• EPA to Review Pesticides' Effects in California
  
• New York Will Appeal Acid Rain Ruling
  
• $36.7 Million Funds Washington Salmon Recovery Efforts
  
• Lawsuit Challenges Development in Pygmy Owl Habitat
  
• EPA to Revise Coliform Bacteria Standard
  
• Partnerships Protect Watersheds in Ohio, West Virginia
  
• Cormorants, Gulls to Have Eggs Addled Again
  
• Reminder: Bird Nests Are Protected by Law
  

EPA to Review Pesticides' Effects in California

In the agreement signed Friday, the EPA will consult with two other federal agencies, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), on specific uses of 18 chemical pesticides in California. They include how the pesticides are used in forestry, on fruit, nut, nursery and forage crops, and on highway and utility rights of way and irrigation canals.

The 18 pesticides will be analyzed for effects in one or more of these usage sites in the habitat of each of the seven salmon species and 33 forest plants that are named in the settlement.

"These species are close to extinction and pesticides continue to pollute their habitat but the EPA hasn't even begun to take action to protect them. How can an endangered species survive if the effect of widely used pesticides isn't taken into account?" said Patty Clary of Californians for Alternatives to Toxics (CATs), the lead plaintiff group.

"We welcome the EPA's resolve to take these first important steps to protect some of the nation's most highly valued and imperiled wildlife species from the effects of pesticides," Clary added.

The environmentalists targeted in their lawsuit some of the most common pesticides registered by the EPA, including chlorpyrifos, diazinon, atrazine, Roundup, and 2,4-D.

More than 112,000 pounds of diazinon alone were applied to California lettuce crops in 2000 according to the Department of Pesticide Regulation. Government agencies often detect diazinon in rivers, the conservation groups charge, and the EPA has determined that diazinon exceeds levels of concern for toxicity and risk to endangered species.

Another chemical in the settlement is atrazine, the pesticide most often found in rain and river water, which the EPA acknowledges exceeds its level of concern for chronic toxicity to fish reproduction. A recent study linked atrazine exposure to reproductive deformities in frogs.

The agreement put on hold a lawsuit filed by CATs, the Environmental Protection Information Center and Humboldt Watershed Council that challenged the EPA's failure to consult with NMFS and USFWS as required under the Endangered Species Act. Before the settlement can become final, the EPA will post it on its website and ask the public for comment on the proposed settlement.

Once comments have been received, the EPA will then decide whether changes need be made to the settlement. If the plaintiff groups agree with any proposed changes, the lawsuit will be resolved.

"We're cautiously optimistic that this settlement will result in improved science to protect our water and the endagered species that live in it from the detremental effects of pesticides," said Ken Miller of the Humboldt Watershed Council.

New York Will Appeal Acid Rain Ruling

In 2000, recognizing that out of state or upwind sources account for up to 80 percent of acid rain causing pollutants released into the air, Pataki passed the Air Pollution Mitigation Act to reduce the environmental impact of sulfur dioxide emissions trading by New York power producers. The law penalized New York utilities that traded emissions credits for sulfur dioxide, a major component of acid rain, with utilities in Midwestern states.

On April 9, U.S. District Court Judge David Hurd ruled the law unconstitutional.

"All New Yorkers deserve clean air, land and water, and this ruling will undermine our aggressive efforts to reduce acid rain pollution," said Governor George Pataki. "We will continue to fight for this important law that will protect New Yorkers from harmful emissions that threaten our precious natural resources from the Adirondacks to the Catskills to Long Island."

The federal Clean Air Act's Acid Rain Control Program established the emissions allowance trading program, which requires power plants to obtain allowances or credits for each ton of sulfur dioxide they emit each year. The number of allowances available nationwide is limited.

If a plant maintains emissions below a certain level, it may sell or trade its allowances to other plants whose emissions are above the allowed level. But if those allowances go to upwind states, pollution blowing across state borders may nullify the clean air benefits of the emissions reductions by in state power plants.

"We are very glad to see Governor Pataki taking this step, which is critical to protecting our ecosystems and the health of the Adirondacks," William Cooke, director of government relations for the National Audubon Society of New York State. "We disagree with the court's ruling on acid rain trading allowances and believe it should and will be overturned. In appealing this decision, the Governor is continuing his long term commitment to controlling acid rain and preserving New York's vital natural resources and wildlife."

Earlier this year, Pataki announced draft regulations that will cut sulfur dioxide emissions from electric generators in New York State by an additional 50 percent below levels allowed under the federal Clean Air Act's Acid Rain Program requirements. The reductions would reduce annual sulfur dioxide emissions by 130,000 tons a year and nitrogen oxide emissions from New York sources by 20,000 tons a year.

$36.7 Million Funds Washington Salmon Recovery Efforts

Combined with local matching funds, the total value of the approved project list is more than $57.6 million.

"The funding of these projects clearly illustrates that we are making significant on-the-ground progress on salmon recovery," said Washington Governor Gary Locke. "Just as importantly, it shows what we can do when we work together. Thanks to the ongoing efforts of our congressional delegation, Senator Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell and representatives Norm Dicks, Jennifer Dunn and George Nethercutt, to secure federal funds for salmon recovery, we are ensuring that our children and grandchildren will enjoy salmon just as we have."

The 1999 Washington Legislature created and authorized the SRFB to guide spending of funds targeted for salmon recovery activities and projects. This year, the SRFB has funded 128 individual projects, including 21 projects that focus on the purchase of key salmon habitat and 59 projects that spotlight habitat improvements such as planting vegetation along streams for shade and removing fish passage barriers. Another 14 projects combine habitat acquisition and improvements.

About one-quarter of the projects emphasize studies and plans to help identify priority projects for the future.

The SRFB depends on state, local and regional scientists and technical groups to help review all proposals. Local technical advisory groups define the type of science used in rating and ranking the projects, then local citizen committees review the technical groups' recommendations and develop a final list of proposed projects for SRFB funding.

Once the board receives project lists from the designated local lead entities, a panel of scientists review and rate the local process and list of projects for benefit to salmon and certainty of project success. Through this level of scrutiny, the board seeks to fund projects that have scientific and local support.

"The level of scrutiny used in evaluating, ranking and rating these projects is amazing," said Steve Tharinger, SRFB citizen member.

"I have been involved with the local side of the process for several years but the board adds an additional level of review," Tharinger added. "It is clear that everyone involved in salmon recovery is continuing to make the process better and that the people in the watersheds are key to the ultimate success in salmon recovery."

A summary and detailed listing of projects are available at: http://www.wa.gov/iac/SRFBwhatsnew.html

Lawsuit Challenges Development in Pygmy Owl Habitat

The lawsuit against the Corps and EPA challenges the agencies' approval of dozens of Clean Water Act permits for new urban developments in pygmy-owl habitat.

"It's the agencies from the planet anarchy," said David Hogan, urban wildlands coordinator for the Center for Biological Diversity. "They behave as if laws to protect the desert simply don't exist."

For more than two years, the Corps has ignored a court ruling that they consider the harmful cumulative effects of new developments, the groups charge. The EPA also ignores this obligation, and both agencies defer to developer's findings on whether harm will come to the environment.

"The agencies have left the fox to guard the henhouse when they let developers decide whether projects will harm the environment," said Jenny Neeley, Southwest program coordinator for Defenders of Wildlife.

The groups have also notified the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) of their intent to sue over the agency's delayed release of a pygmy-owl recovery plan. Interior Secretary Norton has responded to pressure from Arizona Governor Jane Hull and developers by delaying the plan's release, the groups charge.

"This is a classic case of politicians meddling with science," said Hogan. "Since when did our old legal system get replaced with government by developers, for developers?"

Last week, the groups released a report detailing what they call the Bush administration's "systematic attack" on federal wildlife protections.

The report describes 21 examples of administration efforts to undermine protection for wildlife, including the pygmy-owl.

"The administration has repeatedly distorted science, ignored clear legal duties and cut backroom deals with anti-wildlife industries," said Michael Senatore, legal director at Defenders of Wildlife. "In Arizona, agencies' disregard for pygmy-owl protection and delay of the recovery plan are two examples of this administration's assault on America's wildlife protections."

The report was prepared by Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, the Endangered Species Coalition and the National Wildlife Federation.

EPA to Revise Coliform Bacteria Standard

Coliform bacteria in water may indicate contamination by sewage or other microbe sources, but they do not always make people sick. The agency's revisions to the standard will be designed to better indicate potential risks to public health.

The EPA also examined standards for 68 chemical contaminants and decided that, at this stage, they should not be revised.

However, the agency notes that new health assessments are now underway for 36 of these contaminants. The results of those studies will be considered as soon as they become available and the EPA will decide whether revisions for these standards are warranted.

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the EPA must review each national primary drinking water regulation (NPDWR) at least once every six years and, if studies indicate a threat to public health, revise them. The current review addresses standards developed prior to 1997.

"We've conducted a thorough review of these existing drinking water standards for the first time in the agency's history. We welcome public comment on our analyses and will carefully consider those comments," said Cynthia Dougherty, director of the EPA's office of ground water and drinking water. "We also recognize that there are a number of scientific assessments underway, and we will examine new data as they become available."

The public has the opportunity to comment on these preliminary decisions for the next 60 days. The agency will also hold a public meeting and consult with EPA's Science Advisory Board.

The results of the review were published in the Federal Register on April 17. The list of standards is available at: http://www.epa.gov/safewater, click on "What's New."

Partnerships Protect Watersheds in Ohio, West Virginia

The projects will be funded under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), which provides for voluntary agreements with farmers to convert cropland or pastureland to native grasses, trees and other vegetation, in return for rental payments and other incentives. More than 300,000 acres are now enrolled in CREP in about 20 states.

Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman and Ohio Governor Bob Taft signed a $13.2 million CREP agreement on Friday to safeguard the Hoover Reservoir, the primary drinking water source for Columbus, Ohio.

"This is a win-win project that will enable farmers to restore lands near streams as well as provide savings of $1 million annually in water treatment costs," said Veneman.

The Ohio CREP will pay farmers to remove land from agricultural production in the state's Upper Big Walnut Creek Watershed, which drains into the Hoover Reservoir. The program will reimburse producers for planting 3,500 acres of filter strips, riparian buffers, hardwood trees, wetlands and wildlife habitats along tributary streams to help prevent pollution from entering the watershed.

The total cost of the program is expected to reach $13.2 million, with the Agriculture Department paying $8.4 million and the state paying $4.8 million.

In West Virginia, Veneman joined Governor Bob Wise and Representative Shelly Moore Capito to launch a new CREP aimed at protecting more than 4,000 watershed acres next to the Potomac, New, Greenbrier, and Little Kanawha rivers.

The program will reimburse producers for planting riparian buffers, filter strips, trees and grasses that keep pollutants from entering the watersheds. The trees and grasses will help protect water quality and provide wildlife habitat for a wide array of wildlife species.

"Through this program, farmers will be able to restore small strips of lands next to streams, while continuing to produce on the rest of the farm," said Veneman.

The total cost of the program is expected to reach $11.4 million over the next year, with the Agriculture Department paying $8.2 million and the state paying $3.2 million.

Cormorants, Gulls to Have Eggs Addled Again

The Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department received permission to apply corn oil to the eggs in 2,500 double-crested cormorant nests and 500 ring-billed gull nests on Young Island. The permit also allows the state to destroy 300 cormorant nests with eggs and 200 ring-billed gull nests with eggs on islands in St. Albans Bay, on Sloop Island near Charlotte, and on Rock and Mud islands near Panton.

The USFWS issued a similar permit to the state of New York, allowing their Department of Environmental Conservation to oil eggs in 6,000 cormorant nests and to destroy 1,500 nests with eggs on Lake Ontario islands.

The permits are required because cormorants and gulls are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The USFWS has issued permits to disrupt these species' breeding patterns for the past four years due to concerns that they displace other water birds.

"The Service authorized the egg oiling to reduce the number of cormorants and gulls that are displacing other colonial waterbirds, such as common terns, and to protect vegetation on state owned islands in Lake Champlain, Vermont," said Dr. Mamie Parker, USFWS regional director for the Northeast. Just 180 pairs of common terns, a state endangered species, nested on two islands in Lake Champlain last year.

The population, centered in St. Albans Bay, has fluctuated due to predation by owls and competition with gulls and cormorants for nesting space.

"By limiting the number of double-crested cormorants and gulls in the area," Parker said, "the state hopes to boost the number of common terns and other waterbirds."

In 2000, cormorants expanded to 10 new islands in the lake, perhaps after abandoning Young Island due to the egg oilings. Last year, cormorants abandoned the 10 new sites and returned to the three traditional nest sites, while maintaining their population numbers from the previous year.

On Lake Ontario in New York, the cormorants and gulls are believed to be displacing other colonial waterbirds, black-crowned night-herons, a species of local conservation concern on Little Galloo, Calf, Gull and Bass Islands. Black-crowned night-herons nested on just three islands in the New York Eastern Basin last year, and were counted at just over 60 pairs.

"Any population as low as 70 pairs nesting at only five islands in the Eastern Basin is in jeopardy," said Parker. "By limiting the number of double-crested cormorants in the area, the state hopes to boost the number of night-herons."

The state is also concerned about impacts that cormorants may have when feeding on fish such as smallmouth bass, a popular recreational species.

Reminder: Bird Nests Are Protected by Law

Hundreds of species of neotropical migratory birds - those that spend the winter in Central or South America or Mexico - return to the United States each spring. Most birds raise several broods of young in spring and summer.

When natural habitat has been altered or destroyed birds will sometimes build nests on houses, buildings or bridges. For example, barn swallows often build nests made of mud pellets under porch eaves or on sides of houses, and chickadees will build nests almost anywhere they can find a safe cavity.

Most birds take about a month to raise a brood, including laying eggs, incubating them and raising chicks until they are strong enough to leave the nest.

Native birds such as warblers, swallows and hummingbirds are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Even birds that do not always migrate, such as robins and wrens and woodpeckers, are protected under the Act.

The Act prohibits destruction of nests with eggs or young, or possession of migratory bird parts. Violations can carry maximum penalties of $15,000 and/or six months in jail.

It is not a violation, however, to prevent the birds from constructing their nests, and non-native birds such as starlings and house sparrows are not protected under the Act.

"A bird must be just beginning to build it's nest - just a few sticks or pieces of mud," said Anne Badgley, director of the UFSWS Pacific Region. "However, sometimes people wash down a nest and don't pay attention to the site for a week or so, only to find the nest has been reconstructed and has eggs in it. Once the nest has eggs, it is protected and its destruction or removal is illegal."

An active nest - one with eggs or young - may be removed only under a special permit issued by the USFWS. These permits are issued only if the USFWS determines that a nest poses a hazard to human health or safety.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act was created in 1918 to address the mass killing of birds for their feathers, which were used in the hat business and other decorative clothing. Today, many native bird populations are declining because of habitat loss, toxins, domestic cat predation and other hazards.

More information about migratory birds is available at: http://migratorybirds.fws.gov/homepg.html