News Release     
Wednesday, May 30, 2001

(This is a joint news release of the German Forum Environment and
Development and RAFI.)  

The CGIAR's last Mid-Term Meeting has ended: Can 'Donorsaurs' Mollify
Treasury-Rexs?

Nice try but no Cigar
       
     
The last-ever Mid-term Meeting of the Consultative Group on
International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) has shuffled into extinction
in Durban, South Africa. The fate of the outmoded Green Revolution
centers - the South's most important scientific research system, remains
in limbo. The 'donorsaurs' (as its 58 funding governments and
foundations have been dubbed) are faced with a number of unresolved
challenges.    
       
Historically challenged: The Green Revolution harks back to the 1940's
and Norman Borlaug's pioneering work in the hills outside Mexico City
breeding semi-dwarf wheat. Short-strawed wheat, maize and rice push a
plant s energy into its grains. Cereal production, with pumped up
fertilizers, irrigation and herbicides, boomed. By 1970 Borlaug was
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and shortly thereafter, the thin green
band of research stations that sparked the Revolution were organized
into the CGIAR's International Agricultural Research Centres, the IARChy
fed by the CG's 'donorsaurs'. Thirty years have passed since the halcyon
days of the CG s founding. There are now 16 Centres, 58 donors (mostly
governments, foundations and the World Bank), about 8000 researchers and
support personnel, and an annual budget of almost $340 million.     
    
At thirty, however, 'Cigar' (as German advocacy groups sometimes call
it), isn t quite the poor's 'Che Guevara' it once hoped to be. The 16
'big box' science campuses scattered around the South are looking a
little ragged around their radical fringes. The funding, in real
dollars, is stagnating. Good scientists are being let go -- or running
off to better provisioned laboratories in the private sector. The old
revolutionaries have been caught in dalliances with the Biotech
industry, flirting with life patents.    
       
But even as the threat of extinction looms over them, some of the
centers are proving themselves progressive and agile. As a result, some
civil society organizations monitoring the CGIAR System would like to
see the IARCs shed their cumbersome campuses and evolve into
regionally-focused 'science-animateurs' or collaborative catalysts.    

    
The System's donors have been propelled to take action. CGIAR's
semi-annual meeting held in Durban, May 21-25 was to decide on a new
programme and institutional strategy that would revitalize public sector
agricultural research and restore the confidence of its financial
backers in Europe, Japan and North America.   
     
At best, it was a biocrats partial success. Probably not sufficiently so
as to return stability to the System and confidence to those critical of
CGIAR science and policies. A nice try but no Cigar.    
       
'IARChy' challenged: Uniquely informal in style (there is no
constitution or by-laws) the CGIAR has three centers of power: the
national governments who donate to the System (led by Japan, the
European Union, and the USA in that order); the World Bank (which hosts
the CG secretariat, provides it with its Chair -- always a Bank V-P --
and antes up about $50 million a year for the infrastructure of the 16
Centres, and the 16 Centres themselves. Each Centre has an independent
legal identity and board (though they obviously need donors) and operate
with a long history of complex bilateral (and host country) arrangements
that continues to give them leverage.     
    
Since 1994, when the CGIAR embarked at its efforts at 'renewal', the
Bank and donors have been aware that mergers and liquidations would be
needed. Indeed, some mergers did take place in the early 90's but since
then, the IARChy has stood resolutely against major changes. In
preparation for Durban, a Change Design and Management Team (CDMT)
crafted proposals that acknowledged the need to merge and eliminate
centers but avoided specific recommendations or even processes. Some
observers thought the team may have misunderstood their mandate to be
'change, design, or management' and that the report has come out in
favour of 'design.'    
     
Intellectually challenged: The CDMT proposed that over a five year
period, the CGIAR shift half of its funding to support a set of 'Global
Challenge Programmes' such as climate change, water, a farming systems
strategy to take into account the devastating effect of AIDS on African
food security, and strategies to utilize new crop genomics technologies
(i.e., 'GM food'). Initially, the new challenges were to be funded with
new money. Theoretically, if enough new money was attracted to these
socially 'sexy' topics, the IARCs might carry on with their mundane
mandate to increase crop yields and conserve genetic resources while
launching new collaborative initiatives with non-CG partners in the new
challenge areas.     
    
A nice idea nobody bought. Privately, World Bank officials let it be
known that they were prepared to shift between $ 15-20 million of their
regular $50 million contribution into the new Global Challenge
Programmes more or less immediately. Some other donors hinted that they
were prepared to do the same. The net effect would be that the majority
of the core unrestricted funds now used by the 16 Centres to ensure
their institutional survival would suddenly move to the 'GCP' (dubbed
'Give Cash Please') pocket. By this sleight of hand, donors hoped to
force the Centres to restructure and to collaborate more closely with
national and regional agricultural research systems in the South.     
    
But in proposing to move half of the CG budget (about $170 million) into
the GCP over five years, the donors were faced with a political
embarrassment -- or impossibility. Clearly, they were revealing that
they were unhappy with half of the current spending activities of the
System. Since the Challenge Programmes were far from detailed or
adopted, the move says much more about what they didn't want than what
they did want. How could the 'donorsaurs' return home to their capitals
to convince their treasury ministries ('T-Rexs') to continue funding
such a dubious proposition?    
     
Regionalisation challenged: The governments who donate the CGIAR have
long been aware that there is very little political cache in dumping
millions into international science facilities in the absence of a
newsworthy Green Revolution. Foreign and trade ministries can get far
more 'bang for their buck' supporting national and regional agricultural
science initiatives that strengthen local laboratories and resource
local scientists. In response, the 16 Centres claim that about one-fifth
of their total funding actually goes to capacity building at the
national level. Nobody -- but nobody -- is enthusing about the results.
   
    
For this reason, the drive to reduce the number of Centers and to design
challenge programmes that emphasize national and regional collaboration,
lay behind many of the proposals in Durban. In the end, however, IARChy
opposition to core funding cuts combined with the donors  inability to
carry through regionalisation. While everybody talked about 'bottom-up'
regional priority setting, no one in Durban knew how to do it. In order
to paper over their confusion, donors agreed to establish a process for
adopting new challenge programmes between now and their next meeting
during International Centers  Week in Washington October 29th to
November 2nd. So much for real grass roots participation.    
     
Governance challenged: The donorsaurs did adopt a series of modest
institutional changes -- the kind that can be vital to bureaucrats and
boring to almost everybody else. Some of the changes do, however,
indicate political tendencies. Chief among them is the decision to
create an Executive Council and do away with one of the System's two
semi-annual meetings. Historically, the twice-yearly events have been
open to virtually anybody who drops by. With exceptions, CGIAR s
decision-making processes may have been cumbersome but they have always
been transparent. Removing one of the global gabfests is a reasonable
move toward greater efficiency but the formation of the Executive
Council cuts the transparency and the participation of about half the
donors who might not win seats at the table. In the end, it was agreed
that all members could be observers to Council sessions even if they
could not speak. In reality, this means that the OECD governments -- who
can afford to send observers -- will be present while South donors will
not. Further, in a somewhat unseemly scramble for influence, the NGO
Committee and the Private Sector Committee won seats on the Council, as
did the Global Forum on Agricultural Research and Development. When the
music stopped, only farmers were left standing without a chair. Although
the world's two most important federations of farmer organizations were
in the room, Via Campesina (for the world s smallest and poorest
farmers) and the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (not
so small nor so poor), no one stood to offer them a seat. All that talk
about grassroots participation but the South and farmers lost out.     
    
Balance challenged: Durban exposed -- if not a power struggle -- then
certainly uncertainties about power distribution between the CGIAR s
co-sponsoring agencies (the Bank, FAO and UNDP). The MTM failed to
clarify the CG s support for the Global Forum on Agricultural Research
and Development and its vital regional fora. The role of the GFAR
Secretariat hosted by FAO in Rome is not clear in relation to the System
Office that the donors did agree to establish in Washington. This will
consolidate the present CGIAR secretariat with the Future Harvest public
awareness and fundraising campaign and possibly unite some other
services so far offered by the Centers. At the same time, the move to
turn TAC (the prestigious Technical Advisory Committee) into a Science
Council, and the future role of the corresponding secretariat at FAO is
also unclear. While some restructuring could prove beneficial, the full
involvement of FAO as a co-sponsor needs to be assured and a proper
balance of strategic and operational planning, monitoring and evaluation
functions between the Science and Executive Councils elaborated. The new
Science Council also needs the full participation of CGIAR s
constituencies -- especially small farmers  organizations actively
concerned with research.      
    
Future challenges: For all half-resolved decisions in Durban, the
'donorsaurs' continue to score high marks for dedication and goodwill.
CGIAR continues to be a remarkably transparent and collegial system
refreshingly open to new ideas and partnerships. The CGIAR's Chair, Ian
Johnson, scores especially high marks for his commitment to consultation
and dialogue. It is important that this approach continue in the months
ahead as donorsaurs try to sort out the fall out from Durban and to
explain to their T-Rexs why financial flows should continue in this era
of great extinctions.     
      
Taxonomy of the IARC Kingdom     
       
CG Speak, CSO Translation and Definition     
     
'Shareholders' = 'Donorsaurs' - Government and foundation delegates to
CG meetings and those who directly monitor IARC activities.   
     
'IARCs' = 'Dinersaurs' - The 16 Centers that receive funding, directly,
and indirectly, from the donorsaurs.   
     
'Stakeholders,' also 'clients' = 'Dinnersaurs' -  NARS (including
farmers), the bread and butter of IARC research and justification.   
   
'Investors' = 'T-Rexs' - Treasury-Rex (or finance officials) who approve
the CGIAR budget contributions.   
     
'NGOs' = 'Prontosaurs' - Civil Society Organizations (mistakenly called
Nongovernmental Organizations in the CGIAR) that are always pushing for
overnight ('Pronto') revolutions.   
     
'Private Sector' = 'Predataurs' - The CGIAR's Private Sector Committee
and the companies that have dealings with the IARCs.     
     
This is a joint news release of the German Forum Environment and
Development and the Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI).
The two organizations have been cooperating closely for more than one
year on issues of common concern related to CGIAR, GFAR and FAO. Susanne
Gura of the German Forum and Silvia Ribeiro of RAFI attended the Durban
MTM. They can be contacted as follows:    
    
Susanne Gura     
German Forum Environment and Development     
Tel: + 49-228 -948 06 70      
Fax: + 49-228 - 976 47 77      
Email: gura@forumue.de     
http://www.forumue.de    
    
Silvia Ribeiro     
RAFI     
Tel : +52-55-632664     
Fax: +52-55-632664     
Email: Silvia@rafi.org     
http://www.rafi.org

May 30, 2001 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week, protest Bush's energy plan AND read about the dramatic change of power in the Senate!  Now that the summer is here, we'll be coming at you monthly until the new school year.  If your email is changing, please let us know -- and remember that we offer free Web-based EnviroCitizen.com email at http://www.envirocitizen.org/mail

mailto:earthnet@envirocitizen.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Shadow Congress 1: Protest the New Energy Plan!
2.  Shadow Congress 2:  Senate Shakeup!
3. Quote of the Week
4.  Summer Radio
5.  Letters to the Editor
6. Jobs, Conferences and Gatherings
7.  Activist Phone Book & EarthNet News Info

SHADOW CONGRESS 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earlier this month, the Bush Administration released its long-awaited national energy plan.  Confirming enviros' worst fears, it heavily emphasizes dirty fuels and nuclear power -- and doesn't ever mention the words "climate change" or "greenhouse gases".  Big surprise -- it also calls for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  Cheney has repeatedly stated that the U.S. needs to build almost 2000 power plants over the next 20 years and he dismisses conservation measures as a "sign of personal virtue."

The Bush plan poses serious long-term threats to the environment and public health, and doesn't address the specter of global warming. Let Congress know that we demand a plan for this century -- not the last one!

TAKE ACTION NOW:  Turn up the heat on Congress!  Tell them that this energy plan is a stone-cold loser, sending letters from http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet

FOR MORE INFO:
http://www.lcv.org/energy/; http://www.ucsusa.org/energy/energy-home.html; http://www.saveourenvironment.org/action/monkeymovie.htm; http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/heatbeat/thisjustin052401.stm

SHADOW CONGRESS 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen. Jeffords (VT) rocked the political world by announcing this week that he is bolting the Republican Party to become an Independent.  What does this have to do with the environment, you ask?  Lots!  His defection means that the Dems now control the Senate for the first time since 1993, and Jeffords, a long-time environmental ally, will likely takeover the chairmanship of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee.  Jeffords, citing "energy and the environment" as two areas of contention that prompted his decision, opposes oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and has worked to block anti-environmental riders on appropriations measures.

However, his support of shipping nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain in Nevada has not wowed enviros.  The current ranking Minority member at the EPW, Harry Reid (D-NV), is a longtime opponent of using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear dumpsite.  Scientists have found earthquake faults and underground water below Yucca Mountain, and activists are concerned about toting nuclear waste through 32 states.
 
TAKE ACTION NOW:  Write Sen. Jeffords a letter demanding that he follow Reid's lead and reconsider his position on the Yucca Mountain Project.  Use the EarthNet Action Center at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet to make your views heard.

FOR MORE INFO:
http://www.shundahai.org/yucca_mt.html; http://www.ymp.gov/;
http://www.citizen.org/CMEP/RAGE/radwaste/radwaste.html

QUOTE OF THE WEEK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"True peace is not the absence of tension, it is the presence of justice."

--Martin Luther King, Jr.

SUMMER RADIO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the dog days of summer ahead, it's a great time to catch up on your radio listening.  And now there are loads of enviro and activist stations online, so you can chill and catch the latest info.  Here are a few of the many offerings:
http://www.glrc.org; http://www.webactive.com/; http://www.alternativeradio.org/; http://www.workingforchange.com/radio/index.cfm; http://www.loe.org; http://www.greenwaveradio.com/

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to comment on the call to action regarding the Puerto Rican island of Vieques. I agree that things need to be done to combat the environmental and health degradation that constant bombing has caused. However, I have been very involved in this issue lately (and have a personal connection there as well) and I am concerned about the negative image that the U.S. Navy is getting through the media.  I do not agree with what they are doing and I am not an advocate of violence for solving global issues, but the Navy does play an extremely important role in the lives of the people of Vieques and Puerto Rico. As just one example, whenever a devastating hurricane hits Puerto Rico, the Navy is the first on the scene helping to clean up and to aid the citizens in any way possible. And as for the recent protests, only 5 of the nearly 200 protestors arrested on Vieques were actually Viequenses. It seems that some Puerto Ricans are using this issue as a vehicle to express their discontent at their territorial status. I am not at all trying to point fingers or to downplay this issue. Vieques is in environmental danger and I do believe there are legitimate health threats to those living there. Yet, I do not want this to turn into a way for people to make out the Navy as the enemy. There are other aspects of the problem that must be factored in to the debate. We need to approach these problems objectively by looking at the facts and tackling the problems from there.

--Samantha Goodwin

Got something to say?  Send your letters to mailto:earthnet@envirocitizen.org
We reserve the right to edit for length, clarity, and purpose.

JOBS AND INTERNSHIPS
------------------------------
These are a sampling of the over 200 environmental and activist jobs and internships listed at www.envirocitizen.org/enet/jobs/index.asp!

Americorps is looking for a campus organizer to help with clean water issues in New Jersey.   Find the job description at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/jobs/detail.asp?id=2786

SCICON Outdoor School in California is looking for a paid, summer intern.  Find the job description at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/jobs/detail.asp?id=2787

The Texas General Land Office is looking for a Natural Resource Specialist.  Find the job description at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/jobs/detail.asp?id=2782

CONFERENCES AND GATHERINGS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All events listed at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/events/index.asp

WHAT: SUV Day of Action
WHERE: Boston Area
WHEN:  June 2, 2001
FOR MORE INFO: http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/events/detail.asp?id=782

WHAT: 5th National Organizers Alliance Gathering
WHERE: Sonoma State University
WHEN:  June 27-July 2, 2001
FOR MORE INFO: http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/events/detail.asp?id=783

WHAT: Greenpeace Student Activist Training
WHERE:  Washington, DC
WHEN:  July 11-14, 2001
FOR MORE INFO: http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/events/detail.asp?id=779

ACTIVIST PHONE BOOK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Capitol Switchboard: 202.224.3121
White House Comment Line: 202.456.1111
EarthNet Action Center: http://congress.nw.dc.us/cec
White House Address: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC 20500
Senate Address: US Senate, Washington, DC 20510
House Address: US House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515
**Look up e-mail addresses in a comprehensive congressional directory at
http://congress.nw.dc.us/cec/congdir.html or http://www.vote-smart.org/ce

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Write your own short articles for submission to EarthNet. We are particularly interested in articles about student activism on your campus. The email accounts for EarthNet News are:
For general comments: mailto:earthnet@envirocitizen.org
For article submissions or ideas: mailto:submissions@envirocitizen.org
Submit Jobs/Internships/Volunteer listings at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/jobs/add.asp.
Submit Events at http://www.envirocitizen.org/enet/events/add.asp.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to our listserv, EarthNet News, go to http://www.envirocitizen.org/subscribe.html, or send an email to mailto:earthnet-request@earthsystems.org with the subject subscribe. To unsubscribe, send an email to mailto:earthnet-request@earthsystems.org with the subject unsubscribe.

from Global Response May 31, 2001

Dear Members of Global Response's "Quick Response Network:"

Another VICTORY to celebrate!

Hot on the heels of our successful letter campaigns in India and Kenya, we
just received this letter from Guatemala.  Tropico Verde reports SUCCESS in
our letter campaign to stop oil exploration and development in Guatemala's
Maya Biosphere Reserve!

Thanks and congratulations to all who helped win this victory for the
environment and the people of Guatemala.

(Original Spanish text of Tropico Verde's letter follows the English
translation.)


Guatemala, October 2000

Dear Friends at Global Response,

In this letter we want to bring you up to date concerning the threats to
the Maya Biosphere Reserve from oil development.  During the months of
April, May and June of this year, we received hundreds of letters and
emails, demanding that Guatemalan authorities respect one of the last
remaining tropical forests on our planet.  We are very happy to inform you
that the pressure was successful!

Under the leadership of Tropico Verde, and with your invaluable support,
the international campaign was a complete victory.  The government of
Guatemala retracted its plan to open the Maya Biosphere Reserve to oil
development.  The government recognized the severe social and environmental
impacts that oil development could provoke, and made a decision without
precedent in our country: oil development will not proceed as long as the
people of Guatemala oppose it.

This decision is very important for us, although we realize that there's a
long road ahead and we must keep our attention on this issue so that the
decision is never reversed.  But know that together you and we have
accomplished a huge achievement.

We send you our most sincere appreciation for your support and your
solidarity with our cause.  Your letters were very important in winning
this victory, and we want you to know that we will always remember your
gesture of solidarity.  We would have liked to respond to each one of you,
but this is impossible for us because of the large amount of letters and
other demands on our time.  To all who wrote us personal messages as well
as letters to the government, we assure you we read your comments with much
attention; excuse us for not responding individually.

Wishing you all the best,

Piedad Espinosa, President
Tropico Verde
14 calle 5-08 Zona 10
01010 Guatemala, Guatemala

(Original Spanish text:)

Carta de Tropico Verde a los miembros de Global Response.

Guatemala, octubre del 2000

Estimados/as amigos/as de Global Response:

Mediante la presente carta deseamos ponerles al dia sobre los
acontecimientos que se han desarrollado en torno a la amenaza petrolera a
la Reserva de la Biosfera Maya, En Guatemala.  Durante los meses de abril,
mayo y junio de este anio recibimos cientos de cartas y correos
electronicos demandandole a las autoridades guatemaltecas que respetaran
uno de los ultimos reductos de selva tropical de nuestro planeta.  La
presion dio
resultado, y eso es lo que queremos comunicarles.

Despues de la capania internacional que lidero Tropico Verde - y que con el
inestimable apoyo de ustedes, fue todo un exito -, logramos que el gobierno
de Guatemala detuviera los planes para abrir la Reserva de la Biosfera
Maya a la actividad petrolera.  El gobierno de Guatemala comprendio el
grave impacto social y ambiental que podrian provocar, por lo que tomo una
decision sin precedentes en nuestro pais:  la actividad petrolera no se va
a llevar a cabo mientras cuente con la oposicion de los ciudadanos
guatemaltecos.

Esta decision es muy importante para nosotros, aunque somos conscientes de
que nos queda un largo camino por delante y que debemos continuar dandole
seguimiento a este problema, de tal forma que la decision que se tomo no se
revierta nunca.  Sin embargo, deben saber que todos juntos, ustedes y
nosotros, hemos conseguido un gran logro.

Queremos hacerles llegar nuestro mas sincero agradecimiento por su apoyo y
por la solidaridad que demostraron con nuestra causa.  Sus cartas fueron
muy importantes para conseguir este resultado, y queremos que sepan que
siempre recordaremos el gesto que tuvieron con nosotros.  Hubieramos
deseado responderles personalmente a cada uno, aunque nos ha sido imposible
hacerlo por la gran cantidad de cartas que llegaron y por el exceso de
trabajo que tenemos.  A todos aquellos que nos escribieron mensajes
personales ademas de las cartas de presion, comunicarles que los leimos con
atencion y disculparnos por no haberles podido responder.

Deseandoles lo mejor

Sinceramente

Piedad Espinosa
Presidenta de Tropico Verde

--------------------------------------
GLOBAL RESPONSE is an international letter-writing network of environmental
activists.  In partnership with indigenous, environmentalist and peace and
justice organizations around the world, GLOBAL RESPONSE develops "Actions"
that describe specific, urgent threats to the environment; each "Action"
asks members to write personal letters to individuals in the corporations,
governments or international organizations that have the power and
responsibility to take corrective action.  GR also issues "Young
Environmentalists' Actions" and "Eco-Club Actions" designed to educate and
motivate elementary and high school students to practice earth stewardship.

P.O. Box 7490 Phone: 303/444-0306
Boulder CO, USA 80306-7490 Fax:   303/449-9794

To receive Global Response "Actions" and "Emergency Actions" by email:
Send a blank message to: globresmembers-subscribe@igc.topica.com

Visit our website at: http://www.globalresponse.org

You can take action on this alert either via email
(please see directions below) or via the web at:
http://actionnetwork.org/take-action.tcl?key=419220A21668B0531024527C180

We encourage you to take action by July 25, 2001

Alaska's Marine Ecosystems In Jeopardy!

----------------------

The marine ecosystems and wildlife of the Gulf of Alaska
and the Bering Sea are being put at risk by a poorly
crafted draft environmental impact statement on the
North Pacific groundfish fisheries. Please write the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) urging them
to fix this vital document today!

----------------------

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA THE WEB:
If you have access to a web browser, you can take action
on this alert by going to the following URL:

http://actionnetwork.org/take-action.tcl?key=419220A21668B0531024527C180  

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA EMAIL:
Just choose the "reply to sender" option on your email
program, and edit the letter below as you wish. Do
not delete "-YOU MAY EDIT THE LETTER BELOW-" and "-END
OF LETTER-". Please do not add your name and address
to your letter. Our system automatically does this
for you.  

We STRONGLY encourage you to make edits directly to
our sample letter below, and put the alert talking
points into your own words. An individualized letter
is worth ten computer generated letters. Of course,
hundreds of unedited letters will still create a large
impact, so please reply even if you don't have time
to personalize the letter.

Your letter will be addressed and sent to:
Ms. Lori Gravel


-------YOU MAY EDIT THE LETTER BELOW---------

As a resident of the United States, I am deeply concerned
about the health of our oceans. I urge you to revise
the draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
for the North Pacific Groundfish fisheries. None of
the narrowly focused alternatives do enough to protect
the entire marine ecosystem from harmful fishing practices.
As the first comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for fisheries management in the United States,
this sets an important national precedent and must
be done correctly.

Specifically, I support a comprehensive and integrated
management plan that:

--Bans bottom trawling and other destructive fishing
practices from important fish habitats;

--Modifies gear types and practices to avoid high amounts
of bycatch, waste and discards;

--Allocates fish as food for marine fish and wildlife,
especially threatened and endangered species;

--Sets aside marine reserves where no fishing occurs,
especially in fish nursery areas and wildlife birthing
grounds;

--Sets conservative fishing quotas to avoid the collapse
of fish stocks.

We must manage our fisheries with an abundance of caution
to protect fish and wildlife for future generations.

-------END OF LETTER-------------------------

Dear WWF Conservation Action Network Activist:

Please don't miss an important opportunity to shape the future of the
vast and sensitive Bering Sea ecoregion, an area that World Wildlife
Fund has identified as one of the world's most productive and
biologically diverse marine ecosystems.  The region is the source of
approximately half of the U.S. fish catch and the lifeblood of Alaskan
Native and coastal fishing communities.

Unfortunately, drastic declines in certain wildlife populations are
occurring in this region, including a more than 80 percent decrease in
the now endangered Steller sea lion, along with 90 percent declines in
Aleutian Islands sea otters and Gulf of Alaska harbor seals since the
1970s.  Despite these declines, federal fisheries management has not
significantly changed intensive fishing practices in the region.  The
world's largest trawl fisheries continue to remove more than 3 billion
pounds of pollock, cod, and other groundfish from the Bering Sea and
Gulf of Alaska every year, along with 300 million pounds of bycatch
(other nontarget marine life that is taken in the process).  (Groundfish
are commercially valuable fish that live on the ocean bottom.)

The National Marine Fisheries Service is assessing the environmental
impacts of Alaska's groundfish fisheries and proposed management
alternatives.  However, the draft assessment, known as a supplemental
environmental impact statement (SEIS), is seriously flawed and
inadequate.  Please go to http://takeaction.worldwildlife.org/ to send a
free message urging the National Marine Fisheries Service to
strengthen the SEIS.  The SEIS will govern fisheries management in
the region for the next five to ten years.  It must be done correctly to
safeguard the region's unique and world-class biological resources.  
The Fisheries Service is accepting comments until July 25.  Please act
today.

Natural Resources Defense Council's

LEGISLATIVE WATCH

May 31, 2001

******************************
Please do not reply to this message. See the instructions
below for how to unsubscribe or contact NRDC with questions
or comments.
******************************

Contents:

1) Legislative Watch
2) About Our Bulletins/How to Subscribe & Unsubscribe
3) About NRDC/How to Contact Us

The information in this bulletin is also available on our
website at http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/legwatch.asp. The
web version links to the text of bills and congressional web
pages. To take action on these and other environmental
issues, visit NRDC's Earth Action Center at
http://www.nrdc.org/action, where you can use our online
activism tools or subscribe to Earth Action, our biweekly
activist bulletin.

1) LEGISLATIVE WATCH

This is a status report on congressional action on the
environment. To make new or updated sections easy to find,
we've highlighted them with:
= N O T E ! =

5/31/01

In a surprise move just before Congress recessed for
Memorial Day, Sen. Jeffords of Vermont announced his
intention to leave the Republican party and become an
Independent. The change shifts control of the Senate to the
Democrats, who will have 50 seats compared to 49 for the
Republicans. Sen. Jeffords remained a member of the GOP long
enough to help the Republicans push the Bush
administration's massive tax cut bill through the Senate.

...

Budget

= N O T E ! =
On 5/6, Congress passed the Bush administration's tax cut
bill, H.R. 1836. The bill authorizes a $1.35 trillion tax
cut over the next decade. Opponents of the cut maintain that
the huge loss of government revenue will make it impossible
to adequately fund many important environmental programs.

On 4/9, President Bush submitted his proposed budget for
next year, with significant reductions in funding for
environmental programs. The cuts would be a serious blow to
environmental protections and would cripple environmental
programs long into the future, slashing overall spending for
environmental and natural resources agencies by $2.3
billion, or 7.2 percent, in fiscal year 2002, eliminating
nearly $500 million from the EPA, nearly $400 million from
the Department of Interior, and more than $600 million from
the U.S. Forest Service. In addition, the Bush budget would
cut about $450 million from the Department of Energy's clean
energy and environmental cleanup programs and fails to
provide funds to develop management plans for several
national monuments designated by President Clinton.

The president's budget also would slash funds for federal
enforcement at the EPA by $11 million. This proposed cut has
the potential to seriously hamper the effectiveness of the
enforcement division, as the reductions would come almost
exclusively from enforcement staff salaries. The loss of key
enforcement officials, estimated at over 8 percent of the
present staff, would severely undermine the EPA's ability to
enforce compliance with environmental laws when states are
unwilling or unable to do so.

For a step-by-step guide to our annual odyssey through
resolutions, reconciliations and appropriations, see NRDC's
budget process fact sheet
(http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/fbudg.asp).

...

Campaign Finance Reform

= N O T E ! =
On 5/22, the Senate sent S. 27, Sen. McCain's (R-AZ) and
Sen. Feingold's (D-WI) campaign finance reform bill, to the
House for consideration. This bill, approved by the Senate
on 4/2, would ban "soft money" donations from corporations
to political parties, which currently are not subject to
federal limits. Huge soft money contributions from wealthy
corporations have made it easier for these corporations to
persuade members of Congress to attach anti-environment
riders to funding bills, and to gain special exemptions from
environmental laws and regulations. S. 27 also contains a
provision that would increase the amount of money
individuals could give to candidates, which has the
potential to increase the influence of the wealthiest
contributors. Another provision would limit issue advocacy
by nonprofit groups preceding an election (this provision
may be unconstitutional, however). While environmental
groups disagree on the merits of this particular bill, they
generally support efforts to reduce the influence of
corporate special interests in the funding of national
elections.

...

Clean Air and Energy

= N O T E ! =
When Congress returns on June 5th, Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) will
become chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee, thereby controlling the development of any energy
bill in the Senate. Sen. Bingaman and the Senate Democratic
leadership have been more supportive of energy conservation
measures than their Republican counterparts, and unlike the
Republican leadership, the Democrats oppose drilling for oil
and gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. However, the
Democratic energy bill (S. 597), introduced by Sen. Bingaman
on 3/22, would increase the use of coal without
environmental safeguards and allow offshore oil and gas
leases in the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico. Because
this area has not previously been open to oil and gas
exploration, environmentalists oppose the bill.

= N O T E ! =
Sen. Reid (D-NV), the highest-ranking Democratic member of
the Senate Environment and Publi