Category: Newsletter

Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 34

PennEast, a pipeline company, has proposed a plan to build a 118 mile natural gas pipeline in Pennsylvania.  The proposed pipeline project has received plenty of backlash from environmentalists.  Before PennEast can build the pipeline, the company needs to complete a regulatory review with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

The FERC found that “The proposed PennEast natural gas-pipeline will result in some adverse ecological impacts, but they could be reduced to less-than-significant levels, according to a draft environmental impact statement prepared by the staff of a federal agency” (Johnson).  This response did not quell the angry critics.

Critics are deeply concerned about the environmental impact, which in some case is long lasting; the pipeline will have on wetlands, endangered species, historic resources, and other areas.  Those against the pipeline do not believe that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s changes do enough to protect these threatened areas.  “Tom Gilbert, campaign director for ReThink Energy NJ and New Jersey Conservation, one of many environmental groups lobbying against the project says ‘It is impossible for FERC to assess the environmental costs of this project’” (Johnson).

Those who argue that PennEast should build the pipeline say that the pipeline will provide cheaper gas to homes and businesses.  PennEast views the FERC verdict as a victory on a project that has taken longer to get started than predicted due to a lack of information provided for the regulatory review.  “’This conclusion brings local homes, hospitals, businesses and schools one step closer to receiving a vital source of reliable, affordable energy,’ the company said” (Johnson).

The areas and animals the pipeline will traverse and that “it could affect four groundwater aquifer systems and a few public drinking wells in Hunterdon County, and cross more than 250 bodies of water, including the Delaware River, and 56 acres of wetlands. It would require more than 200 acres of agricultural land for rights-of-way, poses a risk to five endangered species, and traverse 22 parcels of preserved land in New Jersey set aside under the state’s Green Acres program” (Johnson).  “There is no demonstrated need for this pipeline, which threatens some of New Jersey’s most pristine streams and wetlands,’’ said Jim Waltman, executive director of the Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association, another critic who is against the pipeline being built.

Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, said that the pipeline will never legally meet qualifications it needs to because the bodies of water it comes in contact with have anti degeneration regulations.  This means the quality of the water cannot be reduced.

Those who back the building of the pipeline say that “the pipeline … reflects recommendations in the state’s Energy Master Plan, which calls for a build-out of natural gas infrastructure in New Jersey as a way of reducing energy costs. Nevertheless, the pipeline is perhaps one of the most contentious of more than a dozen similar projects that are pending, approved, or proposed in New Jersey” (Johnson).

Actions have already been taken against the FERC’s decision.  “The Delaware Riverkeeper Network has filed a challenge in federal court, asserting FERC suffers from a conflict of interest, having never rejected a pipeline project.  The public comment period on the draft EIS ends September 5. PennEast said it expects FERC to make a final decision on the project in 2017, but numerous other federal and state agencies have yet to weigh in, including the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, which has refused to review permits for the project because officials say the application is incomplete” (Johnson).

Do you agree with the FERC’s decision?  Do you think PennEast will be allowed to build the pipeline?  Do you think the pipeline will be helpful or just harm the environment?

Source: Johnson, Tom. “Federal Agency Says PennEast Environmental Impacts Could Be Reduced.” NJ Spotlight. NJ Spotlight, 25 July 2016. Web. 27 July 2016.

Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 32

The Obama administration put forth rules about fracking on public lands that oil and gas companies did not like.  These companies believe that these regulations would be the first step to federal regulation of all fracking activity.  The Obama administration argues that these rules are solely put in place due to safety concerns within the industry.  These companies took the rules to court and a federal judge ruled in the oil and gas companies favor.  The White House does not agree with the judge’s ruling and plan to appeal the ruling.

The regulations were made by the U.S. Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and were finalized in March 2015.  U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl made his ruling on June 21, 2016 stating that “the [BLM] lacked Congressional authority to set fracking regulations for federal and Indian lands” (Bailey).

The BLM’s regulations that Skavdahl struck down “would have required companies to provide data on chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing and to take steps to prevent leakage from oil and gas wells on federally owned land” (Bailey).  This would change the regulation of fracking from states to the federal level.

Fracking extracts oil and natural gas from underground by shooting high pressurized amounts of water, sand, and chemicals into the ground.

Not everyone is happy with the use of fracking to extract oil and natural gas.  “Environmental groups and some neighbors of oil and gas wells have linked fracking to water pollution as well as increased earthquake activity in certain areas” (Bailey).

Less than three quarters of U.S. fracking occurs on federal land so the ruling and the case has had little direct effect on the fracking currently operating.  Most of the 22 percent of federal land fracking is done from offshore Gulf of Mexico operations.

Though the effect these rules would have on current fracking operations would have been minimal, oil and gases companies were still concerned.  They worried that these mandates would lead to the federal government making all of the rules regarding fracking operations.

“Skavdahl, nominated by Obama to the bench in 2011, had put the rules on hold a year ago to weigh requests from energy industry groups and four states to stop them from being implemented. He issued a preliminary injunction against the rules in September and made it permanent in Tuesday’s decision” (Bailey).  Skavdahl said that the case was based on where the Interior Department had the authority to make these rules and not about whether fracking was good or bad.  Skavdahl ruled that the BLM overstepped its authority, given to them by Congress.

Skavdahl backed up his ruling by saying “Congress in the 2005 Energy Policy (EP) Act specifically removed hydraulic fracturing operations that do not involve diesel fuels from Environmental Protection Agency regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act” (Bailey).

As with most regulations, there are those who support the rules and those who are against them.  The pro side argues that regulation is necessary due to the potential high amounts of pollution caused by fracking.  Those against regulation point out the growth in U.S. oil production, the lower energy costs, and the jobs created by the fracking industry.

This ruling, as well as regulation on fracking, continues to be a polarizing issue.  Do you agree with Judge Skavdahl’s ruling?  What are your thoughts on fracking?

Source: Bailey, David. “Court Strikes down Obama Fracking Rules for Public Lands.” Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 22 June 2016. Web. 25 July 2016.

Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 30

The newest trend sweeping the nation is the app ‘Pokémon Go.’  The app forces players to leave their homes and explore their surroundings in order to catch ‘em all.  The type of Pokémon found depends on the area players are walking around.  In order to find water Pokémon, players need to be near water and so on.

While exploring and trying to find all of these Pokémon, players have also stumbled upon some real wildlife.  Some biologists have embraced this aspect of ‘Pokémon Go.’  These biologists believe that these situations can be turned into a learning opportunity.  Morgan Jackson, an entomologist and student in Canada tweeted “If you have your #PokemonGo Pokedex memorized but find a live species you don’t recognize, I’m here to help you identify it! #PokeBlitz.”  This was the start of others jumping on this bandwagon.

“For the past few days, players have been tweeting photos of the animals they encounter, hashtagging them #PokeBlitz, a play on “bioblitz,” an event in which people count all the living species in a designated area” (Brulliard).  Jackson, other biologists, and wildlife fans have all been tweeting the answers and if they do not know the answers they retweet the question to get more help.

“Pokémon’s creator would no doubt approve. Satoshi Tajiri grew up collecting insects in his countryside hometown outside of Tokyo. But the concrete of that megalopolis eventually encroached on his town, and bugs became harder to find. The virtual landscape he made, on the other hand, hosted hundreds of make-believe species — ones that enthusiasts could collect, sort and classify, just as Tajiri had once done with insects” (Brulliard).  Tajiri created a generation obsessed with collecting and learning about fictional creatures and ‘Pokémon Go’ maybe instilling in this same generation a thirst to learn more about wildlife on a lesser scale.

Identifying wildlife took an every bigger Pokémon turn when Asia Murphy, who writes about wildlife conservation at her blog Anati’ala, created a Pokédex for wildlife spotted while playing ‘Pokémon Go.’

Biologists are under no illusion that these players will become obsessive bird watchers, but that they believe the number of young people getting interested in the random wildlife they come across has increased.  In order to play ‘Pokémon Go,’ players are constantly looking at their screens to see what Pokémon are around them.  This means that just because players are in areas surrounded by wildlife, they may not be paying any attention to them.  The impact of identifying real life animals found while playing ‘Pokémon Go’ may not be groundbreaking but it is generating more interest in wild animals than there was before.

No matter your feelings on ‘Pokémon Go,’ as long as players continue to play the game and tweet about the animals they come across, there will be biologists ready and willing to identify these creatures for them.  Who knows the next step maybe players taking pictures of interesting plants they come across and asking nature enthusiasts to identify the plants for them?  Do you think ‘Pokémon Go’ is helping players learn about wildlife?

Source: Brulliard, Karin. “If You Must Play Pokémon Go, ‘catch’ Some Real Animals While You’re at It.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 13 July 2016. Web. 13 July 2016.

The Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 27

Many of us are have become familiar with the work of criminal investigators, because this subject has infiltrated television and movies.  For instance, we are familiar with many of the activities required to solve a crime: collecting evidence, interviewing witnesses, conducting surveillance, planning raids, and helping prepare cases for court.  But what most of us don’t realize is that the victims in some of these cases are not people, but rather wildlife.  Special agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service investigate crimes related to wildlife.  They enforce federal wild life laws, prevent smuggling, conspiracy, money laundering, and fraud.  They also investigate the killing of endangered or protected wildlife and work with industry groups and companies to reduce hazards to wildlife.

These special agents often work undercover and in covert operations.  They don’t wear uniforms, generally remain anonymous, and rarely give interviews.  Special agents must be in excellent physical condition, pass mandatory drug tests and psychological screenings, and have a four-year degree in wildlife management, criminal justice, or other related field.  And only the best of the best are accepted.  There are currently only 250 special agents working for the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Why does the Fish and Wildlife Service need a class of covert special agents?  While illegal activities involving wildlife are not often an apparent problem to the general population, they do frequently occur.  Illegal trade in wildlife is second only to narcotics.  Special agents often go undercover to infiltrate trafficking rings and illegal guiding operations to document violations.  The black market for wildlife is estimated to be worth more than $20 billion.  These animals are often smuggled into the United States as a part of the pet trade or for collectors.  And preventing this illegal trade is extremely important, because illegal wildlife trade can lead to mass extinction of species.

When an animal is recovered from an illegal operation, the Service cannot release it back into the wild because the animal is evidence and also it is unfit to survive alone after living in captivity.  Every time a wild animal is captured for illegal trade, there is one less animal to contribute to its natural population.

The best ways for individuals to help prevent illegal wildlife trade is to stay informed.  Asking questions and getting the facts about wildlife can help prevent the success of smugglers.   Also educating others to do the same thing is important.  In addition, pushing governments to pass and enforce laws that reduce demand and impose deterrents can help.

Although not well known, the special agents of The Fish and Wildlife Service provide an important function in our environment.   The job of the special agent is to uphold the objectives of the Fish and Wildlife Service.  These objectives are: to “Assist in the development and application of an environmental stewardship ethic for our society, based on ecological principles, scientific knowledge of fish and wildlife, and a sense of moral responsibility,” to “Guide the conservation, development, and management of the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources,” and to “Administer a national program to provide the public opportunities to understand, appreciate, and wisely use fish and wildlife resources.”

The Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 25

Residents of the San Francisco Bay Area recently approved an unprecedented tax on Tuesday June 7 to fund the restoration of lost wetlands. Known as Measure AA, the tax is expected to raise as estimated $25 million a year for the next 20 years.

The Environmental Protection Agency has found that the Western U.S. has the country’s sickest wetlands. In the San Francisco Bay Area, wetlands have been paved, diked and invaded by weeds at a rate unmatched elsewhere in the U.S.   An assessment based on more than 1000 wetland surveys conducted in 2001 concluded that while nearly half of the wetlands in the continental U.S. are in good shape, only one-fifth of the wetlands in the Western U.S. are doing well.

In California, the destruction of wetlands, has been even worse than in other areas of the west. An estimated 90 per cent of California wetlands have been lost over the last two centuries. The steep cliffs of the Pacific coast contained fewer natural wetlands than are found on the Atlantic coast.

Much of California’s wetlands were concentrated on rivers and around the banks of the San Francisco Bay. These areas have been paved over and built up. Additionally, ships in the Bay introduce invasive species, which has left the area with one of the words infestations of invasive wetland weeds in the United States.

Groups such as the Golden Gate Audubon Society use volunteers to help clean up wetlands in the San Francisco area. They host monthly workdays during which volunteers can sign up to remove invasive plants and pick up trash in areas such as the Pier 94 waterfront. The Pier 94 wetland restoration began when a shoreline on a Port of San Francisco property collapsed into the water and began to return to marshland. A decade ago, heavy trash such as pieces of pavement was cleared away, creating a place for plants to take root.

Coastal wetlands such as these may be important around the nation as sea levels rise. Coastal wetlands can help ease flooding and erosion as sea levels are getting higher. By growing taller as seas rise, marshes and other wetlands are increasingly valuable as buffers from the possible effects of climate change. It is estimated that seas may rise two to six feet over the next two centuries.

Wetlands are also helpful to filter pollution from the water and to provide habitats for multiple species of plants, fish, and animals. They improve water quality by trapping sediments and retaining excess nutrients and other pollutants such as heavy metals. These purification functions are especially important when a wetland is connected to groundwater or rivers and lakes that are in turn used for human activities and as a habitat for wildlife.

There are also economic benefits associated with the preservation of wetlands.   Without wetlands communities may have to build flood control or water treatment systems to replace the functions that are naturally provided by wetlands.  Is so, these costs could be much higher than those of preserving natural wetlands.  Also, wetlands provide valuable fish habitats, that if lost could be detrimental to the recreational and commercial fishing industries.

Wetlands perform a number of significant ecological functions that are not known by most people.  Over 100 years ago, some organizations campaigned for the elimination of wetlands, as they were considered a nuisance.  Now ecologists, scientists and environmental groups recognize the environmental benefits that wetlands provide, and hence have raised the public awareness of the importance of preserving them.    This type of awareness has made a difference in cities such as San Francisco where significant tax dollars are being used to restore wetlands.    Because of this increased awareness and the subsequent efforts being done by some communities in the western U.S., it would be expected that we will see increased efforts to improve wetlands in the 21^st century.