{"id":56,"date":"2007-06-04T10:51:00","date_gmt":"2007-06-04T14:51:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/?p=56"},"modified":"2007-06-04T10:51:00","modified_gmt":"2007-06-04T14:51:00","slug":"policy-news-from-esas-public-affairs-office-19","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/2007\/06\/04\/policy-news-from-esas-public-affairs-office-19\/","title":{"rendered":"Policy News from ESA\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s Public Affairs Office"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>A Bi-Weekly Publication of the Ecological Society of America<br>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>CLIMATE: BILL FORCING U.S. PARTICIPATION IN CLIMATE CHANGE TALKS CLEARS HOUSE PANEL<\/li>\n<li>CLIMATE: U.S. ACCUSED OF STALLING PROGRESS ON RAINFOREST PLAN<\/li>\n<li>AGRICULTURE: HARKIN TARGETS BIG CHANGES TO CONSERVATION PROGRAMS<\/li>\n<li>AGRICULTURE: POLLINATOR PROTECTION ACT INTRODUCED IN SENATE<\/li>\n<li>ENDANGERED SPECIES: HOUSE LAWMAKERS ASK INTERIOR TO HALT ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT REWRITE<\/li>\n<li>ENDANGERED SPECIES: FWS BUREAUCRATS ORDERED SCIENTISTS TO BACK DELISTING OF ARIZONA EAGLE<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr>\n<p><strong>CLIMATE: BILL FORCING U.S. PARTICIPATION IN CLIMATE CHANGE TALKS CLEARS HOUSE PANEL <\/strong>  <\/p>\n<p>The Bush Administration would be required to participate this year  in international global climate change negotiations aimed at setting  binding targets to limit heat-trapping emissions under legislation  approved May 23 by a near party-line 29-16 majority in the House  Foreign Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n<p>Chairman Tom Lantos\u2019 (D-CA) bill , H.R. 2420, calls on Bush to work  \u201cmore actively and constructively\u201d through the United Nations on a  future climate treaty that can go into effect upon the 2012 expiration  of the Kyoto Protocol.<\/p>\n<p>It orders the U.S. to send a high level delegation \u2014 headed by the  Secretary of State \u2014 to the next major U.N. global climate change  conference scheduled this December in Bali , Indonesia .<\/p>\n<p>The bill also orders Bush to work on an international climate  agreement that requires \u201cbinding mitigation commitments from all major  emitting countries based on their level of development.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The legislation does not give a specific numerical target for  emission cuts but instead urges U.S. diplomats \u201cto seek international  consensus\u201d on a target stabilization rate for greenhouse gases in the  Earth\u2019s atmosphere that reflect the recent recommendations of the  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.<\/p>\n<p>Lantos\u2019 bill also sets up a State Department Office on Global  Climate Change headed by a presidential-appointed ambassador who must  be Senate confirmed. And it puts an emphasis on exporting new U.S.  energy technologies to emerging economies, namely China and India ,  through trade missions and several new offices.<\/p>\n<p>The White House quickly signaled opposition to the measure and defended its efforts on climate change.<\/p>\n<p>Visit this site to view the bill: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.eenews.net\/features\/documents\/2007\/05\/23\/document_gw_01.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">http:\/\/www.eenews.net\/features\/documents\/2007\/05\/23\/document_gw_01.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>CLIMATE: U.S. ACCUSED OF STALLING PROGRESS ON RAINFOREST PLAN <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>U.S. officials are blocking progress on a proposal from rainforested  countries seeking the start of a new program to combat global climate  change, according to environmentalists tracking United Nations talks in  Bonn , Germany .<\/p>\n<p>Papua New Guinea , Costa Rica , and Brazil , along with the European  Union, suggested the launch of a \u201cnational baseline\u201d measurement system  to allow countries with rainforests to determine whether deforestation  is speeding up or slowing down. The measurements could later be used to  start up a payment program for countries that do not clear  carbon-absorbing trees.<\/p>\n<p>But Bush Administration officials attending the two-week conference  resisted the measurement plan, saying further study would be needed  before it could gain U.S. approval.<\/p>\n<p>Steve Schwartzman, Director of International Programs at  Environmental Defense commented, \u201cIt\u2019s scandalous that the United  States has said we\u2019re not going to be a party to the Kyoto Protocol  because it doesn\u2019t do anything to reduce emissions from big developing  countries, and then when Brazil comes forward with a proposal, the U.S.  says, \u2018No, I think we need another workshop.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The top U.S. climate negotiator, Harlan Watson, said that the  rainforested countries are free to advance their proposal, but they  should do it under the existing Kyoto Protocol system and not during  the debate on a follow-up treaty that would go into effect once Kyoto  expires in 2012.<\/p>\n<p><strong>AGRICULTURE: HARKIN TARGETS BIG CHANGES TO CONSERVATION PROGRAMS <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) is planning  a dramatic reorganization of conservation programs in the next Farm  Bill and wants to pump $6 billion more into conservation spending.<\/p>\n<p>Harkin\u2019s Farm Bill proposal would consolidate the Agriculture  Department\u2019s largest working lands programs into one new initiative  called the Conservation Stewardship Incentives Program. Its annual  budget would be twice that of the entire Fish and Wildlife Service. The  Agriculture Chairman would put another $3 billion into the other  conservation programs. The money would come from the \u201creserve fund\u201d  given to the Farm Bill in the 2008 budget resolution, which requires  offsets.<\/p>\n<p>Harkin does not have those offsets in hand yet and is basically  going to \u201cbuy now, pay later,\u201d with the hopes that his colleagues will  be so impressed with the conservation spending, they will help him come  up with the offsets.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson  (D-MN) said he would restore controversial cuts he made to the  Conservation Security Program in his Farm Bill proposal, bringing it up  to baseline levels.<\/p>\n<p>Peterson appears to have backed away from some of the hard budget  lines he drew before the conservation and energy markups earlier this  week, when he had told members they could not tap any more of the  reserve funds to try to boost funding for favorite programs.<\/p>\n<p>But after a meeting with House leadership, Peterson said that he is  feeling more confident about being able to find offsets for funding and  would let subcommittees tap more money in the reserve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>AGRICULTURE: POLLINATOR PROTECTION ACT INTRODUCED IN SENATE <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A group of 29 senators introduced a bill May 24 that would open all  Farm Bill conservation programs to habitat protection for bees and  other pollinators.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201cPollinator Protection Act\u201d does not create new Farm Bill  programs or change their funding. Rather, it directs the USDA offices  that dole out conservation funds to help producers develop habitat or  farming practices that could benefit pollinators.<\/p>\n<p>Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) and roughly  half of the Agriculture Committee members have signed on as cosponsors.<\/p>\n<p>Note: The Ecological Society of America signed a group statement of  support for the Pollinator Protection Act, along with many other  organizations, including The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife  Federation, and National Audubon Society.<\/p>\n<p><strong>ENDANGERED SPECIES: HOUSE LAWMAKERS ASK INTERIOR TO HALT ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT REWRITE <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A group of House lawmakers asked the Bush Administration to stop its rewrite of Endangered Species Act ( ESA ) regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Seventy-six members, most of them Democrats, told Interior Secretary  Dirk Kempthorne in a letter to \u201creconsider any attempts\u201d to change the  law until he seeks the advice of congressional committees with ESA  jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<p>The Administration can move forward with its regulations without  congressional approval, but Congress could put future work on the  regulations on hold by blocking funding.<\/p>\n<p>Interior has been under fire since draft regulatory changes became  public in March. That draft would scale back federal power to list  species or prevent disruptive activities in their habitat.<\/p>\n<p>Fish and Wildlife Service Chief Dale Hall said the Agency has thrown  out those proposals and is drafting new regulations. Reps. Maurice  Hinchey (D-NY), Jim Moran (D-VA), and Christopher Shays (R-CT) were the  lead authors of the letter, which is signed by half the Democrats on  the Interior Appropriations panel.<\/p>\n<p>Hinchey also sent a letter to Interior Appropriations Committee  Chairman Norm Dicks (D-WA) asking him to include language in the  spending bill that would limit the Administration\u2019s ability to overhaul  the ESA.<\/p>\n<p>Visit this site to view the letter to Secretary Kempthorne: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.eenews.net\/features\/documents\/2007\/05\/16\/document_gw_01.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">www.eenews.net\/features\/documents\/2007\/05\/16\/document_gw_01.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>ENDANGERED SPECIES: FWS BUREAUCRATS ORDERED SCIENTISTS TO BACK DELISTING OF ARIZONA EAGLE <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>High-ranking Fish and Wildlife Service officials in Washington ,  D.C. ordered the agency\u2019s field biologists to overlook some scientific  information and back the removal of Arizona \u2019s bald eagles from the  endangered species list, according to Interior Department documents  obtained and released May 18 by the Center for Biological Diversity, an  advocacy group.<\/p>\n<p>Biologists argued against delisting the eagle but were told by  agency supervisors to seek only information that would back removing  the bird from the list, according to department meeting notes. The  group, which filed a lawsuit to maintain the eagle\u2019s listing, obtained  the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request.<\/p>\n<p>Agency notes suggest the FWS decision came as a \u201cpolicy call\u201d from  higher-ranking officials in the regional office and Washington . Some  biologists\u2019 initial reactions were to keep the eagles on the list as a  distinct population segment (DPS). The delisting is expected to occur  next month.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>Sources: Energy and Environment Daily and Greenwire<\/p>\n<p>Send questions or comments to Nadine Lymn, ESA Director of Public Affairs, <a href=\"mailto:Nadine@esa.org\">mailto:Nadine@esa.org<\/a>or Colleen Fahey, Policy Analyst, <a href=\"mailto:Colleen@esa.org\">mailto:Colleen@esa.org<\/a><\/p>\n<p>If you received Policy News from a friend and would like to receive it directly, please send an e-mail to <a href=\"mailto:listserv@listserv.umd.edu\">listserv@listserv.umd.edu<\/a> with the following in the body of the message: sub ESANEWS {your first and last name}<\/p>\n<p>If you wish to unsubscribe to ESANEWS and your biweekly Policy News, send the command \u201csignoff ESANEWS\u201d to <a href=\"mailto:listserv@listserv.umd.edu\">mailto:listserv@listserv.umd.edu<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Visit ESA \u2019s website at <a href=\"https:\/\/esa.org\">https:\/\/esa.org<\/a><\/p>\n<p>See past editions of ESA \u2019s Policy News at <a href=\"https:\/\/esa.org\/pao\/policyNews\/\">https:\/\/esa.org\/pao\/policyNews\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Read the latest biweekly Policy News from ESA&#8217;s Public Affairs Office.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,91],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-56","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ecology-in-policy","category-policy-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=56"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=56"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=56"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=56"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}