The Middle River Group, LLC

fly fishing, conservation and politics.

Hunting

Our Public Lands (Part 1)

By

Regular readers know that the prevailing theme of the conservation posts on Dispatches is summed up in this simple equation: access to healthy habitat creates recreational opportunity and that creates economic activity and jobs.

By and large that healthy habitat is found on the lands owned by all Americans and managed by federal, state and local governmental agencies on our behalf. If you think about it for a minute without those national parks, wildlife refuges, national forests, wildlife management areas, local parks and greenways we would be hard pressed to find places to play outside.

All to often we take these public lands and the people who manage them for granted. We forget that those lands create jobs in many local communities far beyond the governmental jobs. Gas stations, diners, motels, hunting and fishing retail stores, all are small business in local communities that benefit from public lands.

Of course just because I think public lands are a good thing doesn’t mean everyone does. My years as a conservation lobbyist has taught me different. I know there are elected officials who are skeptical about the value of public lands (more on that in future posts).

So what does the general public think about our public lands?

Let’s look at a recent post, “Government does a good job of protecting our natural history” in the Hill’s Congress Blog:

“Fully 87 percent of American voters agree that their “state and national parks, forests, monuments, and wildlife areas are an essential part of my state’s quality of life.” A near-unanimous 96 percent of those we polled in six inner West states likewise agreed.

But voters don’t stop there. Seven-in-ten Americans and nine in ten Westerners agree that these public lands are “an essential part” of their state’s economy. Think about it: in six states with some of the highest proportions of land in public hands, voters were even more likely to view those lands as a valuable economic resource. The numbers quantify what voters tell us in Western focus groups: that public lands bring tourists, hunters, anglers, and other outdoor recreationalists to spend money in their communities; that their neighbors moved there for the clean air, trails, and trout fishing; that a growing company chose their town because they knew future workers would find the nearby natural beauty and outdoor recreation opportunities desirable too.”

Our public lands are something to be proud of. Maybe it is time we remind our elected officials and the politicians just how proud we are of them.

Give that some thought.

The Sportsmen’s Act of 2012

By

Back in June, Senator Jon Tester, (D-MT) introduced the Sportsmen’s Act of 2012 and during consideration of the Farm Bill was able to get it attached as an amendment and included in the version that passed the Senate.

If you are following the news the Farm Bill has been tied up in the U.S. House and prospects for passage are very uncertain. Anyone who knows Senator Tester would not be surprised to hear him referred to as tenacious. And in this case that tenacity is serving sportsmen and conservation well. The word on the Hill is that Tester’s bill might actually get a vote in the Senate before they beat a hasty retreat to wait out the results of the elections.

The Sportsmen’s Act of 2012 is a smorgasbord of legislative items that can go a long way to improve the fish and wildlife habitat that makes up the prime venues for hunting and fishing in this country.  Senator Tester deserves our thanks and your Senate should hear from you asking them to support The Sportsmen’s Act of 2012. Use this link to send a message to your Senators courtesy of the folks at Keep America Fishing.

Details on The Sportsmen’s Act of 2012

Courtesy of Senator Tester’s office.

Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Access

Making Public Lands Public:   This section requires that the 1.5% of annual LWCF funding is made available to secure, through rights-of-way, or the acquisition of lands, or interests from willing sellers, recreational public access to existing federal public lands that have significantly restricted access to hunting, fishing, and other recreational purposes.  Access is the number one issue for Sportsmen.  Finding places to recreate and the loss of access are the top reason sportsmen stop hunting and fishing.  In an agency report to Congress (in 2003) found 35 million acres of public land had inadequate access.

Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act:  This section amends the Pittman-Robertson Act by adjusting the funding limitations.  This allows states more funds available for a longer period of time for the creation and maintenance of shooting ranges.  The bill encourages federal land agencies to cooperate with state and local authorities to maintain shooting ranges.

Polar Bear Conservation and Fairness Act:  This bill allows for the Secretary to authorize permits for re-importation of legally harvested Polar Bears from approved populations in Canada before the 2008 ban.

The Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act:  This section specifically excludes ammo and fishing tackle from the Toxic Substances Control Act, leaving decisions about tackle to State Fish and Game Agencies and the Fish and Wildlife Service, who currently regulate ammo and tackle.  The EPA has denied petitions to regulate tackle and ammo under TSCA in 1994 and again in 2011.  This codifies that the EPA does not have the ability to regulate tackle.  This includes a savings clause for local, state and other federal regulations.

Bows Transported through National Parks:  This provision clarifies the 2007 legislation, and will allow bows to be transported across national park lands.  Currently, firearms can be legally transported, but not bows.  This poses a practical problem for bow hunters who want to legally hunt on Forest Service or BLM lands, but must cross National Park Service Lands.

Billfish Conservation Act:  This section prohibits the sale of Pacific-caught billfish, except in the State of Hawaii, in order to respect traditional fisheries.  Billfish (marlin, sailfish and spearfish) populations have declined severely due to overfishing by non-U.S. commercial fishing fleets who harvest billfish as by-catch while targeting other species. More than two decades ago, the United States banned the commercial sale and harvest of Atlantic-caught billfish.  Catch-and-release recreational angling for billfish generates many millions of dollars in economic benefits to the U.S. economy each year.

Report on Artificial Reefs in the Gulf of Mexico:  This section requires report on the Idle Iron program in order to develop more coordination between agencies and states.  This will assure that the interests of recreational fishermen are incorporated into the program.

Habitat Conservation

National Fish Habitat Conservation Act:  This section creates a national voluntary grant program to protect and improve fish habitat by improving water quality and quantity across the nation.  This section builds on current partnerships to restore waterways and provides an organic statue to authorize the work that the Fish and Wildlife Service is currently performing into one program with an advisory board.

Migratory Bird Habitat Investment and Enhancement Act: This section amends the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act so that the Secretary of the Interior, beginning in 2013 for three year periods, can set the amount to be collected for Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps.  It will require the Postal Service to collect the amount established by the Secretary for each Stamp that is sold for a hunting year.

Permanent Electronic Duck Stamp Act: This section would grant the Secretary of the Interior permanent authority to authorize any state to issue electronic duck stamps.  It also outlines electronic duck stamp application requirements.

Joint Ventures Authorization:  This section creates an organic statute for the Joint Ventures program housed in the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Joint Venture program was established within the Fish and Wildlife Service in 1987.  This language allows FWS to provide financial and technical assistance to support regional migratory bird conservation partnerships, develop and implement plans for the protection and enhancement of migratory bird populations to support migratory bird conservation.

Reauthorizations

North American Wetlands Conservation Act Reauthorization (NAWCA):  This section reauthorizes the North American Wetlands Conservation Act for another five years. NAWCA is a voluntary land-owner friendly initiative that uses incentives to provide valuable matching grants that leverage federal dollars to protect habitat that is critically important for migratory birds, such as ducks and other wildlife.  Over the last 20 years, NAWCA has completed over 2,000 conservation project to protect 26.5 million acres of habitat.  This voluntary program has over 4,500 partners and has leveraged nearly 3 dollars for every dollar spent by the federal government.

Partners for Fish and Wildlife:  This provides provision reauthorizes the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program through 2017.  This program works in a non-regulatory, cooperative fashion to help private landowners with habitat restoration on their property. This cost-share program focuses on improving wetland, riparian, in-stream, fish passage, sage-steppe, grassland and aquatic habitats that provide benefits to migratory birds, threatened or endangered species, and other sensitive and declining species.

Neotropical Migratory Birds Reauthorization:  This extends the authorization for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Act which allows for voluntary conservation of critical bird habitat with 28 Projects in 26 Countries in 2012. This program leverages four dollars of matching funds for each dollar spent by the federal government.

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Reauthorization:  This section reauthorizes the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), a non-profit that preserves and restores our nation’s native wildlife species and habitats. Created by Congress in 1984, NFWF directs public conservation dollars to the most pressing environmental needs and matches those investments with private funds. Since its establishment, NFWF has awarded over 11,600 grants to more than 4,000 organizations in the United States, investing a total of $2 billion for conservation.

Multinational Species Conservation Fund Reauthorization: Section reauthorizes appropriations to carry out the African Elephant Conservation Act, the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997, The Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2003 and the Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 for FY2012-FY2017.  This will also allow for a five year extension on the corresponding postal stamps.

Multinational Species Conservation Funds Semipostal Stamp Reauthorization Act: This section would amend the Multinational Species Conservation Funds Semipostal Stamp Act of 2010 to require such stamps to be available for an additional four years; and provide five versions depicting African or Asian elephants, a rhinoceros, a tiger, a marine turtle or a great ape.

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization (FTFLA): This section reauthorizes the BLM’s authority to sell land to private land owners, counties, companies and others for ranching, community development and various projects. This “Land for Land” approach creates jobs and generates funding for BLM, USFS, NPS and USFWS to acquire critical in-holdings from willing sellers. The sales revenue allows agencies to acquire high priority lands with important wildlife habitat value and recreational access for hunting and fishing.

Nutria Eradication and Control Act:  This section would amend the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance to Maryland, Louisiana and other coastal states for a program to eradicate and control nutria populations.

Outdoor Recreation Means Business

By

For too long those of us in the outdoor recreation industry have been given a pat on the head and told to “go play outside” by the politicians and policy makers alike. We have been treated as “hobbyists” who don’t really count when it comes to the U.S. economy. Well thanks to a new report, The Outdoor Recreation Economy from the Outdoor Industry Association we can now tell those folks that outdoor recreation means business. And it is time we did.

Play Outside, It’s Good Business

The outdoor recreation economy is serious business. It is responsible for:

  • 6.1 million direct American jobs
  • $646 billion in direct consumer spending
  • $80 billion in combined state, local and federal tax revenue

What concerns me and should concern you, is our elected officials – at all levels of government – give short shrift to that economic activity. They ignore those numbers in favor of other industries who, with their better funded advocacy efforts, have convinced policy makers and politicians that their sector is more important than ours.

When that happens the infrastructure that supports the outdoor recreation economy suffers. We see public land and the recreational opportunities they provide relegated to second class status.

So where does the outdoor recreation economy stack up compared to other sectors? Here are a couple of comparisons:

The $646 billion in direct consumer spending annually is greater than:

  • Pharmaceuticals ($331B)
  • Motor vehicles and parts ($340B)
  • Gasoline and other fuels ($354B)
  • Household utilities ($309B)

When it comes to employment the more than 6 million American jobs that are directly dependent on outdoor recreation is greater than:

  • Real Estate, Rentals and Leasing (2.0M)
  • Oil and Gas (2.1 M)
  • Information (2.5M)
  • Education (3.5M)
  • Transportation and Warehousing (4.3M)
  • Construction (5.5M)
  • Finance and Insurance (5.8M)

What is important to understand is these comparisons are based on direct economic impact and do not include indirect, implied, multiplier or ripple effects. If those effects were included the economic impact would be substantially larger. According to the report, when outdoor recreation related spending ripples through the economy it creates $1.6 trillion in economic impact and 12 million jobs.

Habitat = Opportunity = Economic Activity.

“Preserving access to outdoor recreation opportunities protects the economy, the businesses, the communities and the people who depend on the ability to play outside.” — OIA’s Outdoor Recreation Economy Report, June 2012.

What underpins this economic activity is the network local, state and federal public lands and waters. A network as important to the economic viability of this country as the other public works infrastructure such as the schools, water treatment, roads and airports we depend on.

When the policy makers and politicians demean our public lands they show either their ignorance (to be charitable) or there political bigotry (more likely). While politicians can be expected to say what they think will get them elected, ignorance has no place in policy making. This report is a powerful, factual tool that should be part of every debate on the value of our public lands and the importance of conservation of those resources.

A National Outdoor Recreation System.

“Outdoor recreation can grow jobs and drive the economy if we manage and invest in parks, waters and trails as a system designed to sustain economic dividends.” — OIA’s Outdoor Recreation Economy Report, June 2012.

Recreational venues in our nation, such as seashores, forests, parks, and wilderness, must be recognized for the important role they play in the economy. These public venues form the foundation of a national outdoor recreation system. Our policy makers should invest more, not less in these important assets to our nation’s economy.

This new report arms us with facts that must be used to show our elected officials just how important outdoor recreation is to our economy. These are undeniable economic, social and health benefits that are no longer “nice to have,” they are a “must have.”

You can help spread the word by emailing the report (here’s the link) to your elected officials. Just tell them: “Outdoor recreation means business,read this!”

Guest Post – Our Natural Assets

By

Photo courtesy of the U.S. Dept. of Natural Resources

Editor’s Note: Janet Lebson wrote this excellent column and shared it with me. I asked if she would let me use it as a guest post on Dispatches. She agreed. Enjoy.

Our Natural Assets by Janet Lebson

I’ve been told that in the past, a few daring visionaries have tried to consolidate all federal conservation agencies into one cabinet-level department.

A “Department of Natural Resources”—that would certainly make sense, right?

Too much sense, apparently.  Here are just a couple of the most glaring peculiarities that exist today.  Inland fisheries are tended for under the Interior Department while saltwater fish come under Commerce (and don’t even ask about the poor anadromous ones).  Three of the four major public lands networks come under Interior (national parks, wildlife refuges, and BLM lands) while the fourth falls under Agriculture (national forests).

Not surprisingly, this fragmentation inhibits public-private partnerships, leads to inconsistent policy (and practice), and makes agencies susceptible to turfiness and conflicting “cultures” (for example, Commerce has long been criticized for cowing to commercial fishing interests, and Agriculture for viewing national forests like crops.)

Yes, those brave souls dared to imagine that our country’s overall conservation effort would be more successful if it was better integrated and coordinated.  Shocking!

I think there’s a more insidious side effect of a fragmented conservation community—and I’m including the private sector along with government.

We’re not being effective ambassadors for the broader values of conservation.  I’m talking about how much America’s natural resources have to do with our health and well being, our prosperity, and our stature around the world.

What I see coming out of agencies and non-profit groups every day is a lot of promotions that convey only the values that are directly relevant to their mission.

There’s nothing wrong with being specific—but what’s not there is what I’m concerned about.  What’s missing is the big picture.

We end up with the equivalent of a lot of really wonderful pieces of a puzzle scattered about a room.

The whole world has been totally transformed by globalization, yet we’re still communicating in “neighborhoods.”

Ultimately, we become a cacophony to people who only have time for soundbites.

Here at home, everything from 9/11 to the soaring costs of Medicare has completely shifted the context of government, yet the conservation community has not evolved to define a forcefully relevant identity against this new backdrop.

I’m afraid the consequences will eventually disrupt the legacy of conservation that has long fortified America’s growth and prosperity, not to mention our quality of life.

That would be cause for concern at any time, but particularly when our nation is experiencing new areas of weakness, every existing pillar of strength takes on added importance.

When I try to take a big step back and a world view, I’m struck by the notion that our rich and diverse natural resources are a huge part of what makes America America!

Our natural assets—and the investments we’ve made to protect and sustain them—are unsurpassed throughout the world.

How vital a nation would we be (economically and culturally) without our mighty rivers, teeming wetlands, grand mountain ranges, rich grasslands, bounteous coasts, and majestic forests—and all the different fish and wildlife they host?

I’m reminded of what F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote in The Great Gatsby, how “the old island here…flowered once for Dutch sailors’ eyes—a fresh, green breast of the new world.”  The America our forbears first encountered must indeed have been “something commensurate to [our] capacity for wonder.”

That amazing spectacle may be marred, yet America is still a world leader in keeping a sustainable balance between preserving our resources and using them recreationally and commercially—the ultimate goal of conservation.

We’ve got vast networks of public lands, a variety of pollution controls, special programs for fragile wetlands and waterways, unique sources of conservation funding, exceptional protections for imperiled wildlife, and a citizenry with a pretty remarkable environmental consciousness.

What’s lost in piecemeal approaches and details is what’s really at stake if we don’t continue our unprecedented commitment to conservation.  We can’t afford to keep advocating for it in the same old ways.  We need to take into account the bigger picture and the long view—or conservation might be perceived as something expendable during hard times.

Considering how difficult it was to create a Department of Homeland Security, I doubt a new conservation department will come around anytime soon.  In truth, it would only be a start anyway.

Meanwhile, I’m going to hold out hope that some daring visionaries in the conservation community will blaze a new trail of unity so we can be more effective in our advocacy over the long haul.

EPA’s Draft Watershed Assessment for Bristol Bay

By

Hard work pays off.

The folks at TU’s Save Bristol Bay campaign and Sportsmen’s Alliance for Alaska deserve some serious congratulations. Because of their efforts the a critical milestone in the efforts to protect Bristol Bay has been reached. On May 18, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency put out a draft scientific study of the Bristol Bay watershedand its natural resources. The study is open for public comment through July 23, 2012. Scott Hed and Shoren Brown (below) in particular have been tireless in their efforts to get us to this point and have earned a round of applause at the very least and a round of drinks next time you see them.

These guys have reason to smile

Forewarned is Forearmed

EPA has taken an important step and deserves credit for being pro-active in doing this forward-looking assessment. Knowing what the potential challenges of a project this size could be and the ecological and economic impacts it could have, allows EPA and those who have an interest in Bristol Bay to be much better informed when it comes to siting mining or other extraction projects in the region.

 Sportsmen in particular have written, spoken out and shown their concerns about the impact a large-scale mining operation could have on the Bristol Bay watershed.

What the DRAFT Watershed Assessment says

Here is what EPA wrote in their press release:

“The report assesses the watershed’s natural resources and the economic benefits associated with those resources, including the largest undisturbed wild sockeye salmon run in the world. EPA’s draft study does not provide an in-depth assessment of any specific mining project, but instead assesses the potential environmental impacts associated with mining activities at a scale and with the characteristics that are realistically anticipated, given the nature of mineral deposits in the watershed, the requirements for successful mining development, and publicly available information about potential mining activity. The report concludes that there is potential for certain activities associated with large-scale mining to have adverse impacts on the productivity and sustainability of the salmon fishery in the watershed. Potential impacts could include loss of habitat used for salmon spawning and rearing. The assessment, when finalized following the important public comment and independent peer review, could help inform future decisions on any large-scale mining in Bristol Bay by both federal and non-federal decision-makers.
The draft assessment focused on the Nushagak and Kvichak watersheds, which produce up to half of all Bristol Bay salmon and are open to mining development under Alaska law.

Key findings in EPA’s draft assessment include:

  • All five species of North American Pacific salmon are found in Bristol Bay. The Bristol Bay watershed supports the largest sockeye salmon fishery in the world. The Kvichak River produces more sockeye salmon than any other river in the world. The Nushagak River is the fourth largest producer of Chinook salmon in North America.
  • Bristol Bay’s wild salmon fishery and other ecological resources provide at least 14,000 full and part-time jobs and is valued at about $480 million annually.
  • The average annual run of sockeye salmon is about 37.5 million fish.
  • Bristol Bay provides habitat for numerous animal species, including 35 fish species, more than 190 bird species and 40 animal species.

EPA also examined the importance of Bristol Bay salmon in sustaining the traditional subsistence lifestyle of Alaska Native Villages in the watershed. The assessment includes detailed reports on Bristol Bay indigenous culture, wildlife and economics, as well as salmon and other fish.

TU’s Save Bristol Bay campaign website adds this:

“Even at its minimum size, mining the Pebble deposit would eliminate or block 55 to 87 miles of salmon streams and at least 2500 acres of wetlands – key habitat for sockeye and other fishes. EPA evaluated four types of large-scale mine failures, and found that even though precise estimates of failure probabilities cannot be made, evidence from other large mines suggest that “at least one or more accidents of failures could occur, potentially resulting in immediate, severe impacts on salmon and detrimental, long-term impacts on salmon habitat.”

What it means for Bristol Bay

This DRAFT assessment is a good first step. There is still a lot of work to be done however. EPA’s assessment is scientific and technical. It is not final, takes no regulatory action and “no way prejudges future consideration of proposed mining activities.”

Unless significant changes to the assessment are justified during the public comment and peer review period, EPA should take the next step and initiate a process under the Clean Water Act to protect Bristol Bay’s waters.

Please add your voice in support of protections for Bristol Bay; Click here to take action.

For information on public meetings and how to submit comments, visit EPA’s website:http://www.epa.gov/region10/bristolbay/.

For more information on EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment and to read the assessment, visit:http://www.epa.gov/region10/bristolbay/

Saving Bristol Bay

By

Damn right it is worth protecting!

Tomorrow I will put on my American Fly Fishing Trade Association hat and join sportsmen from around the country in Washington, DC. We are gathering to tell our elected officials and the President that protecting Bristol Bay in Alaska is a top priority for sportsmen.

Scott Hed, director of the Sportsman’s Alliance for Alaska, shares the importance of our effort in this post from Trout Unlimted’s Save Bristol Bay website

Sportsmen fly to DC to tell President and Congress no to Pebble Mine

Next week, April 16 – 18, about 40 sportsmen from around the country are traveling to the nation’s capitol to let their elected officials and the President know that protecting Bristol Bay is a top priority for sportsmen.

This is an important week to show the folks who have the power to protect Bristol Bay that sportsmen are in this fight. We’ve got folks from Alaska, Montana, Michigan, Colorado, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Texas, Wisconsin, Washington, Oregon, Ohio, North Carolina, California, Missouri, New York, and Virginia representing this great country and the millions of people who want Bristol Bay to be protected.

A recent report by the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation shows that there are 34 million hunters and anglers in the U.S., and we’re a powerful constituency. Every year, we pump $76 billion into the economy in pursuit of our passion, through our spending on gear, licenses, gas, lodging, meals and more. All of that spending and activity directly supports 1.6 million jobs in this country.

We are also an influential group because 80% of sportsmen are likely voters – much higher than the national average. And, we also contribute the most money of any group toward government wildlife conservation programs. So, hopefully if we care about an issue and show our support, the decision makers will listen to what we have to say.

In just a few weeks, the EPA will be releasing a draft of its Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment. This huge scientific assessment will likely guide future decisions about large-scale mining and other industrial development in the Bristol Bay region. If they find that disposal of waste from the mine would adversely harm the surrounding clean waters or natural resources, the EPA can deny or place restrictions on a required dredge and fill permit. If warranted, we hope the Obama Administration would take that step to protect Bristol Bay.

You can support the fight for one of planet Earth’s finest and most productive fishing and hunting destinations by taking action today. Fill out this simple form that will send a letter to the President and your members of Congress asking them to protect Bristol Bay. Let’s carry our sportsmen into D.C. with a lot of momentum.