Complete list of press releases
House Amends Nano Law to Strengthen Focus on Health, Environmental Risks
June 6, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: Sharyn Stein, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.orgRichard Denison, 202-387-3500, rdenison@edf.org(Washington, D.C. – June 6, 2008) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) applauded the U.S. House of Representatives today for passing the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2008 (H.R. 5940) by a vote of 407-6. EDF says the measure will help address critical environmental, health and safety (EHS) concerns that could arise from use of nanotechnology.
“The bill calls for much-needed changes both in the planning and decision-making processes of the NNI as they relate to EHS questions,” said Dr. Richard A. Denison, a senior scientist for Environmental Defense Fund. “It should also improve the extent and transparency of EHS-related information to be made publicly available. Overall, this bill should help substantially to achieve a better balance between the federal government’s dual roles in developing and advancing nanotechnology and in identifying and reducing its potential risks.”EDF identified the following provisions as being particularly noteworthy:Bill ProvisionCurrent problem addressedPublic information: Requires development and maintenance of a public database that identifies each EHS-related project funded under the NNI, its source and amount of funding, and its relevance to the major EHS research objectives.Lack of transparency in NNI’s public accounting for the amount of funding and relevance of currently funded activities to addressing EHS research needs.Independent advice: Establishes “as a distinct entity” an Advisory Panel and requires designation of a subpanel whose members have expertise specific to EHS and other societal dimensions.Corrects current use of the White House’s PCAST as the NNI’s advisory/oversight body; ensures appropriate expertise among advisors.Senior coordinator for EHS activities: Designates an associate director within OSTP to oversee agency activities to address EHS (and other societal) concerns.Lack of individual with responsibility and authority to conduct super-agency oversight of EHS efforts.EHS research plan: Mandates detailed plan with interim milestones, actual and estimate needed timing and resource allocations to achieve identified objectives.Failure of NNI to develop a comprehensive, accountable EHS research strategy.Green nanotechnology: Expands mandate of NNI-funded research centers to include research to develop safer nano products and applications and foster technology transfer and education on green nanotechnology.No specific focus on such directed research currently.Majority of Senate Voices Support for Progress on Comprehensive Climate Change Bill
June 6, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact:
Tony Kreindler, EDF, 202-572-3378 or 202-210-5791 (cell)
Majority of Senate Voices Support for Progress on Comprehensive Climate Change Bill(Washington, DC – June 6, 2008) A majority of the U.S. Senate today voiced support for moving forward with the Climate Security Act, marking an historic turning point in the debate over national climate policy. While the bill could not survive continuing delay tactics, it garnered important new momentum that sets the stage for quick action in the next Congress.“The din of Washington politics can’t drown out the drumbeat of progress,” said Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund. “Old adversaries came aboard and new supporters stood up for action. In the end, we got a stronger vote on a stronger bill than we had three years ago.”A vote on cloture to begin debating amendments to S. 3036 failed to win the necessary 60 votes, but nonetheless secured 48 votes on the floor and written statements of support from six Senators not present, bringing the total to 54. Only 36 Senators voted against cloture today.“Even many opponents of the bill said this week that America needs to cap carbon pollution. The excuses for inaction are running out,” Krupp said. “With presidential leadership, which was absent in this debate, we’re confident that 2009 will be the year Congress finally gets off the sidelines and begins to fight climate change and our country’s oil addiction.”S. 3036, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, would put a mandatory cap on U.S. greenhouse gas pollution and implement an emissions trading system that would give businesses flexibility to seek out emissions reduction opportunities at the lowest cost. The bill’s sponsors say they will bring the legislation up again next year.Senators John McCain and Barack Obama have made clear their support for a comprehensive cap and trade program to reduce pollution, and both said today they would have voted to continue moving forward with S. 3036.Cap and trade also is expected to be the centerpiece of a comprehensive climate bill being developed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Chairman John Dingell yesterday announced that he would begin hearings this month on legislative proposals, including the Climate Security Act.###About Environmental Defense FundA leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.orgStatement on Grants to Convert NC Hog Lagoons
June 4, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASECONTACT:Dr. Joe Rudek, 919-881-2913Georgette Shepherd, 919-880-8033(Raleigh, NC - June 4, 2008) The NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources today announced that three hog farm operations in Sampson County will receive funding to install innovative waste treatment technologies, the first cost share grants to be awarded under the NC Lagoon Conversion Program established by the 2007 General Assembly. The following statement may be attributed to Dr. Joe Rudek, senior scientist with Environmental Defense Fund. Rudek helped document the air and water pollution associated with the traditional lagoon and sprayfield system and helped shape state legislation that permanently bans open air lagoons for treating hog waste.“The hog farmers receiving the first grants are innovators. They deserve a salute for their commitment to finding ways to treat swine waste that will protect the state’s air and water quality and the health of communities.“The technologies selected for funding will use a centralized system large enough to treat nearly 60,000 hogs. This is a great beginning for the state’s push to convert all open air lagoons to modern systems.“The Lagoon Conversion Program was designed to help farmers make the switch to better systems, and its success over the coming year should spur legislators to provide additional funding in the state budget.”Statement in Response to White House Opposition to the Climate Security Act
June 2, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Tony Kreindler, EDF, 202-572-3378 or 202-210-5791 (cell)
From Steve Cochran, Environmental Defense Fund Climate Campaign Director:The White House today put itself on a road to the wrong side of history by opposing a bipartisan bill that will fight climate change, reduce our oil dependence, and restore America’s competitiveness.They might as well have said, ‘Let’s do more of what we’ve been doing for the economy and the environment. We think its working really well.’We urge the Senate to choose a better path.The question for Senators now is whether they stand with those defending the status quo of failed environmental and economic policies, or whether they plan to answer the call of Americans who want real action on climate change and a real solution to rising gas prices.In opposing the Climate Security Act being debated in the Senate this week, the White House today complained that the cost of gasoline could go up 53 cents over the next 22 years if we finally deal with climate change. They apparently missed the fact that under our current oil-addicted energy policy, gas went up $1.10 in just five months last year – and continues to climb.The only answer to high gas prices is to break our over-dependence on oil, which is exactly what the Climate Security Act will do. Analysis based on data from MIT shows that the Climate Security Act would reduce oil imports by at least half a trillion dollars through 2030.
The White House also claims that economic output would be reduced by 7% if we took action to reduce emissions – a number at the very extreme end of all analysis that’s been done. All credible academic studies show we can grow our economy and address climate change at the same time – most saying the impact will be 1% or less over twenty years.That’s a far lower cost to our economy than the impact of unchecked climate change. This is a modest investment we need to make for a problem the President himself has recognized as important.###Environmental Defense Action Fund
Founded in May 2002, Environmental Defense Action Fund is at the forefront of educating legislators about developing new solutions that protect the natural world. Through grassroots and direct lobbying, EDAF amplifies Environmental Defense Fund’s ability to champion laws that are based on science, economic incentives, and, above all, the protection of our environment.Statement by EDF National Climate Campaign Director Steve Cochran on Comprehensive Climate Legislation Unveiled Today by Congressman Ed Markey
May 28, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Tony Kreindler, EDF, 202-572-3378 or 202-210-5791 (cell)
“We applaud Congressman Markey for his bold leadership on global warming. Today’s proposal marks an important step forward in the House of Representatives’ efforts to address the looming climate crisis.“Congressman Markey’s Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act appears to be the most comprehensive climate bill drafted in the House, and Congress should carefully consider the legislation as it crafts an effective response to climate change.“We’re particularly pleased that his bill would combine strong environmental protections with sound measures to protect American jobs and family budgets.“We look forward to working with Congressman Markey, members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and the House leadership to bring a strong bill to the House floor as soon as possible.”###
About Environmental Defense FundA leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.orgEnvironmental Defense Fund Supports Wind Transmission Plan with Most Power Capability
May 23, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: Scott Anderson, 512.691.3410-w or 512.565.3528-cMedia Contact: Chris Smith, 512.691.3451-w or 512.659.9264-c or csmith@edf.org(Austin – May 23, 2008) Environmental Defense Fund filed a statement today supporting a wind-power development plan providing nearly 25,000 megawatts (MW) of clean power for Texas, enough to power several million households.The statement urges the Public Utility Commission to embrace “Competitive Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) Scenario 3” presented by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), so that transmission capacity serving previously identified areas of high wind capacity (CREZ zones) may be expanded by 17,956 MW. When combined with ERCOT’s already forecasted wind generation figure of 6,903 MW, the plan would enable construction of nearly 25,000 MW of wind power, more than the rest of the United States combined.“Texans should favor proposals providing the most power possible from tapping into wind, an abundant, clean and renewable energy source,” said Scott Anderson, senior policy analyst with Environmental Defense Fund. “Scenario 3, by enabling Texas businesses to build up to 24,859 MW of wind capacity, will displace more high-priced power than any of the other scenarios – particularly power from coal.“Wind power produces no carbon dioxide emissions or other greenhouse gases, no NOx, no SOx, and no particulate matter,” Anderson said. “The more wind power Texas develops, the healthier will be the air we breathe and the less Texas will contribute to the problem of global climate change.”Opponents argue that the higher wind generation capacity, the higher the associated costs that will eventually be transferred to consumers. In reality, wind power has zero fuel cost and will displace expensive natural gas and coal and result in lower market energy prices. The difference in price is enough to offset the costs of building transmission lines within a handful of years.Gov. Sanford Asks President to Protect Deep Sea Corals Off South Carolina Coast
May 22, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEPhotos and video availableContact:Tom Lalley – (202) 572-3303, tlalley@edf.org(“This deepwater coral ecosystem constitutes a national treasure on par with Yosemite Valley and theThe governor was backed by 121 marine scientists who today released a letter calling on the president to “expand protection for these corals and commit the necessary resources to understand this important and vulnerable ecosystem.”“It’s impossible to overstate how spectacular this area is and that’s why Governor Sanford’s action is so important and visionary,” said Dr. Doug Rader, a marine biologist with Environmental Defense Fund. “Scientists have only recently come to realize just how unusual these coral reefs are. We now know that the reefs are one of the most important areas in the world for marine life. There’s nothing else like it and it’s in our own backyard.”The fragile nature of these slow-growing and long-lived corals makes them highly vulnerable to disturbance. Preserving these reefs – thriving since our forefathers first entered this land – will provide a safe haven that will help them adapt to the changing oceans and ensure their survival for our grandchildren and great grandchildren.“Every time we visit the reefs we see places no human has ever seen before, and find new species,” said Dr. Steve Ross, a researcher at theThe South Carolina Department of Natural Resources is working with the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council to provide partial protection for this coral ecosystem using existing authority. A monument designation would support this process and extend durable, long-lasting protections. This is an important step that will allow non-damaging fishing to continue while preserving the unique coral habitats.“What a legacy Governor Sanford would leave if the president agrees with his request to permanently protect this magnificent system of towering corals and exotic fish,” said Nancy Vinson, program director at the Coastal Conservation League.Many of the coral reefs lie 1,000 feet or more below the ocean’s surface. Some of the coral colonies may be more than 2,000 years old and some coral mounds may be more than one million years old.“From a scientific point of view, we’ve struck it rich – we’ve found a treasure trove of marine biodiversity that we didn’t know existed until fairly recently,” said Dr. Lance Morgan, Chief Scientist, Marine Conservation Biology Institute. “With adequate protection, scientists will be busy for decades finding new species and unlocking the secrets of these reefs.”2008 Farm Bill A Disappointment
May 21, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact:
Sean Crowley – (202) 550-6524-o, scrowley@edf.orgSara Hopper – (202) 572-3379–o, shopper@edf.org(Washington D.C. - May 21, 2008) – The 2008 farm bill that Congress is nearly certain to enact into law over a presidential veto provides some badly needed new funding for conservation programs over the next five years, and makes improvements to some of these programs. However, these benefits are overshadowed by the lack of meaningful subsidy reform, the addition of an environmentally damaging new subsidy program and last-minute changes made to the bill by the conference committee that undermine the effectiveness of the bill’s conservation provisions, according to the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).The House this afternoon voted 316-108 to override the president’s veto of the bill earlier today and the Senate is expected to follow suit tonight or tomorrow. The Senate originally passed the bill by an overwhelming margin of 81 to 15.“The good news is that the 2008 farm bill includes $4 billion in new money for conservation, and makes changes to some conservation programs that will make them more effective in helping farmers deliver environmental benefits like cleaner water to the public,” said Sara Hopper, an attorney with EDF who was a staff member of the Senate Agriculture Committee during the 2002 farm bill. “The bad news is that the bills that both the House and Senate passed last year provided more money and included stronger conservation policies. Unfortunately, the conferees worked behind closed doors to make this a weaker bill for the environment.”Like the versions of the farm bill passed by both the House and Senate last year, the final bill makes important improvements to, and increases funding for, two programs that help farmers improve stewardship of working agricultural lands. It also retains a new initiative designed to assist groups of farmers willing to work together to address specific environmental issues and leverage the resources of states, local government and other partners.Unfortunately, the conference committee reduced the size of programs that reward farmers for taking environmentally sensitive lands out of production and restoring wetlands. Conferees also added new provisions to restrict participation in existing conservation programs that were not originally included in either bill. Finally, they gutted a “Sodsaver” provision included in both bills that would have barred crop insurance and disaster payments to any producers who plow up native grasslands in order to plant crops.The House and Senate versions of the farm bill each included approximately $5 billion in new funding for conservation, but conferees reduced this amount, in part to pay for a new, environmentally damaging “permanent disaster” program. Both the Government Accountability Office and USDA’s Economic Research Service have found that disaster payments provide incentives to convert grassland to crop production.“Cutting conservation spending to help fund a new subsidy program that will encourage intensive crop production on grasslands and other environmentally fragile lands represents a double blow to the environment,” concluded Hopper.In addition to providing $3.8 billion for the new disaster program, the 2008 farm bill increases support levels for some crops, adds new crops to the subsidy roll, and fails to make any significant reduction in direct payments. Direct payments will cost over $5 billion a year for the next five years and mostly flow to producers of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice regardless of how high prices are or whether the farmer needs the assistance.President Bush cited these increases in farm subsidies when he vetoed the 2008 farm bill today.Governor Schwarzenegger and Environmental Defense Fund Recognize Business Leadership in Environmental Innovation
May 20, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Jesus Mena, (415) 948-4220, jemena@edf.org, Environmental Defense Fund
Robin Rootenberg, (415) 646-5754, robin.rootenberg@edelman.com, Edelman(San Francisco – May 20, 2008) With the support of Governor Schwarzenegger and distinguished CEOs, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) today launched its inaugural report “Innovations Review 2008: Making Green the New Business as Usual.” The report highlights the latest trends and best practices that demonstrate how environmental sustainability efforts are creating new markets, providing competitive advantages and saving companies millions of dollars. The report is a first of its kind, featuring business solutions that are replicable and ready for implementation across business sectors and industries today. [Editor’s note: Live event webcast at 10:30 a.m. PDT may be viewed at www.edf.org/InnovationsReview]“Environmental Defense Fund recognized that ‘business as usual’ is changing, so they created a new way to assess environmental innovation,” Governor Schwarzenegger said. “More than a third of the companies showcased are based here. I love it when California is number one and it is a big thrill to see businesses in our state leading the way.”CEOs of businesses featured in the report were on hand at EDF’s San Francisco office to discuss the benefits of the innovations to their companies. Speakers included: Ken Grossman, Founder, Owner and CEO, Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.; Charles (Chuck) Kavitsky, Chairman of the Board, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company; Jonathan Schwartz, CEO and President, Sun Microsystems; Casey Sheahan, President and CEO, Patagonia, Inc. and Richard Swanson, Founder, President and CTO, SunPower Corp.“This report is a roadmap to the future. Whether you work at a company or you’re a shareholder and you’ve wanted to go green, this is the answer book,” said EDF Executive Director David Yarnold. “The ideas in ‘Innovations Review 2008’ show how building environmental considerations into basic business processes can create competitive advantage. We hope these ideas inspire others to reduce waste or improve energy efficiency in their operations, services and supply chains – and strengthen the bottom line in the process.”EDF leadership and a distinguished advisory panel of experts from the fields of environmental science, law, finance and management consulting assessed hundreds of business products, practices and technologies, selecting more than 20 innovations from around the country that are highlighted in the report.In keeping with EDF’s market-based approach to solving major environmental problems, the “Innovations Review 2008” features game-changing best practices that can influence nearly every functional area within a company – including real estate, operations and manufacturing, fleet management, human resources, IT and finance. Additional innovations highlight transformations underway in the shipping, food and agriculture, retail and insurance sectors. All the innovations were selected based on four key criteria: environmental benefits, business benefits, replicability and creativity.This report is a natural extension of EDF’s track record working with leading businesses to demonstrate that good environmental stewardship and competitive business advantage go hand in hand. McDonald’s elimination of its clamshell packaging, FedEx’s hybrid delivery trucks and Wal-Mart’s greening of its supply chain are all examples of EDF’s intensive work with corporate partners.The Innovations Review is the first product of a new EDF initiative to catalog and widely disseminate environmental best practices to a broad corporate audience, and to catalyze a new generation of corporate environmental leaders. Later in the year, EDF will launch additional Web-based tools to help companies reduce their environmental footprint and share information on environmental innovations.A downloadable version of the report and a podcast of today’s event are available at www.EDF.org/InnovationsReview.###About Environmental Defense FundEnvironmental Defense Fund, a leading national nonprofit organization, represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. We accept no payment from our corporate partners; we consider the environment our primary client and businesses our partners in pursuit of common aims. www.EDF.org
Landmark Chemical Safety Legislation Introduced to Protect Kids
May 20, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Sharyn Stein, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.orgRichard Denison, rdenison@edf.org(Washington, DC – May 20, 2008) New legislation to protect children from dangerous chemicals – the Kid Safe Chemicals Act of 2008, introduced by U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) and U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) – received strong support today from a leading national environmental group as a long-overdue reform of U.S. chemicals policy.“More than 30 years after the passage of the Toxic Substances Control Act, at last we have a serious effort to bring U.S. chemicals policy into the 21st century,” said Dr. Richard A. Denison, a senior scientist for Environmental Defense Fund and author of Not That Innocent, a major report comparing U.S., European and Canadian chemicals policies. “Sadly, the United States has lagged behind in protecting human health and the environment from harm by hazardous chemicals. By modernizing the Toxic Substances Control Act, this legislation would close the gap between the policies of the United States and those of many other developed countries.”The Kid Safe Chemicals Act of 2008 would require manufacturers of all chemicals in commerce to develop a minimum set of data on the chemicals’ hazards, uses and exposure potential. It would also place the burden on manufacturers to demonstrate the safety of their chemicals as a condition for entering or remaining on the market. Any uses of a chemical not shown to be safe would be prohibited.“With rates of children’s diseases like autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders, asthma, and cancer all increasing over the past three decades, it is essential that we more closely scrutinize all chemicals to which children may be exposed,” stated Dr. John M. Balbus, Chief Health Scientist for Environmental Defense Fund. “Bisphenol A, a chemical widely used in baby bottles and infant formula cans and suspected of harming early development, is only the latest example.”In its landmark 1997 report Toxic Ignorance, Environmental Defense Fund sounded the alarm about the dearth of even basic safety data available on the great majority of chemicals present in the products and materials we encounter every day.“For too long we have granted chemicals in commerce a strong presumption of innocence,” said Denison. “One has only to look at how little we know about the growing list of chemicals being detected in our bodies and our environment to recognize that this continued ‘toxic ignorance’ must end.”“We are all exposed to large numbers of chemicals every day – and the more we look, the more chemicals we find in our surroundings. We simply must require thorough testing and proof of safety,” Denison added. “The Kid Safe Chemicals Act would start us down this critical path.”Denison also lauded the bill’s provisions to promote safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals and to advance green chemistry; to foster use of alternatives to animal testing where shown to be scientifically valid; to increase the reliability of and public access to chemical information; and to limit the ability of industry to claim such information as confidential business information.“While some provisions of the bill will need further refinement to ensure its objectives are achieved, the basic framework is sound,” Denison concluded. “We look forward to working to advance this legislation, which will give the Toxic Substances Control Act the major overhaul it needs.”
To "Go Green," Companies Partner with Environmental Groups
May 19, 2008NEW YORK – May 19, 2008 – Environmental Defense Fund and BusinessWeek Special Advertising Sections will feature innovative partnerships between businesses and nonprofit groups in a section this July. Partners in Green will highlight companies that are cutting pollution and boosting profits by partnering with environmental groups on projects ranging from waste reduction to cleaner energy.BusinessWeek will publish the special section in its July 14-21, 2008, double issue (on newsstands July 4), reaching 4.9 million readers worldwide.From Wal-Mart to Microsoft, companies have engaged with environmental organizations to build sustainability into the bottom line. For example: a grocery chain bypasses the middleman and buys direct from fishermen; an elite winery helps save a rare frog; and a leading nanotechnology manufacturer develops the industry’s first safety standards by partnering with a nonprofit. The special section will examine the types of partnerships that result in action, not just talk.Partners in Green is part of Business and the Environment 2008, a series of special ad sections in BusinessWeek on major environmental issues. In a unique alliance, Environmental Defense Fund is providing the content for the series. With offices from Boston to Beijing, Environmental Defense Fund is the leading nonprofit developer of market-based environmental solutions, working with companies that have the market clout to transform industries. It played a central role in the $45 billion buyout of electric utility TXU and the launch of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of major corporations with $2 trillion in revenue.
The Special Ad Sections group at BusinessWeekspecializes in integrating the marketing objectives of its partner companies with the information needs of the BusinessWeek audience through the delivery of custom article content—via print, online and other media. Published by The McGraw-Hill Companies, BusinessWeek is the market leader, providing unparalleled insight and analysis to a worldwide audience of 4.9 million readers each week in 140 countries.
Advertising space may be reserved by contacting Lisa Wood of FVG LLC, Custom Publishers, at (732) 701-1051 or lisawood@fvg.com. The deadline for space reservation is June 2, 2008. Exposure includes visibility on www.businessweek.com/adsections with direct links to companies’ websites.
For more information please contact:Lisa Wood, FVG LLC, Custom Publishers of BusinessWeek Special Ad Sections
(732) 701-1051; lisawood@fvg.com
Helen Distefano, Director, Custom Content Partnerships, BusinessWeek
(703) 793-3644; helen_distefano@businessweek.com
Cynthia Hampton, VP, Marketing and Communications, Environmental Defense Fund
(202) 387-3500; champton@edf.org
Endangered Bird Seen on Three Texas Ranches
May 16, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ContactDavid Wolfe, 512.691.3415-w or 512.426.7670-cMedia Contact[Note to editors: Black-capped vireo photo and video footage available upon request.](Austin - May 16, 2008) – Environmentalists and landowners hail the endangered black-capped vireo return to three central Texas ranches as further evidence supporting the benefits of Safe Harbor agreements, which provide incentives for private landowners making their property hospitable to endangered species.
The petite, white-bellied, yellow-green and gray song bird with a black cap was spotted this month on each of the Russell, Panther Cave and Quail Ridge ranches. The landowners were as thrilled as the environmentalists.
“We committed to this Safe Harbor project several years ago and with the recent sightings of the black-capped vireo, it’s certainly clear now that endangered species management can be compatible with good ranch management,” said Kerry Russell, owner of Russell Ranch. “Many ranchers may not call themselves conservationists, but I believe our love for the land makes us natural allies with all of those wanting to leave a positive legacy for future generations.”
The Safe Harbor concept was developed by Environmental Defense Fund and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to encourage private landowners to restore and maintain habitat for endangered species without fear of incurring additional regulatory restrictions. From the signing of the first Safe Harbor agreement in North Carolina in 1995, nearly three million acres of land have been enrolled in several Safe Harbor agreements, and many more are being drafted or await final approval.
“Participation in Safe Harbor agreements is a win-win situation for Texas landowners and endangered species,” said David Wolfe, senior scientist with Environmental Defense Fund. “These agreements have proven time and again that private landowners can play a major role in the recovery of endangered species without losing their future land management flexibility.”
For more information on Safe Harbor agreements, visit: http://www.edf.org/article.cfm?ContentID=399
Florida Business Leaders Featured in
May 15, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:Gerald Karnas, Florida Climate Project Director, Environmental Defense Fund: O: (941) 309-5399 C: (941) 587-1803; gkarnas@edf.org
Jay Liles, Policy Consultant, Florida Wildlife Federation: O: (850) 656-7113 C: (850) 294-5004; jliles@fwfonline.org
Lisa Garcia, Director of Special Projects, Ron Sachs Communications: O: (850) 222-1996 C: (850) 590-7640; lgarcia@ronsachs.com
Jennifer Dickson, Media Manager, Environmental Defense Fund: O: (202) 572-3401 C: (202) 520-1221; jdickson@edf.org
(Tampa, FL- May 14, 2008) – Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Florida Wildlife Federation (FWF), and Florida business leaders today unveiled an unprecedented advertising campaign showcasing Florida companies and entrepreneurs on the front line of the fight against climate change.
The Faces of Climate Change campaign tells the story of Florida businesses developing the next
generation technologies that are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and powering job growth as America moves toward a low-carbon economy. TV ads featuring the faces of climate change in Florida run in markets across the state beginning this week (see http://edf.org/facesofclimatechange).Participants in the ads range from the Jackson County Chamber of Commerce and Mosaic (the world’s largest phosphate company) to St. Joe (the state’s largest land owner) and PetroAlgae, which makes oil from algae in Fellsmere, FL.
“The unfolding threat of climate change has launched a worldwide race to a new energy future,” said
Jerry Karnas, Florida Climate Project Director at Environmental Defense Fund. “Florida has a lot to gain
when it comes to economic development through green technology. Our state also has a lot to lose if
global climate change continues unchecked, given our 1200 miles of coastline, low-lying topography, and location in the hurricane belt. Florida’s position as a swing state in national elections makes this a critical battleground for climate change policy.”
“Climate change is one of the most serious threats facing our state, especially our wildlife,” said Jay Liles, Policy Consultant with the Florida Wildlife Federation. “Political candidates understand that. Our Governor recognizes the need to do more to reduce the impacts of global warming. And now we have business leaders who are lending their faces and their success stories to help everyone understand that
businesses do play a key role in securing a safe environment in the future.”Congressional action on global warming is expected shortly. In early June, the U.S. Senate is scheduled
to consider the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, a cap and trade bill approved by the
Environment and Public Works Committee last December.“Technology and innovation will be a large component in the race to slow global warming,” said Karnas.
“Strong federal legislation will provide businesses with even more incentive to develop clean technologies that meet our energy demands while protecting the environment.”###
Mention of products and companies does not constitute an endorsement by Environmental Defense Fund or Florida Wildlife Federation.
About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.
The Florida Wildlife Federation is a statewide, non-profit conservation and education organization composed of thousands of concerned Florida residents from all walks of life who share a common interest in preserving, managing, and improving Florida’s wildlife, water, and natural places. For more information go to www.fwfonline.org.
Farm Bill Conference Report Called "Mixed Bag"
May 8, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:Sean Crowley - (202) 572-3331 - o, scrowley@edf.orgSara Hopper – (202) 572-3379 - o, shopper@edf.org(Washington D.C. - May 8, 2008) – The 2008 farm bill conference report appears to include important new investments in conservation, but will not do enough to meet the growing need to expand and improve conservation programs, or to reform our antiquated system of farm subsidies, according to Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
“The good news is that conference committee members recognized the need to boost conservation funding at a time when very high commodity prices are increasing pressure on our land, water, and important wildlife habitat,” said Sara Hopper, an attorney with EDF who was a staff member of the Senate Agriculture Committee during the 2002 farm bill. “The bad news is that this new funding falls short of what’s needed to provide farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners with the resources they need to help us solve some of the nation’s biggest environmental problems.”
EPA Misusing Science, Jeopardizing Children
May 7, 2008FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:Sean Crowley – (202) 572-3331-o, scrowley@edf.orgDr. John Balbus – (202) 572-3316–o, jbalbus@edf.org(Washington, D.C. – May 7, 2008) The senior leadership at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency “has repeatedly chosen to stray from the clear and science-based recommendations of expert advisory panels, public health organizations and advocates, and in some cases even its own career staff scientists, in order to make policies and decisions that fall short of adequately protecting children as well as the general public.”That was the conclusion of testimony today by a member of the EPA Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee before the Senate Public Sector Solutions to Global Warming, Oversight, and Children’s Health Protection Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.“In some cases, EPA policies and decisions are justified on the basis of arguments that run counter to established scientific principles and the judgments of the most prominent experts in the country,” said Dr. John Balbus, chief health scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund. “In other cases, EPA policies and decisions are made with little justification whatsoever. Greater transparency in agency decision-making and greater adherence to the recommendations of the agency’s scientific experts will help bolster public trust in the agency and lead to greater protection of the public’s health.”Over the past four years, the EPA Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee has made recommendations to the EPA Administrator on a number of science issues regarding the protection of children that have not been followed by the agency. These include recommendations for setting the level of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter (microscopic-sized soot that permeates lung tissue) and ozone, relying on a voluntary program to obtain critical information on children’s risks through the Voluntary Children’s Chemical Evaluation Program, and implementing EPA’s 2005 Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposure to Carcinogens in an expeditious and health-protective manner.“The final particulate matter standards selected by the Administrator for annual and daily concentrations of fine particulate matter were well above those recommended by the EPA Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee, and indeed, above the range recommended by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, the federal committee charged with evaluating EPA’s assessment of the science behind the standards,” Balbus testified. “EPA ultimately set standards that do not provide an adequate margin of safety for infants and children.”“The EPA Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee noted that a number of child-specific outcomes were omitted from consideration of the benefit of reducing the ozone standard, including school absences, doctor visits, medication use, and decreased resistance to infections,” Balbus testified. “[Yet] the Administrator, going against the recommendations of the leading air quality and public health experts on his advisory committees, concluded that the substantial body of evidence from epidemiologic studies showing ozone effects at levels below 0.075 parts per million could not be trusted. This results in a standard in which there is no margin of safety to protect children from ozone’s damaging effects.”“There is insufficient rigor in EPA’s efforts to protect children’s health,” testified Balbus. “The EPA does not appear to be placing adequate priority on assembling the scientific data needed to determine and then act upon chemical risks to children.”