Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Conservationist
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

  • April 25, 2013

    Appeals Court: Leave that Mountain—and Trout—Alone

    By Bob Marshall

    Sportsmen and other conservationists found another reason to value the Environmental Protection Agency and the rule of law Tuesday, when a federal appeals court unanimously upheld the agency’s right to regulate the permitting process for mountaintop mining operations – one of the most destructive mining activities ever for fish and wildlife.
     
    The case involved the EPA’s decision to revoke a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit for The Spruce 1 Mine, the largest in West Virginia history, which would have buried some six miles of streams with tailings from the mountaintop. The EPA said the permit violated the Clean Water Act, but a lower court ruled the agency didn’t have the right to revoke a permit granted by the corps.

  • April 19, 2013

    New National Ocean Policy Gets Two Thumbs Sideways

    By Bob Marshall

    After years of often-bitter debate, The White House released its final version of the new National Ocean Policy this week. Sportsmen’s groups cheered. And jeered. The cup was half empty and full at the same time.

    George Cooper, a board member of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and a consultant who has worked closely with the American Sportfishing Association on this issue, spoke on behalf of the ASA:

    “What a lot of us see in this document is as follow-through on commitments Deerin [Deerin Babb-Brott, Director of the National Ocean Council] made to us early on in the process to be more responsive to our community’s interests,” Cooper said. “We didn’t want to be lumped in with the commercial interests, we wanted to be recognized for our contributions through the excise taxes we pay for fisheries management, and we wanted recognition of the proper priority of public access and use of a public resources.

  • April 10, 2013

    Super-Sized Crabs and Oysters with Herpes

    By Bob Marshall

    When you spend most days scanning the wire (ok, the Internet; I’m old-school) ferreting out the latest events on the important conservation issues of the day, you come across some remarkable stories. Most make you cry. Some make you laugh.

    And then there are those that make you laugh while you cry.

    Which brings me to these two headlines from last weekend that created a serious panic among those of us in Cajun country:

    Oysters With Herpes: One More Effect Of Climate Change

    and

    Crabs, Supersized By Carbon Pollution, May Upset Chesapeake’s Balance

  • April 3, 2013

    A Perfect Storm of Wildlife Habitat Loss—and How to Stop It

    By Hal Herring

    Bob Marshall recently described on this blog how the biofuels mandate from the Bush administration has had an unpleasant result: the explosive conversion of native grasslands (our gamebird and waterfowl habitat) to corn crops, with their high uses of water and the fertilizers that run off and pollute watersheds for hundreds of miles downstream. As Marshall pointed out, what we are doing to our native grasslands is almost exactly what the Malaysians, Brazilians and Indonesians are doing to their native forests.
     
    The biofuels mandate is a perfect example of unintended consequences. But there’s another engine driving this destruction of our wetlands and wildlife, too. This engine dates back to the 1996 Farm Bill, when Congress de-coupled what is known as “conservation compliance” - basic protections for wetlands and highly erodible lands- via our government supported crop insurance programs.  At that time, it did not seem too important. Farmers in the U.S. relied more on direct subsidy payments - which came with an extensive set of mandates for conservation compliance - than they did the federally supported crop insurance plans.