “cellulosic” biofuels for their superior environmental benefits. Made from grasses, woody crops like poplar, crop silage and other plant wastes, cellulosic ethanol does not compete with the food supply for feedstocks, which consume fewer resources, and are potentially more compatible with wildlife. Mixes of perennial native grasses, for example, offer better habitat than monocultures and don’t need intensive fertilizer, pesticide, and water inputs. But cellulosic ethanol contributes only 0.5% of current biofuel production, and still faces major implementation challenges to become commercially viable. Algal biofuels remain in development. The authors conclude the report with recommendations to get the most out of biofuels going forward, improving ecosystem services, reducing greenhouse gases, and providing new income for rural communities.</p>
<p>Conclusions:</p>
<ul>
<li><b>Net greenhouse gas emissions</b>: vary greatly by feedstock. Conversion of fallow, range, or wild lands to biofuel production releases greenhouse gases stored in soil. Tilling existing croplands also contributes greenhouse gasses. High intensity agriculture uses fuel for irrigating, fertilizing, sowing, harvesting, and transporting biofuel crops.</li>
<li><b>Water</b>: biofuel processing plants do not use much water, but some of the biofuel crops do. Perennial crops such as switchgrass and mixed prairie grasses do not demand the irrigation, nitrogen fertilizer and yearly soil tilling typical of high intensity corn production.</li>
<li><b>Land use and wildlife diversity</b>: biofuel crops compete with food crops. Demand for biofuels drives conversion of prime agricultural land, expansion into marginal agricultural lands and reopening of reserves. To meet current US energy demand through biofuels alone would require conversion of 41% of US land to corn, 56% to switchgrass, or 66% to rapeseed, but potentially only 3-13% to algae. Drought tolerance, fast growth and pest resistance, traits that make plants fine candidates for biofuel feedstocks, also make them fine candidates for becoming invasive. Some, such as the old world grass miscanthus, are already invasive in North America.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?page_id=1638">Ecological Dimensions of Biofuels</a>. Cifford S. Duke, Richard Pouyat, Philip Robertson, and William J. Parton. <i>Issues in Ecology</i> No. 17, Spring 2013.</p>
<ul>
<li>The review is freely available and follows a series of reports on <a href="http://www.esa.org/biofuelsreports/">biofuels and sustainability</a> from 2010.</li>
<li>Contact: Cliff Duke, Ecological Society of America, <a href="mailto:csduke@esa.org">csduke@esa.org</a>, 202-833-8773 x202</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p><strong>Looking to large tributaries for conservation gain </strong></p>
<p>On big rivers like the Mississippi, the infrastructure of modern civilization – dams, locks, dikes, power plants, cities – has made life easier for people, but harder for fish and other denizens of the river. Restoration is a tricky problem. Economic reliance on these big rivers makes fundamental reversals like dam removals unlikely. Conservation laws and projects tend to be local, on the city or state level, and the river crosses many borders, complicating the restoration picture.</p>
<p>Brenda Pracheil and colleagues at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, say tributaries have under-appreciated potential to compensate for habitat loss on the major concourses of the Mississippi Basin. The Platte, for example, has 577 kilometers of free-flowing, relatively intact habitat. It feeds into the heavily altered Missouri, a large mainstem river in the Mississippi Basin, and harbors many of the same fishes.</p>
<p>Pracheil found a correspondence between the volume rate of water flow and the presence of 68 large-river fishes, including paddlefish, blue catfish, and silver chub, most of which are threatened. A steep threshold separates tributaries with large-river fish from those without; 166 cubic meters per second is big enough for roughly 80% of large river specialist species. Below the threshold, almost none of these species are around. Pracheil says this threshold could be used to target tributaries for conservation attention. Existing regulatory structures don’t allow improvements on tributaries to count toward mainstem restoration mandates. The UW scientists argue that more flexibility could, in some cases, provide a better return on investment of conservation dollars, complementing efforts on the larger rivers downstream.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/120179">Enhancing conservation of large-river biodiversity by accounting for tributaries</a> (2013) Brenda M Pracheil, Peter B McIntyre, and John D Lyons. <i>Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment</i> 11(3): 124-128</p>
<ul>
<li>Learn more on the University of Wisconsin <a href="http://limnology.wisc.edu/blog/thinking-big-may-not-be-best-approach-to-saving-large-river-fish/">Center for Limnology blog</a>.</li>
<li>Contact: Brenda Pracheil, University of Wisconsin, Madison. <a href="mailto:pracheil@wisc.edu">pracheil@wisc.edu</a><span style="text-decoration: underline;">,</span> desk: 608-262-3088 cell: 402.613.0315</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p><strong>Oyster reefs buffer acidic inputs to Chesapeake Bay</strong></p>
<p>When European settlers arrived on Chesapeake Bay, it was encrusted with a treasure trove of oysters and other bivalves. The living oyster reef and its stockpile of empty shells was voluminous enough to influence the water chemistry of the bay, says marine ecologist George Waldbusser and colleagues. Based on harvest records from the 17<sup>th</sup> century, he estimates that the oyster-impoverished bay of 2013 is running “at least 100 million bushels behind where it was before we started harvesting, in terms of shell budget.”</p>
<p>Oysters eat microscopic phytoplankton, including algae, which the bay generally has overabundance of thanks to excess fertilizer runoff. Oysters are not just a tasty economic resource – they make Chesapeake Bay cleaner. The missing shells are a direct loss to oyster restoration, because oyster larvae are choosy about where they glue themselves down and start building their shells. They prefer other oyster shells as anchorage.</p>
<p>But in addition to providing habitat for future generations, oyster reefs appear to alter their local water chemistry. Like slow dissolving Tums in the belly of the estuary, disintegrating oyster shells are slow release capsules of calcium carbonate, an alkaline salt and a buffer against acidity. Seawater mixing in on the tide has a relatively high capacity to absorb acid inputs without a large change in pH. Fresh water flowing out to sea generally has a low buffering capacity, and is sensitive to acid sources, whether from human made point sources like coal plants or natural processes like the oysters’ own respiration. Coastal estuaries, where the waters meet, are also where oysters tend to cluster.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.esajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1890/12-1179.1">Ecosystem effects of shell aggregations and cycling in coastal waters: An example of Chesapeake Bay oyster reefs</a>. (2013) George G. Waldbusser, Eric N. Powell, and Roger Mann. Ecology 94(4): 895-903 (Currently in authors’ preprint; contact Liza Lester for a type-set copy).</p>
<ul>
<li>Contact: George Waldbusser, Oregon State University, <a href="mailto:waldbuss@coas.oregonstate.edu">waldbuss@coas.oregonstate.edu</a>, 541-737-8964</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>Journalists and public information officers can gain access to full texts of all ESA publications by contacting the public affairs office. Email Liza Lester, <a href="mailto:llester@esa.org">llester@esa.org</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><i>The Ecological Society of America is the world’s largest community of professional ecologists and a trusted source of ecological knowledge. ESA is committed to advancing the understanding of life on Earth. The 10,000 member Society publishes five journals, convenes an annual scientific conference, and broadly shares ecological information through policy and media outreach and education initiatives. Visit the ESA website at </i><a href="http://www.esa.org/"><i>http://www.esa.org</i></a><i>.</i></p>
<p><b><i>To subscribe to ESA press releases, contact Liza Lester at </i></b><a href="mailto:llester@esa.org"><i>llester</i><b><i>@esa.org</i></b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7314</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 5, 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7584</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7584#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 14:04:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sources:AAAS, ClimateWire, Energy and Environment Daily, E&#38;E News PM, Environmental Protection Agency, Greenwire, the Hill, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, New York Times, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geological Survey, the Washington Post]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2 class="thethe-toggle-group-title">In This Issue</h2>
<div id="thethe-toggle-3" class="thethe-toggle-group">
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-4631">BUDGET: SEQUESTRATION IMPLEMENTATION HAS AGENCIES PLANNING FURLOUGHS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-4631" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>With policymakers seemingly adapting to the implementation of the sequester budget cuts as a fact of life for the time being, many federal agencies are now faced with furloughs to compensate for the funding cuts they must implement. The cuts remain in effect until such time as Congress comes up with a deal to reach $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years, an unlikelihood in the immediate future at least.</p>
<p>On April 1st, the White House announced that 480 of the 500 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) employees have been notified that they will be furloughed for 10 days for the remainder of the current Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. For each pay period beginning April 21 and through Sept. 7, OMB employees will have to take one unpaid furlough day. In addition, less money is being spent on supply and equipment purchases and many agencies have instituted work-related travel restrictions.</p>
<p>The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to initiate four-day weekends over Independence Day and Labor Day and plans on a skeleton crew on May 24, the Friday before Memorial Day weekend. Its employees are expected to take as much as 13 furlough days through FY 2013.</p>
<p>In an effort to minimize staff furloughs, the United States Geological Survey has pulled back on a number of its popular educational initiatives. This summer, it will no longer hire 1800 college students it utilizes to help monitor flood forecasting data and earthquake seismic activity. The agency is also ending its tours for school groups and the two-week science summer camps for children ages 8-12 that it has hosted annually since 1996.</p>
<p>Many agencies are instituting hiring freezes to save money. Among them is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is already wrestling with staff shortages. Emergency managers within the agency have expressed concern that the unfilled positions will eventually lead to decreased capacity to issue warnings and weather forecasting. Such forecasting is also necessary in helping water managers monitor stream flow and area water supplies.</p>
<p>The next opportunity Congress has to reach a deal on the sequester will be when the temporary suspension of the debt ceiling expires. Under current law, the debt ceiling suspension will expire on May 19. However, the US Department of Treasury has indicated that the implementation of extraordinary measures may extend a government default on debt until late July or early August. The White House plans to introduce its budget proposal for FY 2014 on April 10 to nullify sequester cuts. The proposal is expected to include $1.8 trillion in savings through a mix of entitlement reforms and revenue increases.</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-359">EPA: OVER HALF US RIVERS, STREAMS IN POOR CONDITION</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-359" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On March 26, the Environmental Protection Agency released a report that finds that 55 percent of US rivers and streams are in poor condition for aquatic life.</p>
<p>Among its findings:  27 percent of rivers and streams have high levels of nitrogen and 40 percent of these water bodies have high levels of phosphorous. Excessive amounts of these chemicals causes nutrient pollution that increases oxygen-depleting algae that make waterways uninhabitable for aquatic wildlife.</p>
<p>The study also found that high concentrations of mercury and bacteria have adversely affected waterways. Nine percent of rivers and streams had high concentrations of bacteria that deemed them potentially unsafe for swimming and other forms of recreation. Over 13,000 miles of waterways contain fish with mercury levels that may make them unsafe for human consumption, according to the report.</p>
<p>The survey noted that human disturbance has attributed to approximately 24 percent of rivers and streams not having a healthy amount of vegetative cover. Such vegetation helps prevent erosion, maintain water temperature and remove pollution carried by rainwater. Loss of this vegetative cover also increases flooding risks for communities living near these rivers and streams. </p>
<p>For additional information on the report, click here:<br /> <a href="http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/monitoring/aquaticsurvey_index.cfm">http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/monitoring/aquaticsurvey_index.cfm</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-3093">FWS: AGENCIES PUBLISH WILDLIFE CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTION STRATEGY</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-3093" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On March 26, key wildlife agencies within the Obama administration announced the publication of a national strategy that seeks to buffer wildlife from impacts of climate change.</p>
<p>The “National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaption Strategy,”   notes the value of plants and wildlife and seeks to provide information about threats and potential courses of action to mitigate those threats. The goals of the strategy include habitat conservation, increasing knowledge of climate impacts on wildlife as well as raising awareness and motivating actions that protect animals and plants.</p>
<p>The strategy was developed through collaboration between the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the New York Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources. An intergovernmental steering committee comprising 15 federal agencies, five state wildlife agencies, two inter-tribal commissions along with the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies also contributed to the strategy.</p>
<p>To view the full strategy, click here: <br /> <a href="http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/">http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-1401">NASA: CLIMATE SCIENTIST HANSEN TO DEPART GOVERNMENT</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-1401" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate scientist James Hansen is retiring from the federal government after 46 years of service to the agency’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS).</p>
<p>Hansen, 72, is the GISS’s longest serving director, having served in the position since 1981. During his tenure, Hansen frequently reported on the threat of climate change. He was among the first scientists to identify the ways in which rising temperatures are affecting the planet and the impacts climate change has on human society. He testified before Congress in 1988 on the threats posed by climate change. His retirement will allow him to further his climate change advocacy without the restrictions placed upon federal government employees.</p>
<p>Hansen has engaged in activism in his off-time frequently over the years, appearing at climate protests and even allowing himself to be arrested or cited on six occasions. Early this year, he was arrested for protesting against the Keystone XL pipeline. He was first arrested in 2009, joining university students in a coal protest. His critics often label him as an “alarmist,” though even allied colleagues state some of his views can lean on the extreme side. He has once asserted that climate change could eventually lead to Earth having an uninhabitable atmosphere similar to Venus.</p>
<p>Hansen received his Masters’ in Astronomy and his Ph.D. in Physics from Iowa University. Distinguished honors include the American Meteorological Society’s Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal (2009), American Geophysical Union’s Roger Revelle Medal (2001) and the Heinz Award for the Environment (1995). He was also honored as one of the “World’s Most Influential People” by Time Magazine (2006).</p>
<p>In retirement, Hansen plans to take a more active role in lawsuits challenging federal and state governments over their failure to reduce green house gas emissions. The New York Times reports that he intends to start working out of his farm in Pennsylvania, but may also accept an academic appointment or start an institute.</p>
<p>View the full NASA release here:<br /> <a href="http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130402/">http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130402/</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-6440">PUBLICATIONS: MCNUTT NAMED EDITOR IN CHIEF OF SCIENCE MAGAZINE</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-6440" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On April 2, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) announced that former United States Geological Survey (USGS) Director Marcia McNutt has been named as the next editor in chief of its leading journal <em>Science</em> and its associated publications.</p>
<p>The first woman to head the journal, McNutt is among several scientists who departed their positions as agency heads at the start of the Obama administration’s second term. She served at the helm of the USGS from October 2009 until earlier this year. Prior to working at the agency, she was CEO of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California (1997-2009). McNutt received her Ph.D. in earth sciences from Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California.</p>
<p>Founded in 1880 by journalist John Michels and Thomas Edison, <em>Science</em> includes peer reviewed studies and news articles covering topics of importance to the scientific community. <br /> McNutt’s tenure with the journal begins on June 1, 2013. She succeeds Bruce Alberts, who has served since 2009 and had planned to step down at the end of his five year term.</p>
<p>For more information, see the AAAS press release:<br /> <a href="http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2013/0402_mcnutt.shtml">http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2013/0402_mcnutt.shtml</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-8000">PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: NMFS TO REVIEW SPERM WHALE STATUS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-8000" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>The National Marine Fisheries Service has published a notice requesting input on whether sperm whales inhabiting the Gulf of Mexico warrant a “distinct population segment” listing under the Endangered Species Act.</p>
<p>The notice comes after the environmental group WildEarth Guardians petitioned to recognize the Gulf population of sperm whales (numbering roughly 1300) as a discrete group as the whales spend most of their lives in the area rather the migrating, which is unique among the species. While the general population of sperm whales are already listed as endangered, the Gulf sperm whales face unique threats posed by oil and gas exploration and development and shipping traffic in the region.</p>
<p>According to WildEarth Guardians, the Gulf sperm whales are physically smaller and gather in smaller groups than their outside counterparts, which help them forage in shallower water than larger sperm whales. They also note that the Gulf whales have developed a unique “dialect” that is “culturally learned” in a manner similar to human language. These unique adaptations would make it unlikely that other sperm whales would or could colonize the area, the organization asserts.</p>
<p>Public comments will be accepted through <span style="text-decoration: underline;">May 28, 2013.</span> For additional information on how to submit comments, click here: <a href="http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2013-07355_PI.pdf">http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2013-07355_PI.pdf</a></p>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<p><strong>Sources:</strong>AAAS, ClimateWire, Energy and Environment Daily, E&amp;E News PM, Environmental Protection Agency, Greenwire, the Hill, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, New York Times, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geological Survey, the Washington Post</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7584</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Agriculture, Big Data, and Traditional Knowledge headline the Ecological Society of America’s 2013 Annual Meeting in Minneapolis, Minn.</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7323</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7323#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 21:24:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Liza Lester</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ESA2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[press release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7323</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[August 4 &#8211; 9 Sustainable Pathways: Learning From the Past and Shaping the Future &#160; The Ecological Society of America’s 98th annual meeting “Sustainable Pathways: Learning From the Past and Shaping the Future” will meet in in Minneapolis, Minn., from &#8230; <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7323">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2 style="text-align: left;" align="center">August 4 &#8211; 9</h2>
<h2 style="text-align: left;" align="center"><i></i>Sustainable Pathways: Learning From the Past and Shaping the Future<a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ESA2013-Minneapolis-badge.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-7325 alignright" alt="ESA2013 Minneapolis badge" src="http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ESA2013-Minneapolis-badge.png" width="130" height="130" /></a></h2>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>The Ecological Society of America’s 98<sup>th</sup> annual meeting “Sustainable Pathways: Learning From the Past and Shaping the Future” will meet in in Minneapolis, Minn., from Sunday evening, August 4, to Friday morning, August 9, at the Minneapolis Convention Center. Early bird <a href="http://www.esa.org/minneapolis/rates.php">registration</a> opens the first week of April.</p>
<p>ESA invites press and institutional public information officers to attend for free (see credential policy below). To apply, please contact ESA Communications Officer Liza Lester directly at <a href="mailto:llester@esa.org">llester@esa.org</a>.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.esa.org/minneapolis/plenary.php">Plenary sessions</a> (open to the public</strong>):</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Jonathan Foley</strong> is a prominent voice on <a title="UMN Institute on the Environment" href="http://environment.umn.edu/about/ione_bios/jon_foley.html">land use, global food security, and sustainability</a>. He directs the Institute on the Environment (IonE) at the University of Minnesota, where he holds the McKnight Presidential Chair in the Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, and leads IonE&#8217;s <a href="http://environment.umn.edu/gli/">Global Landscapes Initiative</a>. <i>Opening keynote, Sunday, August 4, 5:00pm</i>.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><strong>Anthony Ives, Professor of Zoology</strong> at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, will look deep into a lake in a lively volcanic region of northern Iceland, nutrient-rich  Mývatn (Icelandic for lake of midges), to meditate on the confluence of theory and empiricism in ecology.<i> MacArthur lecture, Monday, August 5, 8:00 am</i>.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><strong>Tony Hey, Vice President of Microsoft Research</strong> says science has already entered the era of Big Data. Future researchers will need digital tools, technology, and talent to integrate big data troves into the research machine. Hey, who has fingers in popular science communication as well as commercial computing, will present challenges and opportunities for management, visualization, and manipulation of data.<i> Recent advances lecture, Wednesday, August 7, 12:15 pm</i></li>
</ul>
<p>A <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/start.html">preliminary program</a> is online. Other highlights:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Symposia </strong>dig into the ecology of <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session8834.html">agricultural ecosystems</a> and infectious <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session8809.html">disease</a>.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><strong>Ignite 5-minute presentations</strong> debut at ESA2013, with sessions on <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session9051.html">realizing resilient food systems</a>, and <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session9016.html">urban ecology</a>.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Field trips head out to the Fond du Lac Reservation, where traditional knowledge is combined with modern science to <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session8993.html">restore native wild rice and lake sturgeon</a>, and ESA’s SEEDs undergraduate diversity program will take students and interested conference attendees to “Dream of Wild Health” a 10-acre, organic farm in Hugo, Minnesota, which aims to recover <a href="http://eco.confex.com/eco/2013/webprogrampreliminary/Session9066.html">traditional Native American crop varietals</a> and traditional farming knowledge.</li>
</ul>
<p>Meeting <strong>abstracts are not embargoed</strong>. Reporters who would like help locating presenters and outside sources for in person or phone interviews should contact Liza Lester at llester@esa.org or 202-833-8773 x211.</p>
<p><strong>ESA Policy on Press Credentials</strong></p>
<p>We will waive registration for reporters with a recognized press card and for press officers. Registration is also waived for current members of the National Association of Science Writers, the Canadian Science Writers Association, the International Science Writers Association and the Society of Environmental Journalists.</p>
<p>We do not waive registration for editors of peer-reviewed journals, ad sales representatives, publishers, program officers or marketing professionals.</p>
<p><strong>Institutional Press Officers</strong></p>
<p>We will waive registration for press officers. If you cannot attend but would like to promote presenters from your institution, we are happy to distribute your press releases in the meeting Press Room.  Press officers may request copies of all abstracts related to their institution. For registration, more information, or help finding your scientists in our meeting program, please contact Liza Lester at llester@esa.org or 202-833-8773 x211.</p>
<p><strong>Newsroom Operation</strong></p>
<p>Members of the press are exempt from registration fees and may attend all meeting sessions (*field trip fee still apply). A staffed press room, including computers, a printer, telephones and an interview area, will be available. The newsroom will be open:</p>
<ul>
<li>Sunday, August 4: 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.</li>
<li>Monday, August 5 &#8211; Thursday, August 8: 7:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m.</li>
<li>Friday, August 9: 7:30 a.m.-Noon</li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<hr />
<p><i>The Ecological Society of America is the world’s largest community of professional ecologists and the trusted source of ecological knowledge.  ESA is committed to advancing the understanding of life on Earth.  The 10,000 member Society publishes five journals, convenes an annual scientific conference, and broadly shares ecological information through policy and media outreach and education initiatives. Visit the ESA website at </i><a href="http://www.esa.org/"><i>http://www.esa.org</i></a><i> or find experts in ecological science at </i><a href="http://www.esa.org/pao/rrt/"><i>http://www.esa.org/pao/rrt/</i></a><i>.</i></p>
<p><b><i>To subscribe to ESA press releases, contact Liza Lester at </i></b><a href="mailto:llester@esa.org"><i>llester<b>@esa.org</b></i></a><b><i>.</i></b></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7323</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>March 8, 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7598</link>
		<comments>http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7598#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 14:22:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Policy News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7598</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sources: ClimateWire, Department of State, Energy and Environment Daily, E&#38;E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, House Energy and Commerce Committee, POLITICO, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, USA Today, US Fish and Wildlife Service, &#8230; <a href="http://www.esa.org/esa/?p=7598">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2 class="thethe-toggle-group-title">In This Issue</h2>
<div id="thethe-toggle-4" class="thethe-toggle-group">
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-7089">BUDGET: AGENCIES IMPLEMENT SEQUESTRATION AS POLICYMAKERS WRESTLE WITH DEBT</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-7089" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>Congress’ failure to address budget sequestration by coming up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction has federal agencies trimming investment priorities and beginning (reportedly in some cases already implementing) employee furloughs as budget sequestration went into effect March 1.</p>
<p>As enacted by the Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25) and modified by the American Taxpayer Relief Act (P.L. 112-240), sequestration includes across-the-board cuts of 7.9 percent for defense discretionary spending programs and 5.3 percent to non-defense discretionary spending programs. It is estimated that for the current Fiscal Year of 2013, which began on Oct. 1, the non-defense discretionary cuts will actually total about nine percent while the defense cuts will total about 13 percent for the remainder of the year to compensate for the five months of spending that have already occurred for the current fiscal year.</p>
<p>For federal agencies, the 5.3 percent sequester for non defense amounts to the following monetary decreases: Environmental Protection Agency ($472 million), Department of Energy ($1.9 billion), Department of Interior ($883 million), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ($271 million) and the National Science Foundation ($361 million), according to a report from the White House Office of Management and Budget released March 1. The Interior cuts include the National Park Service ($153 million), the US Fish and Wildlife Service ($127 million), US Geological Survey ($54 million) and the Bureau of Land Management ($75 million). Department of Defense (DoD) research and development programs would decrease by 7.9 percent, roughly $6 billion. (A House-passed continuing resolution to fund the government would cut an additional $2.5 billion to DoD research and development).</p>
<p>In an effort to reduce partisan tensions over the budget, President Obama held several meal discussions with lawmakers this week at the White House. On March 6, the president met with Republican Sens. Kelly Ayotte (NH), Richard Burr (NC), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Dan Coats (IN), Tom Coburn (OK), Bob Corker (TN), Lindsey Graham (SC), John Hoeven (ND), Mike Johanns (NE), Ron Johnson (WI), John McCain (AZ) and Pat Toomey (PA). Two key Senate Republicans whose committees’ have jurisdiction over budget, entitlement and taxation issues, Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (AL) and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Orin Hatch (UT), did not attend the meetings. The following day, the president met with House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) and House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-MD).</p>
<p>During the meeting, President Obama said that lawmakers must reach agreement on a comprehensive bipartisan debt reduction plan by the end of July, which coincides with when the federal debt ceiling will need to be addressed. The White House has released a plan for addressing the sequester that would cut defense and non-defense discretionary spending equally by a total of $200 billion below pre-sequestration levels, cut healthcare costs by $600 billion and include $580 billion in revenue, largely through closing tax loopholes that benefit the wealthiest Americans. Chairman Ryan plans to release a debt reduction package in the near future.</p>
<p>The White House plan for addressing sequestration is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sequester">www.whitehouse.gov/sequester</a></p>
<p>To view the Ecological Society of America press release on sequestration, click here: <br /> <a href="http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/ecological-society-of-america-voices-concern-over-us-fiscal-situation/">http://www.esa.org/esablog/ecology-in-policy/ecological-society-of-america-voices-concern-over-us-fiscal-situation/</a></p>
<p>The OMB report on sequestration’s impacts is available here:<br /> <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf">http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fy13ombjcsequestrationreport.pdf</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-7222">APPROPRIATIONS: HOUSE PASSES SIX MONTH FEDERAL FUNDING EXTENSION BILL</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-7222" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>This week, the US House of Representatives passed a Continuing Resolution (CR) to fund the government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2013, which ends Sept. 30. The bill would prevent a government shutdown by extending federal funding beyond the deadline of the current CR, which ends March 27. The bill (H.R. 933) passed by a vote of 267-151. Fifty-three Democrats joined all but 14 Republicans in supporting the measure.</p>
<p>The bill does not include funding to nullify the overwhelming majority of sequestration cuts to federal agencies that went into effect March 1 as mandated in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25) in lieu of Congress failing to come up with a plan to reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion. According to existing law, sequestration includes across-the-board cuts of 7.9 percent for defense discretionary spending programs and 5.3 percent to non-defense discretionary spending programs.</p>
<p>For DoD, the House bill would shift $10.4 billion to the agency’s operations and maintenance account by cutting $3.6 billion in personnel funds, $2.5 billion in research and development funding and $4.2 billion in equipment procurement. The bill includes a 1.7 percent pay increase for the military, which is exempt from sequestration. For federal government workers, the existing pay-freeze is continued to offset spending increases elsewhere in the bill.</p>
<p>With the exception of the military pay increase, all other funding increases in the bill are allocated within the overall sequestration cuts set by the Budget Control Act. Total post-sequestration funding in the bill amounts to $984 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The bill provides $40 million for the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to fight wildfires. It also includes a provision to provide additional funding to maintain the launch schedule for new weather satellites, ensuring the continuation of data collection necessary for weather forecasting. In addition, the bill includes $2 billion in additional funding for diplomatic security in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2012 Libya terrorist attack.</p>
<p>The White House has not issued a formal statement in opposition to the bill. House Democratic leadership maintained they would not actively whip their members against the bill, proposed by House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY). House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-NY), however, expressed disappointment with the spending levels in the final bill.</p>
<p>"Congress' failure to replace sequestration with a balanced and responsible package of spending cuts and revenue increases before March 1st is inexcusable,” said Lowey in a press statement. “The discretionary spending cuts mandated by sequestration will result in job loss and furloughs, slowed economic growth, and diminishment of services and investments that are critical to middle-class families and those who are striving to reach the middle-class. I am hopeful that an agreement can be reached in the coming weeks to restore these irresponsible cuts while reining in long-term debt and deficits."</p>
<p>The Senate has indicated it will change the bill by adding funding from three other major appropriations bills. As passed by the House, the bill includes compromise language for two FY 2013 appropriations bills: the Department of Defense Appropriations Act and the Military, Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act. The Senate seeks to add FY 2013 funding for the Agriculture, Rural Development and Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Act, the Homeland Security Appropriations Act, and the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The latter bill provides funding for law enforcement and two key science agencies – the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Incorporating the language of actual bills gives federal agencies greater direction and specificity in how to distribute funding than a simple CR does.</p>
<p>The bill would also include minor provisions from other appropriations bills that shift funding from lower priority programs to higher priority programs, much the same way the House-passed bill does with DoD funding. Overall, the Senate-passed bill would seek to give the administration greater flexibility in how to distribute the sequestration cuts. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) worked with Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL) in drafting the bill and asserted it will be able to garner the necessary 60 votes to clear the Senate. The Senate plans to vote on the bill the week of March 11. Since Congress will be in recess the week the current CR expires, the House has until the end of the week of March 18 to either pass the Senate bill or work to reach an agreement on legislation to avert a government shutdown.</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-40">WHITE HOUSE: OBAMA ANNOUNCES NOMINATIONS FOR EPA, DOE</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-40" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>This week, President Obama announced his picks to head two key agencies. Gina McCarthy has been nominated to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Ernest Moniz to head the Department of Energy (DOE).</p>
<p>A native of Boston, McCarthy has been assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation since 2009. Her tenure at EPA has included the promotion of regulations to improve air quality and reduce toxic mercury pollution from power plant facilities.  Prior to her tenure at EPA, McCarthy was commissioner for the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection from 2004-2009. Her state level experience includes time as an environmental regulator in the administration of former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA).</p>
<p>Moniz is a nuclear physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) where he directs the MIT Energy Initiative. During the Clinton administration he served as the Under Secretary of Energy (1997-2001). Prior to that, he served in the administration as Associate Director for Science in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (1995-1997). Moniz headed MIT’s Department of Physics between 1991-1995 before joining the Clinton administration.</p>
<p>The two appointments have been met with praise from conservation groups. Alliance to Save Energy President Kateri Callahan praised Moniz as “a recognized, outspoken and effective energy efficiency advocate during his career in government and academia, which will allow him to thrive in his new DOE role.” Of McCarthy, Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke stated: “She's a good listener, a straight shooter and someone who has what it takes to build consensus and find solutions. We can count on her to protect our environment and our health. And she can count on our support as she works to get the job done on behalf of Americans everywhere."</p>
<p>As political tension remains between many Congressional Republicans and the White House over continued efforts by the administration to address climate change, both nominees – whose agencies will be at the forefront in implementing such efforts – can expect contentious confirmation hearings. The reactions from key Senators have not been immediately confrontational, however.</p>
<p>Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) stated: “I will withhold judgment until I've had a chance to speak to the nominees directly, but my main concern is that both agencies take immediate steps to restore balance to our nation’s energy and environmental policies. That balance has been missing for the past four years but must play a more prominent role going forward if we are to bolster our struggling economy.”</p>
<p>Senate Democratic leaders had more robust sentiments for the nominees. Regarding McCarthy, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) asserted: “The President could not have picked a more qualified person to lead EPA at this critical time. The combination of her experience, intelligence, energy, and unquestioned expertise will make Gina an effective EPA Administrator. She has a deep understanding that the health and safety of the American people depends on clean air and clean water.”</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-1412">SENATE: INTERIOR PICK GETS MIXED REVIEWS AT CONFIRMATION HEARING</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-1412" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>During the March 7, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, relations between committee members and Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell were largely cordial. However, several committee Republicans took the opportunity to relay strong concerns with the nominee and prospective actions of the agency she would head.</p>
<p>For Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Lisa Murkowki (R-AK), a continued sticking point is whether the Department of Interior will allow a land exchange that would establish a road corridor through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. Approval of the road would ease accessibility of King Cove residents to an all-weather airport in Cold Bay for weather evacuations. The US Fish and Wildlife Service has recommended rejecting the proposal. Murkowski has asserted that she may hold up Jewell’s nomination if the King Cove issue is not addressed to her satisfaction.</p>
<p>“The Fish and Wildlife Service’s preferred alternative would protect the heart of a pristine landscape that congress designated as wilderness and that serves as vital habitat for grizzly bear, caribou and salmon, shorebirds and waterfowl – including 98 percent of the world’s population of Pacific black brant [geese],” asserted Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in a press statement commenting on the proposal. “After extensive dialogue and exhaustive scientific evaluation, the agency has identified a preferred path forward that will ensure this extraordinary refuge and its wilderness are conserved and protected for future generations.”</p>
<p>Ranking Member Murkowski said that Interior should recommit itself to economic development through energy development. Jewell responded by elaborating on the economic benefits of land conservation. “Public lands are also huge economic engines. Through energy development, through grazing, logging, tourism and outdoor recreation, our lands and waters power our economy and create jobs. Balance is absolutely critical,” said Jewell. She contended that she embraces the Obama administration’s all of the above approach to energy investment that includes both fossil fuels and renewable energy sources.</p>
<p>Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) criticized Jewell over her position as board member for the National Parks Conservation Association, which he asserted has filed at least 59 lawsuits during her tenure blocking coal plants, uranium production, oil and gas. Jewell said that she played no role in deciding what lawsuits the group filed. She asserted that she would consult Interior’s ethics office before taking any action on issues involving the organization. </p>
<p>One Republican that may be warm to Jewell is Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), who seemed to insinuate that Jewell’s resume is more befitting of a Republican administration cabinet pick. "I see you have worked on the Alaska pipeline, that you're an oil and gas engineer. You said you'd actually fracked a gas well. You were a banker for 19 years. You're chief executive officer of a billion-dollar company” said Alexander. He then quipped: "How did you get appointed by this administration?"</p>
<p>Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) has not yet announced when the committee will vote on Jewell, noting that he would like to allow Senators time to get additional questions answers beforehand.</p>
<p>View the full hearing here: <a href="http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=75010617-43f1-462e-8858-3a4ee100315e">http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=75010617-43f1-462e-8858-3a4ee100315e</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-5883">HOUSE: ENVIRONMENT SUBCOMMITEE GETS NEW CHAIRMAN</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-5883" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>On March 5, House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) announced that freshman Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) will serve as the new chairman of the Environment Subcommittee.</p>
<p>The Energy and Environment Subcommittee was split into two separate committees at the beginning of the 113th Congress. The Energy Subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WI) while the Environment Subcommittee was chaired by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), who chaired the Energy and Environment Subcommittee during the 112th Congress. Rep. Harris was recently appointed to the House Appropriations Committee where he serves on the Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Subcommittee. The CJS Subcommittee decides federal funding levels for science agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration.</p>
<p>Before coming to Congress, Rep. Stewart served as Chief Executive Officer for the Shipley Group, a consulting firm that specializes in environmental issues. The organization provides training to clients on federal environmental regulations, such as the National Environmental Policy Act. Stewart sold the company before being sworn into Congress. He is also a decorated Air Force pilot who set three world speed records during his time in the service.</p>
<p>Stewart was quoted in a statement from the committee, expressing gratitude for the new post: “I feel honored to be working with Chairman Lamar Smith and other members of the Committee in overseeing the EPA, researching scientific issues related to environmental policy and climate change, and ensuring that government agencies employ sound science when making decisions,” said Stewart. “I look forward to working with an active and productive subcommittee as we oversee these important issues.”</p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-5024">CLIMATE CHANGE: CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS BUSINESS STEWARDSHIP EFFORTS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-5024" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>The 2013 Climate Leadership Conference brought a wide array of different interests together in discussion of efforts to save energy and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The Ecological Society of America (ESA) was a supporting partner for the event. Other partnering organizations included the Alliance to Save Energy, the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, the Climate Institute, the Sustainability Consortium, the World Resources Institute, and the World Wildlife Fund Climate Savers.</p>
<p>Speakers at the event included business leaders, military officials and senior representatives of government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which served as the headline sponsor. Acting EPA Administrator Bob Perciasepe discussed the agency’s efforts to serve as a resource for businesses through its Center of Corporate Leadership as well as its Energy Star program, which works to save customers money on their utilities. Jonathan Powers of the White House Council on Environmental Quality elaborated on how the administration’s executive order for all federal agencies to work to address climate change has resulted in a number of collaborations between the government and related interests in the private sector.</p>
<p>Speakers from the business industry included representatives from Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, IBM, The Hershey Co., Ford Motor Co., Staples Inc. and Verizon. Steve Tochilin, Environmental Sustainability General Manager with Delta, discussed the steps the airline is taking to reduce fuel consumption to lower its expenses. Linden Patton, Chief Climate Product Officer with Zurich Insurance elaborated on the growing costs extreme weather events are having on the insurance industry and on energy prices.</p>
<p>Additional highlights from the conference can be found in two recent posts to ESA’s blog, EcoTone:<br /> <a href="http://www.esa.org/esablog/">http://www.esa.org/esablog/</a></p>
</div>
<h3 class="thethe-toggle-header"><a href="#thethe-togle-content-1941">STATE: DRAFT REPORT CITES MINIMAL IMPACT FROM KEYSTONE, FINAL DECISION AWAITS</a></h3>
<div id="thethe-togle-content-1941" class="thethe-toggle-content">
<p>While a final decision on whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline is still pending, the Department of State issued a draft environmental impact statement report March 1 that concludes the pipeline’s construction would not have a significant impact on development of Canada oil sands. "Approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area," states the report.</p>
<p>It finds that the pipeline would have “no significant impacts to most resources along the proposed Project route” as long as safeguards are followed. The report does acknowledge that the project could lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The project also identifies several plant and animal species that could be put at risk from construction of the pipeline, including the greater sage grouse, the whooping crane, the Western Prairie Fringed Orchid and the American Burying Beetle. The report asserts, however, that steps can be taken to minimize impacts on these species.</p>
<p>Reactions in Congress were predictably partisan. The House Energy and Commerce Committee pushed several legislative measures last Congress to expedite approval of the pipeline and this year created a “Keystone Clock” highlighting the amount of time that has passed since the initial application was submitted to the State Department. Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) has introduced the draft of a new bill this Congress to expedite approval of the pipeline.</p>
<p>“The SEIS findings confirm what we already knew – this pipeline is safe and in the best interest of the American people,” asserted House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-KY) in a joint statement. “There are no legitimate reasons not to move forward on the landmark jobs project. The president should stand up for families and immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline,” they continued. “At a time when gas prices are rising toward $4.00 a gallon, we must use every available tool we can to increase America’s access to affordable and secure energy supplies.”</p>
<p>Reaction from Democrats in Congress varied from outright disdain to mild concern. “The draft impact statement appears to be seriously flawed,” stated Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman. “We don’t need this dirty oil.  To stop climate change and the destructive storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires that we are already experiencing, we should be investing in clean energy, not building a pipeline that will speed the exploitation of Canada’s highly polluting tar sands.”  </p>
<p>Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) asserted “<strong>I intend to closely review the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL pipeline. I continue to be very concerned about the contribution that the Keystone XL pipeline would make to dangerous climate change.”</strong></p>
<p>The draft environmental impact assessment is subject to a 45 day public comment period before the State Department issues a final decision. For additional information on the assessment process as well as information on how to submit comments, click here: <a href="http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/">http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/</a></p>
<p>To link directly to the draft assessment, click here: <br /> <a href="http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/draftseis/index.htm">http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/draftseis/index.htm</a></p>
</div>
</div>
<hr />
<p><strong>Sources: </strong>ClimateWire, Department of State, Energy and Environment Daily, E&amp;E News PM, Greenwire, the Hill, House Energy and Commerce Committee, POLITICO, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, USA Today, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington Post, the White House</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.esa.org/esa/?feed=rss2&#038;p=7598</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
