Author Archives | Jamie Rappaport Clark

Tagged Condors

Critically Endangered Condors a Sight to Behold

On a chilly bright blue sky day on top of the Vermillion Cliffs in northern Arizona, I finally got to see first-hand the results of a project I worked on while at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the late 1990s.  I stood on the edge of the cliffs with colleagues from Defenders and conservation partners from AZ Fish and Game and The Peregrine Fund watching critically endangered California condors soaring in the wind updrafts and sitting on boulders sunning themselves in the crisp morning’s sun.  They are certainly spectacular birds. Until you actually see one of these massive creatures on the wing, it’s hard to truly visualize just how incredible these birds are and how precarious their future still is.  They are almost magical to watch as they ride the thermals against the strikingly severe cliff sides near the Grand Canyon.

Condors

Condors

Condors

Condors

Condor 011

Condor 011

Condor soaring

Condor soaring

Condors in flight

Condors in flight

Condor flying

Condor flying

Condor soaring

Condor soaring

Condor 017

Condor 017

Condors on netting

Condors on netting

Condors on netting

Condor

Condor

Condor taking flight

Condor taking flight

Condor taking flight

Condors

Condors

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Defenders CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark watches condors soaring

Condors perching

Condors perching

Condor perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Condor perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Condor perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Condors

Condors

Condors perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Condors perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Condors perched on Vermillion Cliffs

Vermillion Cliffs

Vermillion Cliffs

Vermillion Cliffs

Condor Wingspan

Condor Wingspan

Display showing the wingspan of a condor

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Though there have been some birds now born in the wild since the original releases from captivity over a decade ago, most still wear the obvious brand of human help in the form of tags and transmitters to track their movements in northern Arizona and southern Utah.   It is only with significant human support that we are making headway in returning these incredible flying creatures back to their rightful place in the wild.  All of the birds now in the wild still require supplemental feeding and are monitored regularly to manage the leading ongoing cause of their deaths today; the ingestion of lead from carcasses and gut piles of animals hunted throughout their range.  As carrion eaters (consumers of dead animals), the lead often left behind by hunters in carcasses or gut piles is ingested during feeding and accumulates quickly to deadly levels in the birds.  If we are seeing it at such high levels on an ongoing basis in condors, just imagine all the other wildlife that feed in a similar fashion.  It is abundantly clear that lead and wildlife are not a good mix for long term survival and sustainability.

AZ Game and Fish and The Peregrine Fund have been working diligently through voluntary ammunition swap programs (free exchanging of lead bullets for copper or steel).  In addition, they have an around the clock program of supplemental feeding and monitoring of the birds’ lead levels with intervention by trapping and treatment to remove lead from the systems of those birds most affected.  Regardless, the condor population overall is still in real trouble.

Though there has been a positive response from hunters with the ammunition swap out program in Arizona, there is no such opportunity in Utah and that makes recovery of the condor all the more complicated and frustrating.   The birds range from their “home base” at the Vermillion Cliffs but are now flying further and further away into Utah where there are no controls or incentives to use other than lead shot while hunting.  Until the lead is out of ammunition used to hunt wildlife, it will continue to be a labor intensive uphill battle to save the condors.

It’s time for ammunition manufacturers to step up and do what was done for waterfowl decades ago.  Conversion away from lead should not affect hunter success, but it will do a world of good for condors and other critters.  The science is clear, now we need to encourage manufacturers and hunters to step up.

 

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Features, Photo, Southwest, Species at Risk, Wildlife1 Comment

THIRD PLACE, WILD LANDS: Moonrise by Alexander Ho

Protect America’s Heritage, Communities in 2012

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Defenders' president and CEO, Jamie Rappaport Clark

Last week, the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts Blog asked, “What’s in store for 2012?” Read about what environmental priorities Defenders president and CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark thinks Congress should focus on this year.

The damages of last year’s record-setting droughts, floods and fires are estimated to have cost the country more than $52 billion. Not to mention the costs to our natural resources. The Texas Forest Service estimates as many as 500 million trees throughout the state were killed by the year’s horrific drought —a full 10 percent of the forests in the Lone Star State. And according to the top international climate scientists that comprise the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the natural disasters of last year were only a preview of the extreme weather to come.

Instead of waiting for 2012 to deliver worse and potentially deadlier punches, Congress should take this opportunity to fortify our natural defenses and prepare ourselves for what’s ahead. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Max Baucus (D-MT) have taken the first important step in that direction. In November the two introduced the Securing America’s Future and Environment (SAFE) Act, a bill that outlines the countless benefits that healthy natural resources provide to our country’s safety, economy and well being, and provides a roadmap to help them adapt to a more hostile climate. From combating pests in forests in order to prevent fires to restoring watersheds that protect drinking water supplies, the legislation offers common-sense solutions to protecting our communities, natural resources and wildlife in an uncertain future.

Forest fire, courtesy USDA

2011 was a record-setting year for floods, droughts and fires. Photo courtesy USDA

Without a doubt, the coming year will be one of belt tightening and tough budgeting. The SAFE Act does not appropriate money but does provide a clear outline of how our resource agencies can strengthen and protect our invaluable resources through new planning and coordination. The bill is an investment plan; each step taken to help our natural resources adapt to a changing climate now will save us time, money and energy down the road.

We may not know what the coming year will bring. But by passing the SAFE Act, Congress can ensure America is ready to meet the challenges of the future head-on, in 2012 and beyond.

Learn more:

Read the full question and see what others are saying on the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

Learn more about the SAFE Act and how it will protect American communities and natural heritage.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Climate Change, Commentary, Features0 Comments

Legislation Will Keep Communities, Wildlife and Natural Resources SAFE

Legislation Will Keep Communities, Wildlife and Natural Resources SAFE

Jamie Rappaport Clark

Defenders' president and CEO, Jamie Rappaport Clark

This blog originally appeared on the Huffington Post.

From wildfires and drought to flooding and tornados, 2011 has been a record-setting year for extreme weather events. The economic pain to American communities unprepared for such radical shifts in natural weather systems has been tremendous. Already, drought in the south has cost the country $10 billion. And as the dry conditions spread to the southeast and midwest, we can anticipate that number to grow.

Our finances aren’t the only place we feel the effects of extreme weather. Natural disasters take a substantial toll on our national historic places, parks and refuges, and the wildlife that make up our country’s natural heritage. Drought reduces food supply, flooding damages river banks and sends pollution into waterways, and hurricanes and other large coastal storms can devastate coastlines, habitats and wildlife. Unfortunately, these threats only promise to get worse. These weather patterns have long been predicted as indicators of a changing climate, and as the world continues to warm, we can expect these events to occur more often, with greater intensity.

Natural disasters join a long list of ways a shifting climate is already changing the face of our planet. Sea level rise, warming rivers and streams, insect infestations and other risks to wildlife and natural habitats may not be as high-profile as extreme weather, but their impacts on our wildlife and natural resources are no by means insignificant. To survive these threats, our natural resources and wildlife — and the economies they support — need help adapting to these changes now.

In light of this year’s tragedies, can we really justify not giving our counties, towns and states better tools to prepare for disasters and restore their communities after disasters happen?

Fortunately, we’ve got leaders in the U.S. Senate taking action to tackle this challenge. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Max Baucus (D-MT) have been longtime champions in the effort to protect American communities, natural resources and wildlife from the increasingly destructive impacts of climate change. Legislation introduced by the senators today provides a road map for how to get it done. The bill, the Securing America’s Future and Environment (SAFE) Act, outlines the countless benefits that healthy natural resources provide to our country’s safety, economy and well being, and offers an common-sense approach to help them adapt to a more hostile climate.

Forest fire, courtesy USDA

Climate change will mean more frequent and intense droughts and forest fires. Photo courtesy USDA

This is not a regulatory bill; the SAFE Act is an investment plan. Senators Whitehouse and Baucus know that each step taken to help our natural resources adapt to a changing climate now will save us time, money and energy down the road. So when we rebuild coastal wetlands to create buffers against damaging storms or combat invasive pests in our forests where watersheds originate and in turn protect drinking water supplies, we are not only helping to strengthen our natural resources, we’re investing in our communities, our country and our future.

In light of this year’s tragedies, can we really justify not giving our counties, towns and states better tools to prepare for disasters and restore their communities after disasters happen? Instead of waiting for disaster to strike, our leaders are planning ahead to be sure that we are stronger and ready for whatever future climate change holds. The SAFE Act provides us with the plan and the leadership to start fortifying our natural defenses. Let’s get to work.

Learn more: 

Read more about the SAFE Act.

See how Defenders is working to protect wildlife and natural places from the harmful effects of climate change.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Climate Change, Congress, Features1 Comment

Pronghorn Antelope, Photo: James C. Leopold, USFWS

Halloween Means Scary Cuts for Wildlife Conservation

Hiking Trail

Millions of Americans visit wildlife refuges each year.

It’s Halloween and Congress is eyeing some downright scary cuts to vital wildlife conservation programs as part of its budget cutting frenzy. But while these programs may seem like easy targets for cuts, there is a lot more to the story.

Hundreds of thousands of people have jobs because the federal government funds programs like National Parks and the National Wildlife Refuge System. And everyone who visits these special places—to hike, photograph, hunt, fish, camp, bike, etc—spends money on their chosen method of recreation. So when you cut funding for wildlife conservation programs like wildlife refuges, it’s important for Congress to remember that you also risk losing jobs and further hindering our economic recovery in addition to the damage done to our natural heritage, damage that will be costlier to repair later than it is to prevent now.

This week, citizens from across the nation are coming to Washington D.C. to remind lawmakers on Capitol Hill of this very fact.  And the leaders of many groups, including Defenders of Wildlife, are meeting with members of Congress.  Groups are also running ads in key Capitol Hill media outlets and holding a reception to further our message.

Congress will never be able to come close to balancing the budget by cutting funding for wildlife conservation programs.

And what is that message? Simple: wildlife conservation and wildlife-related activities are big business. In 2006, the total contribution from outdoor recreation—hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, hiking, camping, skiing, and bicycling—in the United States was over $730 billion a year. That translates into about 6,435,000 U.S. jobs and $88 billion in federal and state tax revenues.

Indeed, the main engine driving the economy of many local communities in and around national parks, wildlife refuges, and other federal conservation areas is wildlife-related tourism and activity. Just visit any small town or city around wildlife refuges, national parks and other outdoor recreation areas and you will see what I mean.

Moreover, these programs are an investment. Funding these programs and conserving wildlife now is a lot cheaper  and smarter than rescuing imperiled animals down the road, when their numbers plummet and the situation becomes critical or restoring degraded lands allowed to deteriorate without basic maintenance support. That’s when more drastic and costly measures are needed; similar to repairing a bridge now vs. replacing the bridge after it collapses. Sadly, this simple equation seems to escape some in Congress, many of whom are the first to complain when the bridge collapses.

US Capitol, FWSCongress will never be able to come close to balancing the budget by cutting funding for wildlife conservation programs. Yet there are some in Congress who would target these programs first. They do so not out some long term fealty to fiscal discipline, but largely because they never valued these conservation programs to begin with.  Many would rather promote increased oil and gas drilling, logging, and development; the economic downturn just gives them the excuse they needed to defund wildlife programs they have long held in low regard.

But doing so is extremely short-sighted. Wildlife conservation is not a luxury, it’s an investment and a key building block of what makes our country healthy and strong. Yes, when you conserve wildlife you are preserving a key slice of our natural heritage for future generations. But you are also preserving jobs and helping to keep the economic engine that keeps so many local, hard-hit communities running. And you are making a smart money play, chipping in now to avoid having to pay more later.

These are tough budgetary times and everyone should be expected to sacrifice a little. But in our zeal to cut, let’s not let those who oppose federal environmental protections in general use this crisis as an excuse to slash wildlife conservation programs that are both a smart economic investment and a down payment on the preservation of our natural heritage. And let’s be sure to call out those who hypocritically seek to weaken wildlife programs only to complain later when animals are pushed to the brink and more stringent and costly measures are required to rescue them from extinction.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Congress, Features, Species at Risk0 Comments

Bowhead Whales

Don’t Throw Science Out the Window

Jamie Clark (© Krista Schlyer / Defenders of Wildlife)This week, the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts Blog asked, “Should Obama open Arctic waters to drilling?” Defenders’ president and CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark responded with a resounding, “NO.” Read more about what she has to say about risky drilling in the pristine Arctic environment. 

It’s been a busy time for the Obama administration’s rubber stamp of Big Oil’s to do list. In August, the administration approved the first part of Shell’s plans to start drilling in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea as early as the summer of 2012, the most aggressive Arctic drilling proposal in the history of the country. And just this week, the administration reaffirmed the sale of almost 500 oil and natural gas leases in the adjacent Chukchi Sea, opening 2.8 million acres to drilling. This isn’t just giving offshore drilling the green-light; this is slamming on the accelerator, apparently with the hope or expectation that the obstacles in the road ahead—the rough, frozen Arctic seas, the harsh climate and remote location—magically vanish.

What ever happened to the Obama administration’s stated commitment to make decisions “based on sound science and the public interest, and not on the special interests?”

What ever happened to the Obama administration’s stated commitment to make decisions “based on sound science and the public interest, and not on the special interests?” Because if that commitment held true, the government wouldn’t allow drilling in the Arctic’s extremely sensitive and unique marine environment until we have filled the glaring information gaps identified by the U.S. Geological Survey just this summer. It would have acknowledged the recent studies that show that the Beaufort Sea’s Camden Bay provides habitat of “special significance” to the endangered bowhead whale. And it certainly would have heeded the U.S. Coast Guard officials’ repeated warnings that the resources to clean up an oil spill in the waters of the Arctic Ocean simply don’t exist. And yet none of that information has slowed down the “full speed ahead” attitude toward drilling in the Arctic Ocean.

Bowhead Whales

Bowhead whales, courtesy NOAA

After BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, the Obama administration wisely delayed plans by Shell Oil to drill in the Arctic. Now is not the time to give in to pressure from Big Oil and forgo that prudent commitment to safety. There is still too much to learn about the pristine Arctic environment, and too much to lose if we don’t. When it comes to opening the Arctic waters to risky drilling, the administration should not let the voice of reason—and of science—fall on deaf ears.

Learn more:

Read the full question and see what others are saying on the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

See how offshore drilling threatens the Arctic’s fragile marine environment.

Read more about Shell’s inadequate oil spill response plan and the threat it poses to bowhead whales and polar bears.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Alaska, Features, Marine Animals, Offshore Drilling, Polar Bears0 Comments

Bald eagle in flight_us_military

HuffPost: Defending Endangered Species Protections

Jamie Rappaport ClarkThe Value of Conserving Wildlife

by Jamie Rappaport Clark

(This post originally appeared on Huffington Post on October 4, 2011)

Why save a lizard? Who cares about some little fly? What difference does it make if we kill off a few unwanted prairie dogs?

These are fair questions. At a time when nine percent of Americans are unemployed, another seven percent are marginally employed or working only part-time, and millions more are struggling to stay afloat, protecting obscure endangered species probably isn’t the first thing on people’s minds. But that doesn’t mean we should turn our backs on the countless species, large and small, that still need our help.

Nearly 40 years ago, our government made a commitment in the form of the Endangered Species Act to preserve all native wildlife for the benefit of future generations. And since that time the Act has been 99 percent effective in preventing the extinction of the plants and animals it protects. But tragically, Congress is preparing to use our current economic crisis as an excuse to abandon America’s commitment to preventing extinction.

Prairie DogsBefore the August recess, no fewer than 13 different proposals had been introduced to limit the federal government’s ability to protect endangered species (see Assault on Wildlife: The Endangered Species Act Under Attack). Since Congress returned from recess, another four have been added to the list, and more will no doubt surface long before a comprehensive funding bill is finally passed this fall.

At the center of nearly all of these attacks on our landmark wildlife conservation law is the implicit argument that saving imperiled plants and animals is simply a luxury we can no longer afford. Some members of Congress are taking it a step further, exploiting our country’s very real financial difficulties by pinning job losses on endangered species protections. Of course, this sham calculus disguises the fact that many of these politicians rely on certain big corporate interests hostile to the Endangered Species Act to line their campaign coffers.

Despite the protestations of anti-wildlife politicians, there are very good reasons to protect a lizard, or a fly or a prairie dog. Though they may seem trivial, these animals are an integral part of the web of life that sustains us all. Lizards control insect pests and provide food for hawks. Flies feed reptiles and can help pollinate crops. Prairie dogs mow down prairie grasses, reducing risk of wildfire, and they provide food for ferrets, badgers and owls. What’s more, by fighting to save these species, we are preserving the vitality of the entire ecosystems that they inhabit.

Madagascar Periwinkle Blooms

Madagascar periwinkle

There are also practical reasons for saving as many imperiled species as we can. The ESA acknowledges the direct link between maintaining biodiversity and our own well-being. For example, one economist has estimated that America’s plants and animals provide us with “ecosystem services” (such as erosion control, flood protection, air and water filtration, sedimentation, carbon sequestration, providing nutrients, crop pollination, etc.) totaling $33 trillion per year. Plants like the Pacific yew tree, Madagascar periwinkle and mamala tree have all led to promising treatments for diseases like cancer, leukemia and AIDS. And expenditures for wildlife-related recreation accounted for more than $122 billion in 2006 — about one percent of our GDP.

What doesn’t show up on the ledger though is the value of upholding the principles of good stewardship. The great conservationist Aldo Leopold once wrote, “The last word in ignorance is the man who says of an animal or plant, ‘What good is it?’ If the land mechanism as a whole is good, then every part is good, whether we understand it or not.”

We should ask ourselves instead, what will be left when all the lizards, and flies and prairie dogs are gone? What will happen to our lakes and forests, our deserts and oceans, our rivers and prairies, when fewer and fewer living creatures call them home? If we allow piecemeal changes now to our most important environmental laws, what else might politicians find inconvenient to protect?

The attacks on America’s great conservation legacy may seem small and insignificant. But each one tugs at a thread that could unravel the entire fabric of the great safety net we have built over four decades. Killing off a few lizards or flies or prairie dogs isn’t going to rescue our flailing economy. But it could very well ruin us all.

Bookmark and Share

Posted in Amphibians, Birds, Commentary, Experts, Features, Prairie Animals, Species at Risk0 Comments

Wolf, (c) Gary Schultz, NGSDefenders of Wildlife leads the pack when it comes to protecting wild animals and plants in their natural communities.

www.defenders.org

Archives

Bookmark and Share