Red Lodge Clearinghouse

As temperatures rise, scientists predict resource managers will face a new set of challenges: an influx of invasive species, more wildfires, rising ocean levels, and shifting habitat needs and migration patterns for wildlife in search of a cooler climate. Many of those changes are already taking place across the United States.

To help land managers respond to those growing concerns, S. 3036 would give roughly $137 billion in new funding to federal and state agencies in its first 19 years.

The climate legislation has emerged as the major focus for environmental groups this year. In recent weeks, wildlife advocates and hunting and fishing groups have begun to turn up the heat on their campaigns to advance the bill -- launching advertising campaigns, reports and a flurry of letters to senators to press for their support. Environmentalists say they see this as a long-term campaign. With the 60 votes needed to advance the bill anything but certain, many groups expect they will continue the fight in future years.

"We see this as perhaps the most important conservation bill we have ever worked on, both because of the emissions reductions, as well as protections for natural resources threatened by inevitable global warming," said John Kostyack of the National Wildlife Federation. "We've taken a look at some of the other key programs, like the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act, and our top priority programs can only operate successfully if we grapple with climate change science."

He added: "Right now natural resource agencies are woefully understaffed and unprepared for dealing with this problem."

The bill doles out the nearly $3 trillion it is expected to raise from auctions of greenhouse gas allowances among various sectors. Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D-Calif.) substitute amendment requires roughly 5 percent of the allowance to go into a state and federal wildlife adaption fund.

Since the legislation first advanced in the Environment and Public Works committee last year, lawmakers have reduced the piece of the pie for wildlife. They instead increased the amount of money for other sectors in an attempt to win more votes, with tax cuts and deficit reduction getting the most funding.

But the $288 billion that would go to wildlife adaptation over the life of the bill is plenty to appease environmental groups. They estimate federal and state resources agencies would get an average of $7.2 billion in extra funding each year for the program's first 19 years.

The money would go to the Interior Department, Forest Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. EPA, state Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the federal and state Land and Water Conservation Fund.

The agencies could use the funds to hire more personnel to come up with adaptation plans for the wildlife, buy land or water rights in sensitive areas or conduct scientific research. The bill requires projects to fit within state or national adaptation plans and help species, habitat or ecological processes survive global warming.

More than 150 groups -- including major national environmental groups like the Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation and Wilderness Society and dozens of state and local chapter groups -- sent a letter to senators yesterday asking them to support the bill, stressing its assistance for wildlife and natural resources.

"Scientists warn what natural resources managers, hunters, anglers and other outdoor recreationists already know: Global warming is causing serious damage and disruptions to wildlife and ecosystems," the letter states. "These important subtitles recognize the need to incorporate climate science and policy direction into natural resources conservation planning and provide the investment in natural resources conservation necessary to address climate change's unavoidable impacts."

The National Wildlife Federation also circulated a new report to senators yesterday highlighting the "urgent need for climate change legislation." And grassroots activists from across the country have come to town to press their lawmakers for their support.

Last month more than two dozen hunting and fishing groups -- including Pheasants Forever, the Izaak Walton League of American and Ducks Unlimited -- also sent a letter supporting the bill. "The future of hunting and fishing in America depends on the ability of conservation agencies to assist fish and wildlife to adapt to a changing climate," they wrote.

But the extra funding for the federal purse to respond to climate change is not without its critics. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) is planning to offer an amendment to the bill that would not let the government keep the revenue it gets from the emissions permits. Corker's amendment would instead mail out rebate checks to Americans making $150,000 or less -- $300,000 or less if a married couple.

Corker said the bill is an "overreach," and he is using the amendment to send a message: If you're going to raise a lot of money, don't give it to the government (ClimateWire, June 2).

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment