Thursday, 15 Apr 2004

Craig's List

An Interview With Bush's Point Person on Species and Parks

Craig Manson is the man President Bush selected to protect America's critters. As assistant interior secretary for fish, wildlife, and parks, Manson implements the Endangered Species Act and oversees the National Park System and the Fish and Wildlife Service. He's not considered a friend by most enviros, and his interview with Grist is unlikely to change that. About the precipitous loss of species in the industrial era, he says it's "a logical fallacy to suggest that because two things happen concurrently that they are necessarily related." There's more where that came from in Main Dish -- today on the Grist Magazine website.

Downward-facing Smog

EPA Announces New Air-Quality Standards and Offenders

Today the U.S. EPA made two long-awaited announcements, the first a list of U.S. counties in violation of new, stricter air-quality standards, the second a set of rules meant to improve air quality. Both were the result of legal wrangling stretching back for years, with enviro groups suing to force the feds to tackle pollution and industry groups and some states suing to stall the rules. "[W]e're going to raise the bar for everybody. No exceptions," said EPA chief Mike Leavitt, whose agency was under court order to make the announcements. Some critics questioned the "no exceptions" bit, noting a provision in the rules that imposes stricter measures on counties that fail to meet both the old and new standards than on counties -- primarily in "red" states that backed President Bush in 2000 -- that only fell short of the new ones. Under the new standards, the number of counties in violation rose from 221 to 470, and the number of Americans breathing officially dirty air went from about 110 million to some 170 million. Enviros lauded the new standards, but expressed some concern about the "flexibility" Leavitt promised in the new rules. "Flexibility is great for yoga, but when it comes to air quality, it usually means polluters get to do more," said Frank O'Donnell of the Clean Air Trust.

The Pen Is Mightier Than the Pollutocrat

Umbra Launches New Contest

This week, eco-advice guru Umbra Fisk introduces her latest reader contest, and unlike the last one -- the Cheer Us Up the Weather Is Godawful and We're at War Contest -- this one has actual prizes and stuff! We are proud to join Umbra in presenting The Pollutocrats Must Not Prevail Letter to the Editor Contest. Last year's contest produced the new term "pollutocrat" to describe those who despoil the natural world for political or financial gain. This year's contest is going to get the word in wide circulation. For details, and the dish on prizes, tune in to Ask Umbra -- today on the Grist Magazine website.

You're Fired!

Fire Panel Says California Must Make Tough Choices

Californians must choose which to protect: the developments rapidly advancing into its once-wild hinterlands, or the hinterlands themselves. So said a report released yesterday by a commission formed to develop policy recommendations in the wake of last year's devastating wildfires in the state. While the report recommended more money to train and deploy firefighters and help various firefighting agencies communicate better, it was frank that policy changes and clear public mandates must precede those measures. Once fires start, the weather has a greater influence on their ultimate spread than firefighters, the report concluded, and thus the primary focus must be on reducing fuel -- underbrush, aging chaparral, and beetle-infested trees. The implication was that environmental regulations and organizations are preventing measures to clear the fuel. But Jay Watson of the Wilderness Society said the panel had overlooked the need for controlled burns: "I think it's critically important we prioritize protecting homes and communities, but at the same time, we need to restore fire to wild lands in a safe way through prescribed burns."

I Smell a Rat

Rat Poison Industry Had Undue Influence on EPA Regs, Say Critics

Makers of rat poison were allowed to influence, and in some cases rewrite, two U.S. EPA regulatory initiatives meant to make their products safer, according to environmental and consumer-safety organizations. The first initiative was proposed by the EPA under President Clinton in 1998, when the agency said it would allow rat-poison use as long as the industry added a bittering agent to make the taste less attractive to non-rat creatures -- like, say, kids -- and a dye to make it easier to tell if a child had ingested some. After extensive consultations with the pesticide industry, the agency announced in 2001 that, well, never mind about the whole dye and bittering-agent thing. Meanwhile, the EPA was moving forward on a study of the environmental dangers of rat poison, which frequently kills deer and other wildlife when it's used to protect crops. In 2001, the agency sent a copy of the report to industry groups for a 30-day, "error only" review. Fifteen months and five closed-door meetings with industry groups later, the EPA had toned down language about the dangers of rat poison and rewritten whole sections of the report. Consumer and enviro groups were not consulted during the process. Meanwhile, 15,000 children younger than 6 ingest rat poison each year, as do numerous endangered animals.