Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Saving ginseng means balancing conservation and culture

News Feed
Thursday, October 3, 2024

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between BPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. Each fall, hopeful foragers throughout the Appalachian mountains don heavy work pants and sturdy boots to clamber into dark, steep, moisture-laden coves in hopes of finding Old Man Sang. The name is a colloquialism for ginseng, a perennial with a gnarled and bulbous root prized for its medicinal qualities. The plant, a staple of traditional medicine and flavorful addition to many recipes, can reach 80 years of age but grows so slowly it takes five to reach maturity. Demand is so great that it has largely been extirpated in Asia, driving prices for American varieties to $1,000 a pound. That’s got conservationists concerned that overzealous diggers could be pinching them out of existence as they harvest plants too early and too often. “When it got really valuable, it was just too many people going over and over to the same ground,” said North Carolina ethnobotanist David Cozzo. “There never was a chance for it to recover.”  Although found in much of the eastern United States, ginseng is most prevalent in Appalachia and the Ozarks. The risk of excessive foraging is particularly great in Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, something one expert on the subject attributes to the high unemployment and widespread poverty found there. In response, the Forest Service has taken the step of limiting harvesting on public lands. Although Nantahala and Pisgah national forests have been closed indefinitely in the wake of Hurricane Helene, a federal ban on harvesting the root there will remain in place for at least another year. Getting caught digging up the plant, found primarily in deciduous hardwood forests, can result in a fine of $5,000 and six months in a federal prison.  The Forest Service has said the prohibition, which began in 2021, could last up to a decade. Taking such a step requires balancing the preservation of a valuable resource and respecting a practice intertwined with the region’s history. “Sanging” is for many people a way of life, one that has supplemented rural incomes for generations, particularly in areas dependent on the volatile coal industry. The Appalachian relationship with east Asian markets extends over 200 years. The Cherokee, who used the root medicinally, took advantage of the globalizing world that colonization thrust them into and started shipping ginseng root to China by the middle of the 1700s. Revenue from such deals helped the tribe buy back a small portion of its ancestral lands in the 1870s, establishing the trust on which the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians now lives, said Cozzo, who is also the director emeritus of the Traditional Cherokee Artisan Resources Program. Formerly enslaved people, unmarried women, and even entire towns cultivated ginseng in the forests of Appalachia throughout the 19th and and early 20th centuries, harvesting the roots alongside things like cohosh and mayapple and establishing a thriving industry in places known for timbering and mining. Even now, Cozzo recalls talking to high-mountain diggers who used their autumn haul to pay for their kids’ school clothes and other expenses. Historians have attempted to rectify the stereotype of the ignorant, backward harvester, and have attributed some responsibility for ginseng’s decline to poaching and to habitat destruction driven by the coal and timber industries. In some communities, mineworkers and their families supplemented their incomes foraging for ginseng and other forest products, particularly as work-related disabilities like black-lung disease took hold. “These guys who got black lung from the mines, they might go out in the morning when it was still cool and they could breathe,” Cozzo said. A 2020 Smithsonian oral history project features people from throughout the region describing foraging and selling what they’d picked or pulled alongside furs and skins to support themselves during unemployment or retirement and to supplement the wages of full-time work. One participant, Carol Judy, a digger and environmental activist who sanged in the mountains around the coal community of Eagan, Tennessee until she died in 2017, is described as a believer in the power of agroforestry to provide for communities struggling to meet their needs, particularly in light of coal’s decline. A friend recalled Carol Judy’s hope of fostering a foraging culture that looks “seven generations forward and seven generations back.”  John-Paul Schmidt, a University of Georgia ecologist who has studied the factors contributing to overharvesting on public lands, noted that stress on the plant’s numbers often correlates with high unemployment and low incomes, particularly in southern Appalachia. That, he said, suggests harvesters compelled by need will find ways around a ban. A wiser policy, he said, would be to explore funding education and pathways to sustainable forest farming, something many harvesters already practice. “There’s a real missed opportunity to really promote active wild cultivation of these plants,” he said. Read Next As one Southern community mourns a paper mill’s closure, another rejoices Katie Myers Many old-time diggers, particularly Indigenous people, have patches they tend. Cozzo’s oral histories tell of people returning to the same patch every five to seven years, giving it plenty of time to recover. Careful harvesters save the seeds and plant them an inch deep, making it more likely that they’ll sprout. “Old-timers knew this, and they managed the woods, and they managed the forest,” Cozzo said.  Greater education around sustainable harvesting is needed, particularly as diggers are less likely to have a long-term relationship to the land and more likely to be driven by the value of the root. “All it takes is one generation to skip knowing how to do things properly,” said Cozzo. The hope behind the ban, said Forest Service botanist Gary Kauffman, is to give these fragile plants time to flourish, particularly older specimens that are key to the root’s survival. “It’s the older individuals that produce more seed and actually regenerate the plant,” Kauffman said. The Forest Service is monitoring more than 100 ginseng plots across Nantahala and Pisgah national forests. It also is working with a seed nursery at the North Carolina State Extension to increase the number of seedbeds in the biodiverse, nutrient-rich soils in which ginseng thrives. Sustainable harvesters know to seek plants at least five and ideally over 10 years old with clear signs of maturity: red berries, stem scars, and three to five leaflets. Healthy ginseng communities consist of about 50 to 100 plants, Kauffman said, but many have closer to 25 — a good basis for growth, but not enough to allow harvesting. That’s got the Forest Service thinking that its conservation efforts could last at least a few years, and possibly longer. That may frustrate diggers and herbalists, he said, but it’s necessary to protect a historically important plant.. “It’s very important to look at that and try to preserve some of that culture,” Kauffman said. “To think of how we can preserve it in the future, so our kids and grandkids can also go out and see ginseng, and maybe in the future, harvest some ginseng.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Saving ginseng means balancing conservation and culture on Oct 3, 2024.

As Appalachian ginseng turns from rural tradition to global commodity, the Forest Service is trying to keep foragers at bay.

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between BPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization.

Each fall, hopeful foragers throughout the Appalachian mountains don heavy work pants and sturdy boots to clamber into dark, steep, moisture-laden coves in hopes of finding Old Man Sang.

The name is a colloquialism for ginseng, a perennial with a gnarled and bulbous root prized for its medicinal qualities. The plant, a staple of traditional medicine and flavorful addition to many recipes, can reach 80 years of age but grows so slowly it takes five to reach maturity. Demand is so great that it has largely been extirpated in Asia, driving prices for American varieties to $1,000 a pound. That’s got conservationists concerned that overzealous diggers could be pinching them out of existence as they harvest plants too early and too often.

“When it got really valuable, it was just too many people going over and over to the same ground,” said North Carolina ethnobotanist David Cozzo. “There never was a chance for it to recover.” 

Although found in much of the eastern United States, ginseng is most prevalent in Appalachia and the Ozarks. The risk of excessive foraging is particularly great in Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, something one expert on the subject attributes to the high unemployment and widespread poverty found there. In response, the Forest Service has taken the step of limiting harvesting on public lands. Although Nantahala and Pisgah national forests have been closed indefinitely in the wake of Hurricane Helene, a federal ban on harvesting the root there will remain in place for at least another year. Getting caught digging up the plant, found primarily in deciduous hardwood forests, can result in a fine of $5,000 and six months in a federal prison. 

The Forest Service has said the prohibition, which began in 2021, could last up to a decade. Taking such a step requires balancing the preservation of a valuable resource and respecting a practice intertwined with the region’s history. “Sanging” is for many people a way of life, one that has supplemented rural incomes for generations, particularly in areas dependent on the volatile coal industry.

The Appalachian relationship with east Asian markets extends over 200 years. The Cherokee, who used the root medicinally, took advantage of the globalizing world that colonization thrust them into and started shipping ginseng root to China by the middle of the 1700s. Revenue from such deals helped the tribe buy back a small portion of its ancestral lands in the 1870s, establishing the trust on which the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians now lives, said Cozzo, who is also the director emeritus of the Traditional Cherokee Artisan Resources Program.

Formerly enslaved people, unmarried women, and even entire towns cultivated ginseng in the forests of Appalachia throughout the 19th and and early 20th centuries, harvesting the roots alongside things like cohosh and mayapple and establishing a thriving industry in places known for timbering and mining. Even now, Cozzo recalls talking to high-mountain diggers who used their autumn haul to pay for their kids’ school clothes and other expenses. Historians have attempted to rectify the stereotype of the ignorant, backward harvester, and have attributed some responsibility for ginseng’s decline to poaching and to habitat destruction driven by the coal and timber industries.

In some communities, mineworkers and their families supplemented their incomes foraging for ginseng and other forest products, particularly as work-related disabilities like black-lung disease took hold. “These guys who got black lung from the mines, they might go out in the morning when it was still cool and they could breathe,” Cozzo said.

A 2020 Smithsonian oral history project features people from throughout the region describing foraging and selling what they’d picked or pulled alongside furs and skins to support themselves during unemployment or retirement and to supplement the wages of full-time work. One participant, Carol Judy, a digger and environmental activist who sanged in the mountains around the coal community of Eagan, Tennessee until she died in 2017, is described as a believer in the power of agroforestry to provide for communities struggling to meet their needs, particularly in light of coal’s decline. A friend recalled Carol Judy’s hope of fostering a foraging culture that looks “seven generations forward and seven generations back.” 

John-Paul Schmidt, a University of Georgia ecologist who has studied the factors contributing to overharvesting on public lands, noted that stress on the plant’s numbers often correlates with high unemployment and low incomes, particularly in southern Appalachia. That, he said, suggests harvesters compelled by need will find ways around a ban. A wiser policy, he said, would be to explore funding education and pathways to sustainable forest farming, something many harvesters already practice. “There’s a real missed opportunity to really promote active wild cultivation of these plants,” he said.

Many old-time diggers, particularly Indigenous people, have patches they tend. Cozzo’s oral histories tell of people returning to the same patch every five to seven years, giving it plenty of time to recover. Careful harvesters save the seeds and plant them an inch deep, making it more likely that they’ll sprout. “Old-timers knew this, and they managed the woods, and they managed the forest,” Cozzo said. 

Greater education around sustainable harvesting is needed, particularly as diggers are less likely to have a long-term relationship to the land and more likely to be driven by the value of the root. “All it takes is one generation to skip knowing how to do things properly,” said Cozzo.

The hope behind the ban, said Forest Service botanist Gary Kauffman, is to give these fragile plants time to flourish, particularly older specimens that are key to the root’s survival. “It’s the older individuals that produce more seed and actually regenerate the plant,” Kauffman said. The Forest Service is monitoring more than 100 ginseng plots across Nantahala and Pisgah national forests. It also is working with a seed nursery at the North Carolina State Extension to increase the number of seedbeds in the biodiverse, nutrient-rich soils in which ginseng thrives.

Sustainable harvesters know to seek plants at least five and ideally over 10 years old with clear signs of maturity: red berries, stem scars, and three to five leaflets. Healthy ginseng communities consist of about 50 to 100 plants, Kauffman said, but many have closer to 25 — a good basis for growth, but not enough to allow harvesting. That’s got the Forest Service thinking that its conservation efforts could last at least a few years, and possibly longer. That may frustrate diggers and herbalists, he said, but it’s necessary to protect a historically important plant..

“It’s very important to look at that and try to preserve some of that culture,” Kauffman said. “To think of how we can preserve it in the future, so our kids and grandkids can also go out and see ginseng, and maybe in the future, harvest some ginseng.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Saving ginseng means balancing conservation and culture on Oct 3, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

How the Return of Salmon to the Klamath River Shows Us What’s Possible in Wildlife Conservation

Once a tragic example of degraded wildlife habitat, the Klamath River’s dam removal demonstrates how people can halt the decline of, and even restore, wildlife

November 26, 20244 min readHow the Return of Salmon to the Klamath River Shows Us What’s Possible in Wildlife ConservationOnce a tragic example of degraded wildlife habitat, the Klamath River’s dam removal demonstrates how people can halt the decline of, and even restore, wildlifeBy Jeff OppermanThe removal of the earthen Iron Gate Dam at the Klamath River in its final phase on August 14, 2024 in Hornbrook, California. Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesImagine standing on a riverbank as thousands of dead salmon float past, belly-up and rotting in the hot California air. That's the sight—and smell—that greeted people along the Klamath River in September 2002, when 35,000 fish perished there in the span of a few days. They were victims of warm water temperatures and low river levels, both caused by dams and diversions that altered the river’s flow.This dramatic loss isn’t unique: according to October’s 2024 Living Planet Report, of which I was a co-author, wildlife populations monitored around the world have declined on average by 73 percent in just the last half century. Freshwater species like salmon have suffered even greater losses. Farming and development, like dams, in natural habitats have driven these declines.But the Klamath story continues to be written. Just a little over two decades on from the massive fish kill, the Klamath became the site of the largest dam removal project in history. Since removal of the lower four dams on the river was completed last month, salmon have surged upstream to parts of the river where they haven’t been seen for more than a century. On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.No longer is the Klamath River a tragic example of the global nature crisis; instead, its restoration serves as an inspiring story of how people can work together to repair wildlife habitats. This huge turnaround was made possible through collaboration and unwavering commitment—especially by the region’s Indigenous people. It is an example we can learn from and start replicating across the world.The scale of that global need for restoration is daunting. The alarming results in the Living Planet Report are derived from the Living Planet Index (LPI), a set of statistics developed by the Zoological Society of London. The LPI provides a broad view of wildlife health across the planet, drawing on data from nearly 35,000 populations of birds, mammals, fish, reptiles and amphibians, across more than 5,000 species. It can also be used to track specific groups, such as migratory fish—from tiny gobies to giant catfish—which have experienced a staggering 81 percent decline since 1970.Halting—and then reversing—the alarming downward trends in fish and other wildlife populations will require major shifts in how we produce energy and food, and how we implement conservation. The Klamath shows that those shifts are within reach.Biologists capture juvenile Coho salmon, Chinook salmon and steelhead trout in Wooley Creek, a tributary to the Salmon River which is one of the largest tributaries to the Klamath River on August 15, 2024. The Coho and Chinook are tagged with a monitoring device and also fin clipped for a genetic study.Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe Klamath was once the third most productive river for salmon on the west coast of the United States. Its migratory fish were the primary food—and central to the culture—of the Karuk, Yurok, Klamath and other tribes. But, beginning in the 1920s, four hydropower dams were built on the river, blocking salmon from swimming upstream to spawn and limiting them to a reduced stretch of the river. The expansion of irrigated farming further stressed the salmon through reduced flows and high water temperatures—the factors that caused the 2002 fish kill—and the runoff of chemicals and nutrients.But from that low point, the opening for recovery emerged. At the heart of the Klamath’s stunning turnaround was the unwavering dedication of the tribes to restore their salmon. Their long-neglected legal rights, cultural commitment, and steadfast efforts made river restoration possible. Collectively, their breakthroughs demonstrate that implementing conservation at the scale necessary to restore wildlife will require a diversity of both leadership and strategy.A man rides past an "Undam the Klamath" mural on the Orleans Market on Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2023 in Orleans, CA.Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesFirst, regulators, conservation groups and tribes negotiated agreements with farmers to reduce agricultural runoff, improve water quality, and balance irrigation demands with water levels in the basin’s lakes and wetlands. That led to the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, signed in 2010. That agreement also set the stage for removal of the four hydropower dams, an outcome the tribes had been pursuing for decades.Another catalyst for removal was the legal requirement that the owner of the dams, PacifiCorp, renew the dams’ licenses, which were set to expire in 2006. In the U.S., hydropower project owners must periodically apply for new licenses through a process that considers options for reducing the projects’ social and environmental impacts. For the Klamath dams, regulatory agencies recommended that license renewal would require the addition of fish ladders to allow salmon to swim above the dams— construction projects that would have been prohibitively expensive. Ultimately PacifiCorp signed a settlement agreement with the tribes, agencies and conservation groups to remove the four dams, which started late last year.The removal of four hydroelectric dams may seem like a major loss of renewable energy. Thanks to California’s rapid expansion of wind and solar energy generation projects, however, the loss of the Klamath dams—which provided just 2 percent of PacifiCorp’s generation capacity—will be offset many times over. In fact, California’s new renewable capacity added during the dam removal process will be nearly 20 times greater than that of the Klamath dams.Restoration of the Klamath clearly demonstrates the potential for leadership and resource management by Indigenous people—whose lands encompass 40 percent of the world’s remaining natural areas—and whose efforts will be central to effective conservation in the 21st century.Further, restoration was only possible through a diverse set of strategies. For centuries, nature conservation has been synonymous with setting aside large tracts of land in national parks or wildlife refuges. The Klamath Basin encompasses six national wildlife refuges, two national parks, and wilderness areas—and approximately two thirds of the basin is in public land, mostly national forests. And yet the salmon—one of the basin’s most important environmental and cultural resources—still found themselves on the ropes. Restoring that resource required agreements on water use, agricultural management and dam removal to restore river connectivity.Just such examples are sorely needed. In November representatives from 196 countries wrapped up the United Nations Biodiversity Conference (COP16) in Colombia and, while some important agreements were reached, much of the work of setting targets and designing strategies for conserving and restoring nature remains to be done. Reversing the losses of wildlife worldwide will require a diverse set of strategies. Protected areas will remain important, but so will transformations in how we produce energy and food and implement conservation. And while “transformation” may sound daunting, the Klamath’s remarkable turnaround demonstrates that the recovery of nature remains in reach.This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

This Month in Conservation Science: Trojan Seahorses and ‘Vampire’ Birds

Journals this month looked at “fabulous but forgotten” ecosystems, hungry monkeys, roaming lions, lead-poisoned birds, and more — including a focus on microplastics. The post This Month in Conservation Science: Trojan Seahorses and ‘Vampire’ Birds appeared first on The Revelator.

When I worked for a major academic publisher in the early 2000s, Christmas came twice a year: once in December and once when the annual Journal Citation Reports came out. The JCR, published every year since 1975, ranks academic journals against each other. Each journal receives something called an “impact factor,” a calculation based on how many papers a journal publishes and how many times its papers are cited by subsequent research within two years. This is a very big deal in scientific circles. The higher the impact factor, the more readily the publisher can sell a journal to libraries and other institutions and the more likely the journal is to receive high-quality submissions. That, in turn, helps keep future impact factors high. It’s not a perfect system. Smaller journals — such as those from the Global South or those covering narrow topics — don’t get cited as often, so they may not receive a high impact factor. That doesn’t mean they don’t have an impact, though: Recent research found that these smaller, niche journals actually have a greater effect on policy — particularly when it comes to protecting endangered species. Meanwhile there are plenty of other ways to assess a journal’s impact. Media mentions are also a big deal, and many journals now publish statistics for each paper’s news links or social-media shares. It could be argued that nonscientific citations have a greater effect on policy and public perception than anything else. So let’s dive into those smaller journals and share the latest science from other conservation journals around the world. Below you’ll find more than three dozen papers that grabbed my attention in the past few weeks. They cover “vampire” birds, hungry monkeys, feral cats, roaming lions, the wildlife trade, and more. Most of the articles are open access, so they should be available to researchers (and any other interested readers) around the globe. Will they also shape policy? That remains to be seen, but some of these papers have only been downloaded a couple of hundred times as of this writing, so let’s give them a fighting chance. “Animal-borne sensors reveal high human impact on soundscapes near a critical sea turtle nesting beach” (Biological Conservation) “Are vehicle strikes causing millions of bee deaths per day on western United States roads? Preliminary data suggests the number is high” (Sustainable Environment) “Camouflage or Coincidence? Investigating the Effects of Spatial and Temporal Environmental Features on Feral Cat Morphology in Tasmania” (Ecology and Evolution) “Climatic drought and trophic disruption in an endemic subalpine Hawaiian forest bird” (Biological Conservation) “Conserving genetic diversity hotspots under climate change: Are protected areas helpful?” (Biological Conservation) “Counterillumination reduces bites by Great White sharks” (Current Biology) “Diurnal Activity Budgets and Feeding Habits of Grivet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops aethiops) in Fragmented Moist Afromontane Forest” (African Journal of Ecology) “Environmental Conservation and the Bulawayo CBD as a Linguistic Landscape Construction: An Ecolinguistics Perspective” (Journal of Asian and African Studies) “Fabulous but Forgotten Fucoid Forests” (Ecology and Evolution) “Facing the heat: nestlings of a cavity-nesting raptor trade safety for food when exposed to high nest temperatures” (Animal Behaviour) “Great Gerbils (Rhombomys opimus) in Central Asia Are Spreading to Higher Latitudes and Altitudes” (Ecology and Evolution) “Large Reductions in Temperate Rainforest Biome Due to Unmitigated Climate Change” (Earth’s Future) “Lead-based ammunition is a threat to the endangered New Zealand Kea (Nestor notabilis)” (Conservation Letters) “Madagascar’s proposed domestic rosewood trade undermines species protection and exposes fatal flaws in the CITES regime” (Madagascar Conservation & Development) “Native plants play crucial role in buffering against severity of exotic plant invasions in freshwater ecosystems” (Biological Conservation) “Nearly half of Colombian artisan craft plant species lack national and international vulnerability assessments” (Ecosystems and People) “Predicting conservation priority areas in Borneo for the critically endangered helmeted hornbill (Rhinoplax vigil)” (Global Ecology and Conservation) “Predicting the potential habitat of bears under a changing climate in Nepal” (Environmental Monitoring and Assessment) “Requiem for Argentine mammals: A spatial framework for mapping extinction risk,” (Journal of Nature Conservation) “Sacred Groves and the Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources: a review” (Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences) “The Trojan seahorse: citizen science pictures of a seahorse harbour insights into the distribution and behaviour of a long-overlooked polychaete worm” (Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences) “‘Vampire birds’: diet metabarcoding reveals that migrating Woodchat Shrikes Lanius senator consume engorged camel ticks in a desert stopover site” (Journal of African Ornithology) The Interplay of Lions and African Wild Dogs These papers, which examine some of the same species but share no authors, deserve to be looked at in unison: “Long-Distance, Transfrontier Carnivore Dispersals in Southern Africa” (Ecology and Evolution) “Spatial Risk Effects From Lions Compound Impacts of Prey Depletion on African Wild Dogs” (Ecology and Evolution) “Droughts reshape apex predator space use and intraguild overlap” (Journal of Animal Ecology) Focus on Microplastics This month also featured a lot of research on microplastics — as many as 10 papers a day, by my count. Here’s a small selection focusing on microplastics’ effects on wildlife. This weighs a little more heavily on subscription-access papers, but many of these are open access. “Bibliometric Insights into Microplastic Pollution in Freshwater Ecosystems” (Water) “The dual role of coastal mangroves: Sinks and sources of microplastics in rapidly urbanizing areas” (Journal of Hazardous Materials) “Ecotoxicological Impact of Cigarette Butts on Coastal Ecosystems: The Case of Marbella Beach, Chile” (Sustainability) “From insects to mammals! Tissue accumulation and transgenerational transfer of micro/nano-plastics through the food chain” (Journal of Hazardous Materials) “Is pollution giving fish a headache? Biomarker analysis in fish brains from Danube floodplain” (13th International Symposium Kopački Rit: Past, Present, Future 2024) “Microplastics alter the functioning of marine microbial ecosystems” (Ecology and Evolution) “Microplastics and terrestrial birds: a review on plastic ingestion in ecological linchpins” (Journal of Ornithology) “Microplastics in Animals: The Silent Invasion” (Pollutants) “Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) microplastics affect angiogenesis and central nervous system (CNS) development of duck embryo” (Emerging Contaminants) “Unraveling Plastic Pollution in Protected Terrestrial Raptors Using Regurgitated Pellets” (Microplastics) Our next column will be a bit different: We want to share researchers’ favorite peer-reviewed papers of 2024. For consideration, drop us a line at tips@therevelator.org and use the subject line TMICS. Send us a link, your name and institution, and 1-3 sentences about why you think readers should check out your paper. We’re eager to hear from you, especially if you’re from the Global South or an institution without much public-relations support. (Deadline: Dec. 10, 2024.) Scroll down to find our “Republish” button Previously in The Revelator: This Month in Conservation Science: ‘The Earth Is Dying, Bro’ The post This Month in Conservation Science: Trojan Seahorses and ‘Vampire’ Birds appeared first on The Revelator.

Biden administration offers alternatives for Colorado River’s long-term operations

Biden administration officials on Wednesday announced several potential alternatives for the Colorado River's long-term management, as the expiration date for the current rules approaches. The five alternatives will be considered as possible replacements for the 2007 Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages, which are valid through the end of 2026. These rules will steer conservation policies for a...

Biden administration officials on Wednesday announced several potential alternatives for the Colorado River's long-term management, as the expiration date for the current rules approaches. The five alternatives will be considered as possible replacements for the 2007 Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages, which are valid through the end of 2026. These rules will steer conservation policies for a 1,450-mile river that provides water to about 40 million people in the U.S. and Mexico.  "We're in a moment for solutions and leadership,"  Acting Deputy Interior Secretary Laura Daniel-Davis said on a Wednesday press call. "Today, we're putting forth alternatives that have established a robust and fair framework for a basin-wide agreement." The Interior Department’s Bureau of Reclamation, which is overseeing the revisions in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), had given Colorado River basin states an early March 2024 cutoff date for submitting a consensus-backed alternative themselves. The U.S. portion of the Colorado River region is split into a Lower and an Upper basin, which, respectively, include California, Arizona and Nevada, and Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico.  Back in March, the two basins were unable to come to a unified agreement and ended up filing competing proposals for the river's long-term management. The Lower Basin states had agreed to reductions of their own while also placing an emphasis on shared cuts across the whole watershed — basing storage capacity totals not just on the massive Lake Powell and Lake Mead, but also on other smaller reservoirs in the Upper Basin. The Upper Basin states, on the other hand, submitted a plan that they felt would better reflect changing hydrological conditions in a region where water supplies come from mountain snowpack. In the absence of a March consensus, the federal government on Wednesday released its own alternatives, which will undergo extensive analysis in a forthcoming draft environmental impact statement (EIS). Those alternatives, according to the Interior Department, reflect elements proposed by basin states, tribes, cooperating agencies and non-governmental organizations. "We have laid the foundation to ensure that future guidelines and strategies will be sufficiently robust and adaptive to withstand the uncertainty of climate change impacts," Daniel-Davis said. The release of the proposed alternatives on Wednesday serves to facilitate a "timely development of final operating guidelines that will need to be in place by August of 2026," explained Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Touton, on the same press call.  Touton stressed that there are no preferred alternatives and that the options "represent a wide range of actions that provide improved predictability of water availability, enhanced opportunities for conservation and respond to a broad spectrum of hydrology." The proposals include four viable alternatives as well as a fifth "no action" alternative, which Touton explained is simply a NEPA requirement but would involve reverting to guidelines in place prior to 2007. Alternative 4, a "Basin Hybrid" plan, attempts to include portions of the plans submitted by the Upper Basin, Lower Basin and tribal nations. That option, according to the Interior Department, could help facilitate collaborative action among stakeholders.  In this proposal, Lake Powell releases would generally be based solely on the lake's elevation, but with some consideration of Lake Mead's levels. New delivery and storage mechanisms would serve both reservoirs, including conservation incentivization for both tribal and non-tribal parties.  This option would also make basin-wide cuts more equitable by spreading the burden, which has long been a priority of the Lower Basin states. Specifically, a portion of the reductions that the Lower Basin must make amid shortages would be based on a seven-reservoir capacity, rather than just that of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Alternative 3, called "Cooperative Conservation," was informed by proposals from conservation organizations and would predicate Lake Powell releases upon total Upper Basin system storage and recent hydrological conditions, according to the Interior Department. Under this option, a large share of Lower Basin cutbacks would be based on the seven-reservoir storage capacity, recent hydrology and voluntary contributions from the two basins. In Alternative 2, called the "Federal Authorities Hybrid," Lake Powell releases would be based on a combination of Lake Powell and Lake Mead elevations, hydrological records and Lower Basin deliveries. Shortage responsibilities under this plan would be triggered entirely by the combined seven-reservoir storage capacity and distributed proportionally among parties. A "Federal Authorities" option, Alternative 1, would provide "robust protection of critical infrastructure" within the federal government’s current statutory authorities. Lake Powell released would be based on Lake Powell's elevations, with Lower Basin shortages distributed based on the region's century-old water rights priority system. "These alternatives represent a responsible range from which to build the best and most robust path forward for the basin," Touton said. "There certainly are extremely difficult choices and tradeoffs to be made, but we believe that there are ample opportunities to create a fair path to solutions that work for the entire region." In addition to presenting the alternatives, the Biden administration officials also devoted ample time in the Wednesday press call commending the progress made under President Biden on Colorado River issues. Daniel-Davis recalled how "in 2021, impacts of a historic drought in the West brought the Colorado River Basin and the communities it serves to a near crisis," stressing how Lake Mead and Lake Powell plunged to critically low elevations. But she touted the administration's "all-of-government approach" and "really bold and decisive action" for helping solve the crisis.  Touton offered a similar perspective, adding, "We were able to bring the Colorado River into the back in the break of the worst drought in 1,800 years." White House National Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi, credited not only the administration, but also the region's bipartisan partners for bringing "the river back from the brink." He commended U.S. West governors by name, and from both sides of the aisle, for their work on natural resource conservation and for recognizing the strain on the Colorado River system. Zaidi described the alternatives as "a playbook to come together once again, to meet the urgent need of stabilizing situation beyond 2026." In response to the Interior Department's publication of alternatives, JB Hamby, Colorado River commissioner for California, said in a statement that "federal law requires the Colorado River Basin’s reservoirs be managed in accordance with the Colorado River Compact." The most significant components of that 1922 water agreement, Hamby stated, are "mandatory deliveries of water from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin and Mexico." "In order to be valid, any alternative considered must meet this requirement unless the states agree to a compromise otherwise," he said. Becky Mitchell, Colorado River commissioner for the state of Colorado, said in a statement her state did not have specific comments on the alternatives "at this time." "Colorado continues to stand firmly behind the Upper Division States’ Alternative," she said, noting that this proposal is supply-driven and aims to boost Lake Powell and Lake Mead while protecting Colorado's "significant rights and interests" in the river. "Colorado remains committed to working collaboratively with the other Basin States, the federal government and tribal Nations towards a consensus approach and also stands ready to protect our State’s significant interests in the Colorado River," Mitchell added. In a separate press call following the Interior Department's announcement, Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, told reporters that he needed "a lot more time to digest all this." While he noted "some really positive elements to these alternatives," he also said that he was "disappointed that Reclamation chose to create alternatives, rather than to model the Lower Basin state alternative in its entirety." "It didn't start at one extreme or the other, and it showed unequivocally that the Lower Basin was willing to take the first tranche of cuts," Buschatzke added.

Second Teen Charged in New Jersey Forest Fire as Rain Should Help Douse New York Blaze

A second teenager has been charged with intentionally setting a wildfire in a New Jersey suburb of Philadelphia

A second teenager was charged with intentionally setting a wildfire in a New Jersey suburb of Philadelphia as “significant” rainfall was expected to help douse a stubborn wildfire burning on the New Jersey-New York border Wednesday.Many parts of the Northeast have been under red flag alerts, with firefighters responding to hundreds of brush fires in tinder-dry and windy conditions. Officials have said numerous prolonged rain storms are needed in parts of New England as well as New Jersey and New York, which are the driest in between 120 to 150 years.Police in Evesham Township said Wednesday they have arrested a 14-year-old from Marlton in connection with an Oct. 30 wildfire that burned less than a tenth of a square mile. On Nov. 7, they charged another youth, also from Marlton, with setting that same fire. The latest arrest was made Tuesday and announced on Wednesday. Both are charged with aggravated arson, and causing or risking widespread injury or damage.Both have been taken to a juvenile detention center as detectives investigate whether they might have been responsible for a second wildfire in Evesham a week later that burned a slightly larger area.A storm moving into the New Jersey-New York area Wednesday was expected to bring what New York officials called “significant” rainfall to the area of the Jennings Creek wildfire, which has burned 8.3 square miles and was 90% contained as of Wednesday morning.While that will undoubtedly help fire crews douse the fire, which is burning in several hard-to-reach areas of rugged terrain, the rain could bring its own challenges.“Soil within the burned area will become unstable and erosive as it becomes more saturated,” the New York Department of Environmental Conservation said in a statement Tuesday night. “Residents may see burned and decomposing trees fall within the fire area. A combination of mud and burned debris may run off into local waterways causing discoloration.”Two smaller wildfires in New Jersey, each having burned less than a tenth of a square mile, were declared fully contained Wednesday morning. They were burning in Hainesport in Burlington County, and in Pine Park in Lakewood in Ocean County.Follow Wayne Parry on X at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.