Environment Action Alerts for February, 2003 Earthhope Action Network

========================================

NRDC's EARTH ACTION:

The Bulletin for Environmental Activists

February 5, 2003

========================================

In This Issue:

--Action alerts--

1. HABITAT PRESERVATION: Speak out to keep 66,000 new gas wells out

of the Powder River Basin

2. NATIONAL FORESTS/PUBLIC LANDS PROTECTION: Tell the Bush

administration not to cut public review for logging projects on

public lands

--Updates on Previous alerts--

TOXIC CHEMICALS

======================================================

You will also find these alerts in NRDC'S Earth Action Center, which

includes tools for taking action easily online, at

http://www.nrdc.org/action

(Please do not reply to this message; see the instructions below for

how to unsubscribe or contact NRDC with questions or comments.)

=============

Action alerts

=============

1. HABITAT PRESERVATION

Speak out to keep 66,000 new gas wells out of the Powder River Basin

Last spring we asked you to send comments on the Bush

administration's draft plans to drill 66,000 new gas wells in the

Powder River Basin. Thousands of you responded, but the just released

final plans remain completely unacceptable.

The Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana is a sweeping region of

rolling plains nestled near the Rocky Mountains. Huge herds of deer,

elk and pronghorn antelope, golden eagles, prairie dogs, and many

farmers and ranchers have all made their home in the basin for

generations. The Bush administration, however, is moving ahead with

plans to drill 66,000 new gas wells into this quiet rural landscape.

The administration's plans are a prime example of the on-the-ground

reality of its energy policy, with almost total emphasis on

increasing production and little or no regard for the accompanying

harm that would result to our wildlife and clean air and water.

Most of the proposed new wells would extract coalbed methane gas in a

process that is much more environmentally harmful than conventional

oil and gas development. For example, coalbed methane fields require

far more roads, power lines and other infrastructure, which destroy

wide-open spaces and wildlife habitat. Coalbed methane extraction

also produces vast quantities of contaminated water. The Powder River

plans call for 26,000 miles of new roads, 52,000 miles of new

pipelines, power lines and utility corridors, 1.6 million acres of

disturbed land, and thousands of excavated pits for the nearly *two

trillion* gallons of water that would be produced from the wells.

Impacts on such a scale would effectively destroy the natural

environment of the Powder River Basin, its wildlife, and the social

fabric of the area.

The Bush administration is accepting "protests" to its final plans

for the Powder River Basin through February 18.

== What to do ==

Send a message, before the February 18 protest deadline, opposing the

administration's plans to sacrifice the Powder River Basin's quiet

rural landscape to benefit the oil and gas industry.

== Contact information ==

You can send a message directly from NRDC's Earth Action Center at

http://www.nrdc.org/action/. Or use the contact information and

sample letter below to send your own message.

Kathleen Clarke, Director

U.S. Bureau of Land Management

5655 MIB

1849 C Street NW

Washington, D.C. 20240

Fax: 202-208-5242

Email: Kathleen_Clarke@blm.gov

== Sample letter ==

Subject: Powder River Basin EIS protest letter

Dear Director Clarke,

I am writing to protest the "Final Environmental Impact Statement and

Proposed Plan for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project" in

Wyoming and the "Final Statewide Oil and Gas Environmental Impact

Statement and Proposed Amendment of the Powder River and Billings

Resource Management Plans" in Montana. As an American citizen I am

directly and personally interested in, and affected by, the

unprecedented oil and gas development activities that would occur as

a result of the Bureau of Land Management's plans addressed in these

environmental impact statements, and their profoundly harmful impacts

on our public lands and resources.

Specifically, I am concerned that the BLM failed to take the legally

required "hard look" at the impacts of drilling thousands of new

coalbed methane wells in the area. Furthermore, the BLM has done

nothing to carefully and thoughtfully stage or phase development to

lessen the impacts from the thousands of miles of new roads,

pipelines, and power lines to be built; the vast areas of bare soil

that would be created by drilling pads and roads; and the thousands

of water disposal pits that would be constructed. The BLM also failed

to fully disclose these impacts to landowners who would bear the

brunt of the harm.

I urge the BLM to prepare supplemental environmental impact

statements to correct these fundamental failures of stewardship for

Wyoming and Montana.

Sincerely,

[Your name and address]

2. NATIONAL FORESTS/PUBLIC LANDS PROTECTION

Tell the Bush administration not to cut public review for logging

projects on public lands

As part of an overwhelming series of recent assaults on our natural

heritage, the Bush administration has proposed making it harder for

the public to comment on and appeal logging projects throughout our

national forests and other public lands. As a result, federal

agencies and their friends in the timber industry would find it

easier to log large trees in backcountry areas owned by the public,

regardless of the damage they would cause.

The administration's proposal would thwart public participation in a

variety of ways. It would make many, indeed probably most, logging

projects impossible for the public to appeal at all, and set up

hurdles and traps for those trying to comment and appeal, including

letting agency staff misinform the public about filing dates. The

proposal would also require the public to do the agencies' jobs for

them, identifying possible environmental impacts of proposed

projects, and would allow "emergency" exemptions when an agency finds

that taking the time for appeals could cost it money, no matter how

great the environmental harm.

Although the administration claims that logging is needed to reduce

wildfire risks, the Forest Service's own scientists have found that

logging, including "thinning," can actually *increase* the number and

intensity of forest fires. In fact, this proposal is not about fire

at all. Instead, the proposed rule changes focus on cutting the

public out of the environmental review process for timber companies'

plans to log millions of acres of the public's lands, including vital

habitat for threatened and endangered species, prime recreational

areas, and municipal watersheds. Amazingly, the Forest Service is

even planning to cut scarce large, fire-resistant trees in

California's Giant Sequoia National Monument, where commercial

logging is currently prohibited.

The administration has issued separate proposals concerning this

issue for both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management

(a division of the Interior Department), so comments need to be sent

to both agencies. Comments are due to the BLM by February 14 and to

the Forest Service by February 18.

== What to do ==

Send a message, before the respective comment deadlines, urging the

two agencies to abandon the proposed rule changes, and to instead

uphold the public's right to a say about logging projects on its

lands.

== Contact information ==

You can send official comments directly from NRDC's Earth Action

Center at http://www.nrdc.org/action/. Or use the contact information

and sample letter below to send your own messages, and please include

your own reasons why the Bush administration should not cut the

American public out of deciding what should and should not happen on

its lands.

Appeal Rule Content Analysis Team

USDA Forest Service

P.O. Box 9079

Missoula, MT 59807

Fax: 406-329-3556

Email: 215appeals@fs.fed.us

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals

Attn: AA83

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

801 North Quincy Street, Suite 300

Arlington, VA 22203

Email: WOComment@blm.gov

== Sample letter ==

Subject: Don't eliminate public review of logging projects on public

lands

Dear Forest Service and BLM Staff,

I strongly oppose the "Special Rules Applicable to Public Land

Hearings and Appeals" proposed on December 16, 2002. Public lands are

owned by all Americans, and the public should have a full and fair

opportunity to review, comment on, and appeal proposed agency

actions, particularly logging.

The proposed rules would eliminate the public's right to a meaningful

say during the decisionmaking process on many and perhaps most

logging projects, and complicate public participation in other

proposals. The rules would also encourage agency planners to ignore

environmental impacts in hopes that the public wouldn't notice during

preliminary planning and thus would be barred from appealing the

omissions later. The result would be to expedite destructive logging

projects in backcountry areas of our nation's forests and other

public lands.

This proposal is not necessary. Only a small percentage of the

thousands of agency projects are ever appealed. Thus, while cutting

out the public and gutting the environmental review process, only a

tiny minority of projects would be sped up. Moreover, the logging the

proposed rule is designed to accelerate would not necessarily reduce

fire risk and could actually *increase* the risk of fires by

increasing the logging of large and medium-size trees. Cutting

anything larger than small trees and brush can have serious

environmental consequences, including increased fire risks, and

should be subject to careful environmental review and full public

input.

Instead of focusing on logging commercially valuable trees, I urge

you to expand the Forest Service's and Bureau of Land Management's

efforts to genuinely reduce fire risk to homes and other structures

by directing resources to fireproofing buildings and cleaning up

vegetation within 500 yards around towns and communities.

Again, I urge you to uphold our fundamental environmental laws and

our rights as Americans, and to withdraw the proposed rule.

Sincerely,

[Your name and address]

==========================

Updates on Previous alerts

==========================

TOXIC CHEMICALS

Last June we asked you to urge the Environmental Protection Agency to

ban the herbicide atrazine, which has been shown to cause cancer, as

well as hormonal disruptions, in humans and animals. Although

atrazine has already been banned in several European countries, on

January 31 the EPA announced that it had determined that the chemical

probably does not cause health problems, and that it will allow

Syngenta, the Swiss company that manufactures atrazine, to monitor

contamination levels in US water supplies. In the coming year NRDC

will redouble our efforts to publicize the dangers of atrazine

(especially in the Midwest, where it is most widely used), as well as

the EPA's abdication of its responsibility to protect the American

public. In the meantime, thanks to the thousands of you who contacted the EPA.

from World Wildlife Fund Febraury 5, 2003

Action deadline: as soon as possible

Turtles are washing up dead--often beheaded or with their throats cut

--on the beaches of Mozambique in East Africa. In the first few weeks of 2003, shocked tourists and residents have found dozens of green and loggerhead turtle carcasses.

The cause is bycatch--the unintentional catch of nontarget species--by illegal and unlicensed fishing vessels operating close to the coastline of Mozambique and even within protected areas. The boats are said to be of Chinese, Korean, or Taiwanese origin, and they are using longlines to catch sharks--some of which are protected species in Mozambican waters.

With nearly 1,700 miles of coastline, Mozambique lacks the means to stop these vessels or drive them from its waters. The illegal fishing vessels deploy longlines--steel cables up to 15 miles long with hooks attached on lines set at about one-yard intervals. Baited longline hooks are particularly lethal for loggerhead and leatherback turtles, which are hooked as they swallow the bait, and then drown or are killed by fishermen cutting away this unwanted catch. The discovery of numerous beheaded green turtles in Mozambique suggests that even these normally vegetarian turtles are going for the longline bait.

In addition to this gruesome cull, a recent study shows that shrimp trawlers operating in central Mozambican waters kill between about 2,000 to 5,400 marine turtles every year.

These deaths are preventable, but we need your help. The Mozambique government needs to develop a strategy to deal with illegal fishing, possibly seeking international assistance to drive out the pirate boats. In addition, thousands of turtle deaths could be averted each year by the installation of a simple and inexpensive tool known as a turtle excluder device (TED) on trawl nets. Legislation requiring the use of TEDs could be implemented through changes to Mozambique's fishing regulations, which are under review right now. The five species of marine turtles that occur in Mozambique's waters are all internationally recognized as threatened species and are protected by Mozambican law and international treaties.

See below for how you can help. Please also forward this alert to your friends and colleagues.

**********************TAKE ACTION NOW!****************

WWF has learned from our team in Mozambique that letters are needed to address this issue; sending emails or faxes will not be effective. A few hundred letters (ideally a few thousand) from concerned people around the world will let the government know that action is needed now.

To take action, copy the letters below and add your own thoughts, explaining why this issue is important to you. Mail the letters to the addresses indicated. If you cannot send letters to all five of the ministers we are targeting, the most important person to contact is Cadmiel Muthemba, the minister of fisheries. A standard airmail letter to Mozambique from the United States costs 80 cents.

Thank you for taking the time to send letters. If you have any questions, contact us at actionquestions@takeaction.worldwildlife.org for help.

***************************LETTER TEXT**************************

Please send the following letter to each of the ministers listed below. The priority is to send the letter to the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Cadmiel Muthemba.

Honorable Minister of Fisheries

Mr. Cadmiel Muthemba

Office of the Minister

Caixa Postal 1723

Ministry of Fisheries

Maputo

MOZAMBIQUE

Honorable Vice-Minister of Fisheries

Mr. Alfredo Massinga

Office of the Vice-Minister

Caixa Postal 1723

Ministry of Fisheries

Maputo

MOZAMBIQUE

Honorable Minister for the Coordination of Environmental Affairs

Eng. John William Kachamila

Office of the Minister

Ministry for the Coordination of Environmental Affairs

Caixa Postal 2020

Maputo,

MOZAMBIQUE

Honorable Vice-Minister for the Coordination of Environmental Affairs

Eng. Francisco Mabjaia

Office of the Vice-Minister

Ministry for the Coordination of Environmental Affairs

Caixa Postal 2020

Maputo,

MOZAMBIQUE

The Honorable Minister of Tourism

Mr. Fernando Sumbana J�nior

Office of the Minister

Ministry of Tourism

Caixa Postal 4101

Maputo,

MOZAMBIQUE

Dear Sir,

Mozambique has recently demonstrated leadership in marine environmental protection by creating new marine protected areas in Bazaruto and Quirimbas, no longer issuing new licenses for the shallow water shrimp fishery, and banning coral reef exports, among other commendable actions. However, serious threats remain to marine turtles due to fishing activities both inside and outside marine protected areas. I believe you may be able to help resolve these issues.

Each year, thousands of turtles are dying unnecessarily as a result of bycatch in the shrimp trawling industry. This can be prevented by the introduction of turtle excluder devices (TEDs), which have been welcomed by Mozambican boat owners because they have been shown to improve the quality of their catch.

Marine turtles are also being killed as bycatch by illegal longline fishing vessels that are fishing for sharks, including some species that are protected in Mozambique. These boats--from Taiwan and other far eastern countries--are even entering protected areas such as the Bazaruto Archipelago National Park. Illegal fishing is not only bad for turtles and other species, it also costs your country untold amounts in stolen fish and competes unfairly with local fishermen.

I urge you to take concrete steps to stop the further senseless loss of marine life along the coast:

* The current revision of the fisheries regulations is an opportunity to make sure that all trawlers operating in Mozambican waters are using TEDs. Please do all you can to ensure that appropriate changes are made to the fishing regulations.

* Please work with relevant officials in your own and other departments, including the security and defense authorities, to develop a strategy to deal with illegal fishing, and to seek international assistance, if necessary, to drive out the pirate boats.

Sincerely,

**************************END OF LETTER TEXT*************************

To learn more about Mozambique's amazing species and habitats, as well as the conservation challenges facing the country, visitWWF'sonlineexpeditiontoMozambiqueathttp://takeaction.worldwildlife.org/ctt.asp?u=26681&l=1438

Direct any questions about the WWF Conservation Action Network to

actionquestions@takeaction.worldwildlife.org

______________________________________________________________________

The Conservation Action Network is sponsored by World Wildlife Fund-

US. Known worldwide by its panda logo, WWF is dedicated to

protecting the world's wildlife and the rich biological diversity

that we all need to survive. The leading privately supported

international conservation organization in the world, WWF has

sponsored more than 2,000 projects in 116 countries and has more than

1 million members in the United States. WWF calls on everyone --

government, industry, and individuals -- to take responsibility by

taking action to save our living planet.

World Wildlife Fund

1250 Twenty-fourth Street, NW

Washington, DC 20037

http://www.worldwildlife.org

http://takeaction.worldwildlife.org

from the Petition Site February 6, 2003

ThePetitionSite has worked hard to provide you with monthly

Environment alerts, keeping you up-to-date on the latest

happenings in world around you -- including information on

important campaigns across the country and what you can do

to help! Today we are proud to bring you a special environmental

update with even more opportunities to take action on behalf of

the environment.

What's inside:

1. Raising the Bar: Higher Fuel Economy Standards!

2. Who Wins the Fuel Economy Game?

3. Oil Independence & War With Iraq-What's Your Opinion?

***********************

1. Raising the Bar: Higher Fuel Economy Standards!

We have the technological Capability, Let's Use it!

Did you know:

**Every minute the U.S. sends $200,000 overseas to buy oil.

**U.S. cars and trucks account for 40% of all of the oil consumed

in the United States.

**Persian Gulf nations own two-thirds of the world's remaining oil

reserves. The United States has less than 3%. We can't drill our

way to oil independence, we need to reduce consumption.

**Affordable, but unused technologies exist today that can boost

fuel economy by 75% by the end of this decade, this could cut

pollution and save drivers an average of $3,000-$5,000 each year

at the pump.

Unfortunately, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) doesn't intend to raise the fuel economy standards to a

level that will actually address these issues! The NHTSA's

modest proposal for 7% change, combined with auto industry-

supported loopholes in current law, will result in almost no gains

in fuel economy or real oil savings. Take action now!

http://www.care2.com/go/z/4372

Yet, the technology DOES exist to significantly raise the fuel

economy of the cars and trucks on America's Highways. We know

that it is is possible to improve fuel economy by at least 25%! Ford

has already voluntarily committed to such an improvement for their

line of SUV's. Clearly, more can be done! In fact, the auto industry

has the technology to achieve a 35 mpg average for light trucks

within the next 10 years. The NHTSA should be setting the

standards in order to achieve the highest fuel economy possible,

not undermining progress.

As the administration prepares for a possible war in the Middle

East, we need strong fuel economy standards that will make a real

difference in U.S. oil dependence.

Let's not squander this opportunity to get Americans on the road to

real energy independence and to save Americans millions at the

gas pump. Take a moment and SIGN THIS FREE PETITION.

Urge NHTSA to increase fuel economy standards!

http://www.care2.com/go/z/4372

***********************

2. Who Wins the Fuel Economy Game?

EPA and DOE recently announced the 28th annual mpg estimates

for 2003 passenger vehicles. Check out the most efficient cars in

each class:

Most Fuel Efficient Cars (by EPA Size Class)

Most Efficient Two Seaters

*Honda Insight 3 cyl, 1 L, Manual 61 mpg city, 68 mpg hwy

*Honda Insight 3 cyl, 1 L, Automatic 57 mpg city, 56 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Minicompact Cars

*BMW Mini Cooper 4 cyl, 1.6 L, Manual (5), Premium 28mpg city, 37 mpg hwy

*BMW Mini Cooper 4 cyl, 1.6 L, Auto (variable), Premium 25mpg city, 32mpg hwy

Most Efficient Subcompact Cars

*VW New Beetle (Diesel) 4 cyl, 1.9 L, Manual (5) 42 mpg city, 49mpg hwy

*VW New Beetle (Diesel) 4 cyl, 1.9 L, Automatic (5) 34 mpg city, 44 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Compact Cars

*Toyota Prius 4 cyl, 1.5 L, Automatic (Variable), Regular 52 mpg city, 45 mpg hwy

*Honda Civic Hybrid 4 cyl, 1.3 L, Manual (5), Regular 46 mpg city, 51 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Midsize Cars

*Honda Accord 4 cyl, 2.4 L, Manual 5), Regular 26 mpg city, 34 mpg hwy

*Honda Accord 4 cyl, 2.4 L, Automatic (5), Regular 24 mpg city, 33 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Large Car

*Chevrolet Impala 6 cyl, 3.4 L, Automatic (4), Regular 21 mpg city, 32 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Small Station Wagons

*Volkswagen Jetta Wagon (Diesel) 4 cyl, 1.9 L, Manual 42 mpg city, 50 mpg hwy

*Volkswagen Jetta Wagon (Diesel) 4 cyl, 1.9 L, Automatic 34 mpg city, 45 mpg hwy

Most Efficient Midsize Station Wagons

*Ford Focus Station Wagon 4 cyl, 2 L, Manual (5), Regular 27 mpg city, 36 mpg hwy

*Ford Focus Station Wagon 4 cyl, 2 L, Automatic (4), Regular 27 mpg city, 33 mpg hwy

***********************

3. Oil Independence & War With Iraq-What's Your Opinion?

Given Iraq's position as a major oil supplier, many are suspicious

that the U.S. motives for war are in large part due to a desire to

secure oil. In fact, some people argue that the price of oil isn't

really $1.95 a gallon -- it is a war with Iraq. Where do you stand?

Vote here: http://www.care2.com/go/z/4370

***********************

from Defenders of Wildlife February 6, 2003

A Bi-weekly Update from Defenders of Wildlife:
Working to Save Wildlife and Wild Lands

SAVING MANATEES: With your help, sea cows are given new safe havens

LOUD AND CLEAR: Public strongly against drilling in Arctic refuge

WAR ON WOLVES: Western politicians seek to gut protections

VALENTINE'S DAY IDEA: Give flowers and help save wildlife at same time

WETLANDS AT RISK: Bush administration tries to weaken safeguards

PROMISES FROM PELOSI: New House minority leader says she'll fight for environment

KLAMATH DISASTER: Norton gets blame for fish kill

1. SAVING MANATEES: With your help, sea cows are given new safe havens

Thanks to DEN members and supporters who sent petitions from our www.HelpManatees.org Web site, Defenders of Wildlife has won strong, new protections for Florida's endangered manatees. Under a new agreement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has finally promised to create new manatee protection zones on four heavily traveled rivers. Among other protections, the pact also calls for stepped-up enforcement of boat speed limits in manatee sanctuaries. The deal comes only after a federal judge threatened to cite Interior Secretary Gale Norton for contempt for refusing to obey orders to establish new protections for the gentle sea cows. To learn more, click here: http://www.defenders.org/wildlife/new/manate es.html .

2. LOUD AND CLEAR: Public strongly against drilling in Arctic refuge

A new national poll shows the public remains strongly opposed to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge � a discredited proposal that Big Oil's political allies are pushing again in Congress. By a two-to-one margin, according to the poll conducted by Bellwether Research & Consulting and Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates, voters reject an argument to open the refuge even in the case of impending war with Iraq and a possible cut-off of part of America's supply of oil from the Middle East. And voters overwhelmingly agree that a proposal to include drilling within the pending federal budget bill amounts to back-door political maneuvering.

Six Republican senators, meanwhile, have sent a letter to GOP leaders opposing including in the pending budget bill any language that would give oil companies access to the refuge. The six are Olympia Snowe of Maine, John McCain of Arizona, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike DeWine of Ohio and Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois. If you're from one of the above states, you can send a free on-line fax thanking your senator for supporting the refuge. Go to: http://www.denaction.org , Alert #205.

To urge your senators to support saving America's greatest wildlife sanctuary for future generations, go to www.savearcticrefuge.org.

3. WAR ON WOLVES: Western politicians seek to gut protections

Extremist lawmakers in three western states are trying to strip protections from endangered gray wolves. In Montana, they're backing legislation to classify wolves as predators that can be killed on sight. In Wyoming, lawmakers want to classify wolves as trophy game animals to be killed by hunters or as predators to be shot by anyone. Not to be outdone, Oregon politicians are also pushing shoot-on-sight legislation, even though there aren't any wolves known to be living in their state.

If you live in any of these three states, help save America's wolves by going to http://www.DenAction.org, log in, then select either Alert #201, 202 or 203 to send an e-mail to your elected representatives.

4. VALENTINE'S DAY IDEA: Give flowers and help save wildlife at same time

Express yourself this Valentine's Day with gifts from 1-800-FLOWERS.COM�, and help support Defenders of Wildlife in the process. Order today at 1-800-FLOWERS.COM�, and 1-800-FLOWERS.COM will donate 10 percent* of the net proceeds from your purchase to Defenders of Wildlife when you use promotion code DOW when ordering. Choose from 1-800- FLOWER.COM's exciting array of thoughtful gift products including delicious gourmet baskets, scrumptious desserts, fine novelties and giftware, and of course, the freshest flowers.

Simply go online at http://www.1800flowers.com/ and use promotion code DOW when ordering (type in code DOW under "Redeem Your Special Offer/Promotion Code for Special Offers" section on the Billing Information Page), or call 1-800-FLOWERS� (1-800-356-9377) and mention promotion code DOW to the Gift Advisor when placing your order. 1-800-FLOWERS.COM will then donate 10 percent of the net proceeds from your purchase to Defenders of Wildlife.

Order today for Valentine's Day, a Birthday or Just Because!

*Items may vary and are subject to delivery rules and times. Offer valid online and by phone. Offers can not be combined, are not available on all products, and are subject to restrictions and limitations. Offer valid through 12/31/03. Void where prohibited. © 2003 1-800-FLOWERS.COM, INC. 1-800-FLOWERS.COM� uses Secure Socket Layer (SSL) encryption technology to secure its website.

5. WETLANDS AT RISK: Bush administration tries to weaken safeguards

The Bush administration is trying to dramatically reduce the number of wetlands, streams and ponds that are entitled to federal protection under the Clean Water Act. That landmark law has helped clean up many of our nation's waterways. But this latest administration assault against the environment would let polluters discharge wastes into more and more of our streams and wetlands without fear of prosecution. Wildlife depends on wetlands for survival.

To tell the Bush administration not to surrender these vital wetlands to corporate polluters and developers, go to www.DenAction.org and respond to alert #204.

6. PROMISES FROM PELOSI: New House minority leader says she'll fight for environment

With Rep. Richard Pombo, a radical crusader against wildlife protections, rising to power as chairman of the House Resources Committee, environmentalists need all the help they can get on the Hill. That's one reason environmental leaders, including Defenders of Wildlife President Rodger Schlickeisen, met with new House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as the 108th Congress prepared to start business. Throughout her public career, she has earned high grades from the League of Conservation Voters. Pelosi voted the right way on environmental matters 95 percent of the time in the last Congress. "During our meeting," Schlickeisen reported, "she told us of her determination to fight for the environment."

7. KLAMATH DISASTER: Norton gets blame for fish kill

Secretary Norton is getting the blame for the biggest fish kill ever on the Klamath River � the deaths of 33,000 salmon and steelhead trout last fall. A new report by the California Department of Fish and Game said the federal government caused the fish kill by diverting too much water for farmers. The department also warned that unless Norton increases flows, "there is a substantial risk" for more fish kills.

And here's another example of Norton's ignoring science to please her corporate friends � it was learned last week that when she overturned the ban on snowmobiles in Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks in November, she defied the findings of the administration's own study. It found snowmobiles damage the environment and harm the health of park employees.

CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO DENLINES

NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS? Just send an E-mail from your old address to: Changeaddress@defenders.org and put only your new e-mail address in the subject line. If you no longer have access to your old address send an e-mail to DEN@Defenders.org and in the text part of the message give us your "old" and "new" addresses.

DENlines is a bi-weekly update of Defenders of Wildlife, a leading national conservation organization recognized as one of the nation's most progressive advocates for wildlife and its habitat. It is known for its effective leadership on endangered species issues, particularly predators such as brown bears and gray wolves. Defenders also advocates new approaches to wildlife conservation that protect species before they become endangered. Founded in 1947, Defenders is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization with more than 400,000 members and supporters. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to denlines@den.defenders.org and put the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line.

Defenders of Wildlife
1101 14th Street, N.W.
Suite 1400
Washington, DC 20005

from the Wilderness Society February 7, 2003

**********************************************

* Your WILDALERT for Friday, February, 7, 2003

**********************************************

The Bush Administration continues its barrage of regulatory

proposals designed to weaken environmental protection

and public involvement in our National Forests.

One of the most serious attacks is aimed at citizens'

rights to comment on and administratively appeal timber

sales and other Forest Service land management activities.

The timber industry could scarcely have wished for

more than this scheme, which will drastically diminish

the public's role in the management of its own public

forests.

Please take a moment to let the Forest Service know

that you strongly oppose its proposed appeal regulations

and other roll-backs in National Forest protection.

The deadline for comments is February 18. You can take

immediate action from

http://ga1.org/ct/61a4MzE12pq5/

BACKGROUND: Our statutory right to participate

In 1993, the Congress adopted the Appeals Reform Act.

It gave the American people the statutory right to

file administrative appeals of Forest Service land

management decisions. The Congress passed the law in

reaction to an unpopular effort by the Forest Service

to eliminate its administrative appeals process.

The Appeals Reform Act gives people 45 days to file

appeals of Forest Service land and resource management

activities, such as timber sales and mining operations.

The Regional Forester then has 45 days to review the

appeal and issue a decision, unless the appeal is settled

in the interim by negotiations. By law, the Forest

Service cannot implement the action while the appeal

is pending.

The Appeals Reform Act also requires the Forest Service

to allow citizens 30 days to comment on proposed management

activities. The agency must respond to public comments

as part of its final decision on a project. Only people

who comment on proposals are eligible to file administrative

appeals of final project decisions.

The Bush Administration has blamed environmentalists

for using the appeals process to delay thinning projects

to reduce fire risks. We haven't and the record proves

it; the claim is a subterfuge to get the public out

of public forest management by playing on people's

legitimate fears of fire. A 2001 study by the Government

Accounting Office found that only 1 percent of hazardous

fuels reduction projects were appealed. Nevertheless,

the Administration and some members of Congress have

advocated exempting thinning projects from appeal,

or even repealing the Appeals Reform Act altogether.

THE CURRENT THREAT

On December 11, the White House announced its "Healthy

Forests Initiative," a series of administrative actions

and proposals supposedly aimed at reducing fire risk.

One of these proposals is a major overhaul of the Forest

Service regulations that implemented the Appeals Reform

Act.

The changes to the appeal regulations would apply to

all Forest Service management activities, though, not

just to fire-related thinning projects. Among other

things, the proposed regulations would reduce the types

of activities subject to comment and appeal, and would

allow salvage timber sales to proceed even while appeals

are pending. They would also unfairly limit the issues

in an appeal to those specifically discussed in the

appellant's comments, even if the final project is

different from the proposal.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Please take a few minutes to help us combat this sweeping

change in rules meant to protect our right to participate

fully in decisions involving our public lands. When

public participation is outlawed, only the timber industry

will have a voice in the management of our national

forest lands.

You can take immediate action from http://ga1.org/ct/61a4MzE12pq5/

If you prefer to write your own letter, please feel

free to draw from the attached sample letter for the

major points, but please use your own words where you

can. The deadline for comments is Tuesday, February

18, 2003. You can send comments to:

USDA FS, Appeal Rule Content Analysis Team

P.O. Box 9079

Missoula, MT 59807

Email: 215appeals@fs.fed.us

Fax: (406) 329-3556

Thank you for being an important part of WildAlert,

our online community of wilderness advocates!

SAMPLE LETTER

USDA FS, Appeal Rule Content Analysis Team

P.O. Box 9079

Missoula, MT 59807

I am appalled at the Bush Administration's recent efforts

to reduce public participation in the management of

our National Forests. People should not be denied the

opportunity to express their views about proposed Forest

Service management projects, and to challenge agency

decisions with which they disagree.

In particular, I strongly oppose the proposed changes

to the Forest Service's regulation that implement the

Appeals Reform Act of 1993. Those changes would reduce

the ability of citizens to learn about and comment

on proposed management activities. They would also

make it much harder for people to file meaningful administrative

appeals of agency decisions.

I am especially concerned about these aspects of the

Appeal Reform Act regulations:

(1) allowing projects under appeal to be implemented

immediately for economic reasons such as salvage logging;

(2) exempting relatively small timber sales from comment

and appeal;

(3) limiting appealable issues to those specifically

raised in comments;

(4) only considering "substantive" comments;

(5) omitting interested parties from the appeal process;

and,

(6) exempting project decisions made by Department

of Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman or Under Secretary

Mark Rey.

The proposal to weaken the Appeals Reform Act regulations

is one of several regulatory changes that will drastically

limit public involvement and analysis of environmental

impacts. Others would exempt many forest plans, thinning

projects, and salvage timber sales from the requirements

of the National Environmental Policy Act, for example.

The Administration must acknowledge and explain the

drastic cumulative impacts of these regulatory changes

to public involvement and environmental protection

in the National Forests.

I strongly urge the Administration to withdraw this

proposal to weaken the Appeals Reform Act regulations.

The proposal is fundamentally undemocratic and a betrayal

of the millions of Americans who care about their National

Forests and are entitled to a voice in their management.

Sincerely,

You can take action on this alert either via email

(please see directions below) or via the web at:

http://ga1.org/campaign/forest_appeals/inbx8bar76jj

Visit the web address below to tell your friends about

this.

http://ga1.org/campaign/forest_appeals/forward/inbx8bar76jj

We encourage you to take action by February 19, 2003

Keep public involvement in National Forest decisions

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA THE WEB:

If you have access to a web browser, you can take action

on this alert by going to the following URL:

http://ga1.org/campaign/forest_appeals/inbx8bar76jj

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA EMAIL:

Just choose the "reply to sender" option on your email

program.

Your letter will be addressed and sent to:

USFS, Appeal Rule Content Analysis Team

----THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT IN YOUR NAME----

Dear [decision maker name automatically inserted here],

I am appalled at the Bush Administration's recent efforts

to reduce public participation in the management of

our National Forests. People should not be denied the

opportunity to express their views about proposed Forest

Service management projects, and to challenge agency

decisions with which they disagree.

In particular, I strongly oppose the proposed changes

to the Forest Service's regulation that implement the

Appeals Reform Act of 1993. Those changes would reduce

the ability of citizens to learn about and comment

on proposed management activities. They would also

make it much harder for people to file meaningful administrative

appeals of agency decisions.

I am especially concerned about these aspects of the

Appeal Reform Act regulations:

(1) allowing projects under appeal to be implemented

immediately for economic reasons such as salvage logging;

(2) exempting relatively small timber sales from comment

and appeal;

(3) limiting appealable issues to those specifically

raised in comments;

(4) only considering "substantive" comments;

(5) omitting interested parties from the appeal process;

and,

(6) exempting project decisions made by Department

of Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman or Under Secretary

Mark Rey.

The proposal to weaken the Appeals Reform Act regulations

is one of several regulatory changes that will drastically

limit public involvement and analysis of environmental

impacts. Others would exempt many forest plans, thinning

projects, and salvage timber sales from the requirements

of the National Environmental Policy Act, for example.

The Administration must acknowledge and explain the

drastic cumulative impacts of these regulatory changes

to public involvement and environmental protection

in the National Forests.

I strongly urge the Administration to withdraw this

proposal to weaken the Appeals Reform Act regulations.

The proposal is fundamentally undemocratic and a betrayal

of the millions of Americans who care about their National

Forests and are entitled to a voice in their management.

----END OF LETTER TO BE SENT----

from Save Our Environment February 22, 2003

Urgent Alert - Stop the Elimination of Forest Protections!

SaveOurEnvironment.org Action Center Update: February 21, 2003
Act Now to Stop the Elimination of Forest Protections!

Under the guise of simply changing federal regulations implementing the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Bush administration is planning to eliminate or seriously weaken vital environmental protections that apply to all of our national forests. These protections safeguard our drinking water by preserving vital watersheds, protect habitat for nearly 3,000 species of wildlife and assure that our forests remain American treasures for future generations.

Under this proposed rule, forest plans could be adopted and revised without preparing an environmental impact statement leaving the American people with only minimum information about the environmental effects of Forest Service proposals.

The changes would eliminate or seriously weaken vital safeguards for all of America's 155 national forests, allowing reckless logging by timber-industry profiteers and the destruction of habitat for many species of wildlife.

Deadline March 6: Take Action Now!

The Forest Service is accepting public comments until March 6, 2003. Tell the administration not to rewrite and weaken the NFMA regulations and listen to the scientists not the timber industry.

To send an official comment to the Forest Service and a copy to your members of Congress, simply reply to this message and we'll automatically send the message below on your behalf. To edit the letter or get more information, please click here .

Forest Service Chief Bosworth
USDA FS Planning Rule
Content Analysis Team
P.O. Box 8359
Missoula, MT 59807
CC: Your U.S. Senators/Representative

Dear Chief Bosworth,

I am submitting this letter as an official comment to your proposed rewrite of the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) regulations. I strongly oppose the proposed new rules that would eliminate or seriously weaken vital safeguards for all of our 155 national forests and allow reckless logging by timber-industry profiteers and the destruction of habitat for many species of wildlife.

I am particularly opposed to the attempt to change what have historically been mandatory and enforceable requirements for surveying and maintaining viable populations of wildlife in our national forests into optional considerations left to the complete discretion of forest planners. This flaw is contained in both of the alternative wildlife options presented in the December 6 proposal.

Similarly unacceptable is the proposal's indication that forest planning may be categorically excluded from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). As our nation's bedrock environmental law, NEPA ensures both full consideration of potential environmental impacts of planning decisions and meaningful public participation. I am also troubled that the draft regulations seek to create a presumption that all national forest lands are open to logging, grazing, mining, off-road vehicles, and other commercial uses unless specifically prohibited, making other considerations like fish and wildlife of secondary importance.

In fact, I oppose the overall direction of the proposed regulations, which seek to give forest managers total discretion to manage public forests however they see fit while reducing scientific and public input. This proposal would eliminate balance, scientific credibility, and public accountability in forest planning, the very foundations upon which the National Forest Management Act is based.

I urge you abandon these proposed regulations in their entirety and return to the balanced and accountable forest planning envisioned by the NFMA.

Sincerely,

Clean Energy Victories!	NRDC Earth Action	Stop Mozambique Turtle Deaths

Raising the Bar: Higher Fuel Economy Standards	Denlines	Forest Service Slamming the Door on Public Involvement

Stop Elimination of Forest Protection