Lands Lobby Fly In Talking Points June 2018 Lobby Asks: We are in Washington as part of a volunteer lobby day. More than 25 of us are town, and will hold more than 150 meetings with members of Congress and their staff, on passing a clean appropriations bills without ANY funding for the border wall, and a FARM bill without any anti-environmental riders. Defense Ask Will you stand up against any bills that will undermine the protection of our public lands? Will you oppose any funding or appropriations for the building of a Border Wall? Will you oppose any anti-environmental riders in the 2018 Farm Bill? Will you work to make sure that a comprehensive and clean budget is passed to fund our government that protects key environmental programs like the Land and Water Conservation Fund, National Park Service and public lands, and wildlife? Will you stand up against any gutting or weakening of the Antiquities Act? Offense Ask Will you support the passage of bills to protect and expand our public lands? Will you support the full authorization and funding of the Land Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)? Will you support wilderness bills that protect our public lands? Lobby Talking Points: Border Wall In the FY18 Omnibus appropriations package Republicans cynically included nearly $2 billion toward the construction of a dangerous and politically-divisive border wall. While we were happy to see that the funding provision spared the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, the wall funding remains a shameful addition that tears communities on the borderlands apart and puts plenty of other special places at risk just to push a racist, hateful agenda that would never pass on its own. President Trump s initial budget request for the border wall was a staggering $25 billion. While the appropriated $1.6 billion encompasses just a fraction of that, we were still disappointed to see Congress appropriate any money toward this destructive project, and Sierra Club opposes even a penny more in border wall funding. New walls will make it even more difficult for wildlife to move across the border, including animals such as the jaguar and ocelot which have begun to return to various parts of the US after a long absence, and jeopardize some game animals that support local economies.
President Trump has called for walling off the entire U.S.-Mexico border with a concrete barrier that would stand 30 feet tall. Most of the currently unwalled border is in Texas, and building walls there would require condemning land from hundreds of private landowners and municipalities. Big Bend National Park, Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, and other federal lands would be carved up by these new walls. Habitat and endangered species on these lands would be severely impacted, including ocelot, jaguar, and Sonoran pronghorn. An estimated 6500 acres of conserved lands in Texas are threatened by the funds appropriated in the FY18 cycle alone. Sixty-three percent of people living within 350 miles of the southern border oppose the idea, according to a Pew Research Center survey. 2 Border walls have had no discernible impact on immigration or smuggling, according to the Congressional Research Service, and the GAO reported that CBP cannot measure the contribution of fencing to border security operations along the southwest border. [1] The latest cost estimates for these useless and destructive border walls range between $20-70 billion. The human cost of the walls expansion would also be immense. Existing border walls have already pushed migrants into deadly crossings, where thousands succumb to harsh desert elements. The proposal to expand the wall symbolizes the administration s harsh plot to target immigrant families for deportations that would shatter lives and shred the fabric of tight knit border communities and this country. Due to the Real ID Act of 2005, the Secretary of Department of Homeland Security has the ability to waive any law in order to build border walls, roads, and infrastructure as quickly as possible. The Bush Administration used this authority to waive more than three dozen laws along the southern border, including the Clean Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and Clean Air Act along with other bedrock environmental laws putting wildlife and the public health of communities along the border at risk. Trump has doubled down on this risky behavior, waiving 33 important laws along about 15 miles of our borderlands near San Diego. New walls would make it even more difficult for wildlife to move across the border including animals such as the jaguar and ocelot which have begun to return to various parts of the U.S. after a long absence. This barrier would severely jeopardize game animals that support local economies. The southern border region is home to some 15 million people living in border counties in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. These communities, which include cities such as San Diego and El Paso, are among the safest in the country despite political narratives. 2018 Farm Bill The Farm Bill is meant to empower farmers, put food on our tables, assist families in need, and promote land and water conservation. However in recent years these must-pass bills have been used as vehicles to advance poison pill, anti-environmental riders that threaten our lands, water and wildlife. It s imperative the Senate honor the Farm Bill s bipartisan legacy and put forward a clean, workable Farm Bill.
The House Farm Bill (HR. 2) guts requirements under the Endangered Species Act that require the Environmental Protection Agency to consult with federal fish and wildlife agencies when assessing the effects of toxic pesticides on endangered and threatened species. Circumventing this important process would essentially allow the EPA to conduct insufficient, irresponsible self-consultations and discount any conservation measures necessary to reduce the harmful impacts of pesticide use on listed species. HR. 2 seeks to exempt pesticide manufacturers from any liability for harming or killing endangered wildlife. If the EPA self-determines that a pesticide will not harm a listed species or its critical habitat using the faulty process outlined above, then neither the EPA, the pesticide manufacturer, nor the end user can be held liable for the incidental killing of endangered or threatened species. The House Farm Bill s forestry title is also packed with major attacks on the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered species Act. It seeks to exempt large scale land management projects from environmental review and public comment under NEPA and would waive requirements for the Forest Service to consult with US Fish and Wildlife when determining if proposed projects would harm threatened and endangered species. Together these provisions would open the door for industrial logging on hundreds of millions of acres of critical wildlife habitat. Another section of the House Farm Bill would recklessly roll back the Clean Water Act protections to allow farmers to spray pesticides on or near water resources -- including public drinking water supplies -- without obtaining a permit, as currently required by law. As we saw with the failed House Farm Bill vote, taking food off the table, contaminating our drinking water supplies with pesticides, and logging away the future of our forests is not the way forward. These partisan provisions are an impediment and thwart the bipartisan cooperation needed to advance the Farm Bill. Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Created more than 50 years ago as a bipartisan program, the Land and Water Conservation Fund uses revenues from offshore oil and gas to safeguard our public lands and waterways, provide recreational opportunities, and acquire new lands for public use. Despite strong public support and clear financial benefits, Congress has not permanently fund or reauthorization of LWCF. Not only does LWCF require reauthorization, but the program is also starved for funding. LWCF is an important economic force. The program s funding provides 9.4 million or 1 out of every 15 jobs in the U.S., and according to the National Fish and Wildlife Federation, contributes $1.06 trillion to the U.S. economy annually. Furthermore, a recent study found that for every dollar spent on LWCF projects, $4 were returned to American taxpayers. The Sierra Club has long called for Congress to act swiftly, and permanently reauthorize and fund LWCF at the full $900 million. Without it, our country will lose an essential tool in the preservation of America s landscapes and history.
Lands Bills Wilderness designation continues to be the highest form of protection federal lands can receive. America s wild lands represent the very best of democracy. Opening up these lands to the public provides us all with the opportunity to engage in exhilarating recreational activities, and to absorb the stunning landscape vistas and unique wildlife our nation has to offer. These lands are also key drivers of local economies. Outdoor recreation generates $646 billion for the U.S. economy every year and generates 6.51 million jobs. Yearly benefits, including clean air and water provided by natural areas, is estimated at $1.6 trillion annually. Preserving public lands as wilderness - or through other administrative designations - benefits local communities and economies, and serves as a scientific yardstick for measuring the health of natural systems. Arctic Last year, the Republican budget bill included language to allow oil and gas leasing and drilling in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one of America s last wild places. The Sierra Club has launched a corporate campaign targeting oil companies to stay out of the Refuge. We are also urging financial institutions to oppose leasing and drilling there, and to not invest or fund companies that lease in the Refuge. Representatives Jared Huffman (D-CA), Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), Alan Lowenthal (D-CA), Donald McEachin (D-VA), and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) recently introduced the Arctic Cultural and Coastal Plain Protection Act, a bill to halt the oil and gas drilling exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge currently being rushed by the Trump administration. The Arctic Cultural and Coastal Plain Protection Act would protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from oil and gas drilling by repealing the controversial provision tucked into the 2017 Republican tax law that mandated oil and gas leasing, development, and production in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic Refuge. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of America s last wild places. The 1.5 million acre coastal plain is the biological heart of the Refuge. The coastal plain is one of the few places in the United States that has never been developed or inhabited, and there are no roads or homes or permanent structures of any kind there (the one exception is the village of Kaktovik, which is on a barrier island off the coast of the Arctic Refuge; the barrier island is not considered part of the coastal plain). The Refuge is home to more than 200 wildlife species including polar bears, musk ox and caribou. The Porcupine River caribou herd travel to the coastal plain, from Canada s Porcupine River, each summer to give birth to their young. It also is the most important denning site for polar bears in the United States, and supports a significant population of polar bears. The Arctic Refuge is also the only place in the U.S. where all three species of bears - brown (which includes grizzlies), black and polar can be found. The coastal plain is considered sacred to the Gwich in, Alaska Natives who refer to the area as the sacred place where life begins. The Gwich in depend on the caribou for subsistence and as a link to the traditional culture. They consider themselves the people of the caribou and their creation myth has the Gwich in evolving from a Porcupine River caribou. The area is so sacred to the Gwich in that they
are forbidden from setting foot there, and hunt caribou as they cross the Brooks Range on their migration to the Refuge s coastal plain. Adjacent to the Arctic Refuge is Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, on state lands and the hub of the oil industry in Alaska. There are hundreds of oil spills from wells near Prudhoe Bay every year. Most are small but in 2006, corrosion problems and a lack of inspections by BP caused the largest oil spill in North Slope history 200,000 gallons of crude oil were spilled as well as a temporary, but massive shutdown of the nation s largest oil field. BP was subsequently fined for criminal negligence. In July 2011, BP paid a $25 million civil penalty, the largest per-barrel penalty at that time for an oil spill, and agreed to take measures to significantly improve inspection and maintenance of its pipeline infrastructure on the North Slope to reduce the threat of additional oil spills. [1] Southwest Border Security: Additional Actions Needed to Better Assess Fencing s contributions to Operations and Provide Guidance for Identifying Capability Gaps. U.S. Government Accountability Office. February 2017. p. 25. [2] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/08/in-republicans-views-of-a-border-wall-proximity-to-mexico-matter s Antiquities Act Initially signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1906, the Act has since been used by 16 presidents (8 Republicans and 8 Democrats) to create more than 130 national monuments. Time has demonstrated the wisdom of providing presidents this authority nearly half of our National Parks including the magnificent Grand Canyon and Death Valley were initially protected as National Monuments. Recent monuments including Charles Young Buffalo Soldiers (OH), Fort Monroe (VA), Harriet Tubman (MD), Fort Ord (CA) and Chimney Rock (CO) have been established following thorough public involvement and with bipartisan support locally and in Congress. The Antiquities Act can only be used on federally owned lands, including submerged lands out to 200 miles from shore. Monument designations can allow for broad access to a variety of uses and honor existing rights, including oil and gas leases, public access, hunting, fishing, grazing and rights-of-way. Following a designation, site-specific management plans are put into place with input from local jurisdictions and agencies, community groups and the public. Studies have repeatedly shown that national monuments support local economic growth due to the competitive advantage they offer in attracting new businesses and in boosting fast-growing economic sectors like tourism and recreation. Recently, following the 2012 designation of the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument in New Mexico, visitation to the new monument area increased by 40% and local tax revenue in the gateway community of Taos increased by 21%.