How Renewable Energy Could Power Your State

Some parts of the United States could easily generate 10 times their energy needs, according to a new report.

How much of U.S. energy demand could be met by renewable sources?

According to a new report from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, the answer is an easy 100%.the ask

The report looked at how much renewable energy potential each state had within its own borders and found that almost every state could deliver all its electricity needs from instate renewable sources.

And that’s just a start: The report found that there’s so much potential for renewable energy sourcing, some states could produce 10 times the electricity they need. Cost remains an issue, as does connecting all of this capacity to the grid, but prices have dropped significantly, and efficiency continues to improve. Clean energy is not only affordable but could be a big boost to the economy. Locally sourced renewables create jobs, reduce pollution, and make communities more climate resilient.

So where are the opportunities? Rooftop solar, the study found, could supply six states with at least half of their electricity needs. But wind had the greatest potential. For 35 states, onshore wind alone could supply 100% of their energy demand, and offshore wind could do the same in 21 states. (The numbers overlap a bit.)

The study follows a similar report conducted a decade ago and shows that the clean energy field has made substantial progress in that time.

The Revelator spoke with Maria McCoy, a research associate at the Institute and report co-author, about what’s changed and how to turn all the potential into reality.

What’s changed in the 10 years since you last looked at the potential for instate renewable energy?

Maria McCoy headshot
Maria McCoy. Photo: Courtesy of ILSR

There’s definitely been technology improvements in all the energy sources, but especially solar. Obviously there’s the same amount of sun, but the solar panels themselves have a higher percentage of solar photovoltaic efficiency. Most states, on average, had 16% more solar potential this time around than they did a decade ago.

And for the other technologies, it’s a matter of either more space being available or the technologies themselves improving. Wind turbines now can generate a lot more energy with the same amount of wind.

Where do you see the most potential?

There’s been a lot of development in offshore wind and I think it’s on the cusp of really becoming a big player in the clean energy field. But regulations, including at the federal level, have blocked it from happening at scale in the United States. Whereas in Europe there’s already some incredibly efficient offshore wind farms that are generating a lot of electricity. Those companies are just starting to move into the U.S. market.

But it’s onshore wind that has the biggest potential. Our research found that some states could generate over 1,000% of their energy with onshore wind if they really took advantage of it.

Your report didn’t consider the potential of large-scale solar. Why?

We looked at the potential of rooftop solar rather than large-scale solar because as an energy democracy organization, we’re really focused on distributed and community-owned energy. But it’s also because pretty much every state has enough capacity to completely be powered by large-scale solar. It just then becomes an issue of land-usage debates and other challenges.

Your research shows there’s a ton of potential for renewables across the country. How do we realize that potential?

map
Graphic: ILSR, Energy Self-Reliant States 2020

Continued support for renewable energy is a big one. There are a lot of credits that are phasing out and without renewing those, it will make it a little bit tougher for the market.

We were looking at just the technical ability to produce the energy and not necessarily the cost effectiveness, but we did recognize in the report that the costs have come down. The cost of solar PV, for example, has dropped 70%. So this is not really a pie-in-the-sky goal. It’s definitely gotten a lot more feasible and many cities are already doing it or planning to in the near future.

I think the will is there and people want renewable energy, it’s just a matter of fighting the status quo. A lot of these utilities have been using the same business model for decades and they’re not really keeping up with where things are going and where the community wants things to go.

They’re holding on to their fossil fuel infrastructure and their business model that profits off building more fossil gas plants when solar plus storage is already a cheaper energy source for customers. And wind is very cheap. If utility regulators and state and national policy could hold these utilities accountable to serving the public, which is their job as regulated monopolies, we could finally get to see some of this potential becoming a reality.

Having the ability to generate energy locally and store it and use it locally will create jobs and provide a lot of resilience to the grid and communities. And with climate change, I think that’s becoming more and more important.

Was there anything that surprised you about your findings?

We definitely expected things to be better but I don’t know if we expected them to be this much better in 10 years. Seeing all this potential and these ridiculously high percentages — I mean, being able to generate greater than 1,000% of the electricity we need with renewables in some states is just a sign of how abundant clean energy is.

And it’s kind of sad, I guess, that some states aren’t even able to get to 25% or 50% clean energy goals in their renewable portfolio standards. I would hope that the train starts rolling a little faster.

And I hope our research can inspire others who think maybe their state doesn’t have a lot of renewable energy capacity in their area to realize that they do, and it could provide for all that they need and more.

Creative Commons

Biden Must Take a Leadership Role Against Wildlife Crime

The incoming administration has an important opportunity to protect biodiversity and human health.

Joseph Biden was elected to office as the world continues to struggle with a global pandemic that has killed more than a million people and wreaked devastating economic havoc. The pandemic has highlighted how humankind’s abuse of our planet and the irreversible loss of the biodiversity and ecosystem services upon which we all rely for our very existence simply can’t go on.

I work for TRAFFIC, a nongovernmental organization addressing issues related to wildlife trade, and the COVID pandemic has thrust this topic into the limelight. While we fully acknowledge and appreciate support received under previous administrations, it’s clear that the world has underestimated the importance and potential impacts of failing to manage wildlife trade in a way that’s legal, sustainable and, critically, includes measures to mitigate against the risk of zoonotic-disease spillover events.

bushmeat
Centers for Disease Control staff inspect bushmeat being imported into the U.S. (Photo: CDC)

How do we move forward? First, I would argue that allocating resources to understanding the risks associated with trade in animals — from any source — and how to lessen the danger of disease spillover events is a wise investment. At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, USAID gave the go-ahead to activities under a second phase of a Wildlife Trafficking Response, Assessment and Priority Setting (Wildlife TRAPS) Project implemented by TRAFFIC, with a renewed zoonotic disease risk focus. TRAFFIC will endeavor to ensure it’s money well spent.

Meanwhile welcome global attention has been paid to addressing the wildlife crime that undermines society and threatens the future of many of the world’s wild plants and animals. But we’re still not there in curbing these crimes. More resources will help get us over the line.

These include better equipment, training and working conditions for the rangers on the front lines; enhanced use of wildlife forensics; training of detector dogs; and even access to skilled translators to assist enforcement agencies with interpreting transactions involving foreign nationals. We also need to see renewed efforts by governments, helped by nongovernmental organizations and others, to reduce the consumer demand that fuels such trade.

rangers
Rangers on patrol in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Photo by Bernard DuPont (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Finally, the Biden era must go down in history as the turning point when world governments came together in a united front to address the conservation crisis and start down the long road to repair. Next year the delayed 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity will take place, when world governments will finalize the goals and policies of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework that will guide humankind to a biodiverse and sustainable future. The current draft of the Framework features, for the first time, a target on wildlife trade. It calls on governments to ensure that the harvesting, trade and use of wild species of fauna and flora are legal, at sustainable levels, and safe by 2030. It would be entirely appropriate if the Biden administration were at center stage throughout the negotiations. Given the role of the United States on the world stage, if Biden takes strong action, other countries will doubtless follow his lead.

Already the U.S. intention to rejoin the Paris Climate agreement has been a major symbolic step, signaling the country’s aim to be at the forefront of global efforts to begin the healing process. Make no mistake: Building a green future is an enormous opportunity for businesses in the United States and beyond to meet the challenges of, and profit from, achieving the goal of a zero-carbon economy. Biden’s policies should encourage achievement of that goal on every level. The future is bright, but only if it’s green.

With the world’s climate, forests and other natural resources under ever-increasing pressure, there has never been a more urgent need for the robust guidance, sound policies and strong leadership needed to protect our planet. The next four years could be the make-or-break moment.

The opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Revelator, the Center for Biological Diversity or their employees.

Creative Commons

Multisolving Our Way to COVID-19 Economic Recovery

Addressing the coronavirus pandemic can also provide opportunities to fight climate change and boost equity.

The next president will be inaugurated in the midst of a raging pandemic, an economic recession, a crisis of structural racism and an escalating climate emergency. The best chance for making progress on any of these issues is to tackle them all together.

That’s an approach called multisolving — ensuring that every dollar invested in solving one problem solves others at the same time. It’s the preferred approach when facing intersecting problems with tight budgets and an urgent timeline.

A COVID-19 economic recovery package will be one of the biggest opportunities to multisolve in 2021. A well-designed recovery could lock in decades of low-carbon emissions. It could reap the public health benefits that come along with replacing air-polluting energy sources with clean energy generation. And it could steer benefits, like good jobs that can’t be offshored, to the communities that have historically been left out of economic opportunity.

But multisolving doesn’t happen by accident. It happens by design. If the next administration wants to achieve four benefits — climate protection, economic recovery, health and equity — for the price of one, it will need to place multisolving at the center of its plans.

Nine months into the pandemic, there are bright spots around the world that show what might be possible if economic recovery investments were designed to achieve multiple goals. These can be found in small developing countries and in major economies. Their focus ranges from clean energy to ecosystem restoration to walking and cycling infrastructure.

Biker in bike lane
Separated bike lane. Photo: Paul Krueger, (CC BY 2.0).

Here are a few cases drawn from a growing database of examples my colleagues and I are tracking:

  • The Nigerian government is focusing on solar electricity as part of its recovery plan, with a goal of installing solar-generation capacity on 5 million homes;
  • Spain has pinned its recovery on an “ecological transformation” including installing 100,000 electric vehicle charging stations, making 500,000 homes more energy efficient and accelerating progress toward its goal of 100% renewable electricity by 2050;
  • A joint EU-Africa project will direct €300 million ($354 million) to projects that help businesses in Sub-Saharan Africa, especially ones owned by women. At least 25% of the funds are for projects involving renewable energy, energy efficiency and climate change resilience;
  • The United Kingdom has launched a £2 billion ($2.6 billion) plan to increase cycling infrastructure as part of its COVID-19 response. In the short term this will help people travel safely through the pandemic. In the long term it will reduce emissions from transportation and capture the health benefits of active travel.

Sadly, these bright spots are so far the exception, not the rule.

A study published last month in Science highlights the potential of this moment. Countries around the world have already committed $12 trillion to economic recovery packages. If only 12% of that amount were to be invested in the next five years in clean energy and energy efficiency the world could place itself on a path to meeting the goals of Paris Climate Agreement, while also driving job opportunities and improving human health. But so far, the world as whole is falling short of even this modest amount of multisolving.

Some regions are doing well, though. In the European Union, for instance, somewhere between 19% to 30% of recovery investments are  rated as “green.” But many other governments are allowing this opportunity to multisolve slip away. Estimates are that only 1% of U.S. recovery funding so far has been green. For China the estimate is 0.3%; for India it’s 2.4%.

With recovery plans still taking shape, and with many of the opportunities for investment on hold until the public health threat of the virus is under control, the window of opportunity has not yet closed. That is good news. The United States, under the incoming administration, could direct the funds needed to stimulate the economy in a way that simultaneously helps us meet climate, health and equity goals.

To ensure this quadruple benefit is captured, each element of a recovery plan will need to be designed with multiple criteria in mind. Policy makers should be asking questions such as:

  • Does an energy infrastructure project lock in low carbon emissions while also providing good jobs?
  • Does a particular investment include racial, gender and economic equity provisions to make sure benefits go to communities that have been left out of past opportunities?
  • Are investments like home weatherization targeted towards low-wealth communities, where the resulting utility bill savings will make the most difference?
  • Are job training, healthcare and childcare offered so that everyone can benefit from new employment opportunities?

Success will require sustained effort well beyond the design phase. It will require agencies to work together. Can an energy efficiency program coordinate with a jobs program? Can a cycling project be designed with input from housing and public health?

A true multisolving recovery will invest authority in local communities. While the federal government functions in silos, all the elements of carbon emissions, health, jobs, equity and well-being come together on the ground, at the grassroots level. Funding mechanisms will need to be flexible to allow communities to steer their own green and equitable recoveries.

That’s a tall order, and even the most effective multisolving recovery plan will not be enough if it focuses only within the United States. The transition to a zero-carbon future needs to be a global one. Rich nations like the United States can offer financial assistance so that all countries can recover in ways that are green, resilient and equitable.

The country and the world could emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic more resilient, more equitable, and on track to meet climate goals. But that won’t happen by accident. It’s time to start multisolving.

You can learn more about multisolving on Climate Interactive’s website, where you can also explore a database of green, resilient, equitable recovery measures being taken around the world.

The opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Revelator, the Center for Biological Diversity or their employees.

Creative Commons

Linda Cayot: Lessons From a Life in Conservation

The famed scientist has played a critical role in restoring Galápagos tortoises and other species. Now retired, she offers four key takeaways for the next generation of biologists.

Linda J. Cayot’s scientific focus for the day was a male giant tortoise, part of her dissertation research on the ecology of these iconic Galápagos reptiles. When her study animal lumbered into a swirling torrent of muddy El Niño waters, the intrepid scientist jumped in, too. Together they banged against rocks, his carapace and her daypack catching on tree branches as they thumped in tandem down the river to the lowlands of Santa Cruz Island.

Cayot’s epic 1983 journey launched a 40-year career devoted to conserving the Galápagos Islands. She supervised giant tortoise and land iguana breeding programs; organized campaigns to eradicate invasive species; and coordinated repatriation of tortoises to their native islands. When she began working in the Galápagos, the islands’ giant tortoise populations were down to less than 10% of their historic abundance. They’ve grown since then, bolstered by programs she helped put in place.

Linda Cayot
Cayot studied Galápagos giant tortoises on many islands during her 40-year career. This 1982 photo is from Pinzon Island. (© Theresa Kineke Brooks, used with permission)

The goal remains to restore tortoise populations to their historic numbers and distribution. At the current rate, that might be achieved within two centuries.

For Cayot, who thinks of conservation in terms of deep time, it’s the trajectory that’s critical.

She retired early this year and has just completed co-writing and editing Galápagos Giant Tortoises, a synthesis of knowledge of these island endemics, including the 60-year history of their conservation. Cayot was honored in October with the Prichard Turtle Conservation Award for Lifetime Achievement.

Cayot is a visionary with a practical, one-step-at-a-time approach. If she hadn’t fallen in love with Galápagos, she says, she would have been conserving species somewhere else.

When I asked her about the lessons she’s learned from a lifetime of conservation, it came as no surprise that her succinct responses made little mention of tortoises or the Galápagos. Instead she focused on universal elements that speak to the human element of conservation.

Respectful Relationships: Value Everyone’s Input

“You accomplish much more conservation by having good relationships with everyone,” says Linda Cayot.

As a scientist Cayot worked with Galápagos National Park Directorate rangers who were fresh out of high school, as well as some of the world’s leading herpetologists and geneticists. She sought out people with the tools and ability to solve problems, regardless of their credentials.

Wacho Tapia is among of them. When he was a 17-year-old Galapagoan volunteer Cayot recognized his passion for giant tortoises and determination to save them. Now director of Galápagos Conservancy’s Giant Tortoise Restoration Initiative, Tapia’s years of working with Cayot ensure continuity in the tortoise restoration projects she initiated.

The respect Cayot demonstrated throughout her career is reflected in a small incident on Pinta Island. She asked Joe Flanagan, an American collaborator and chief veterinarian at the Houston Zoo, to document the repatriation of tortoises by photographing the park rangers carrying them to their release sites. One after another refused to be photographed. But when he said the photos were for Cayot, each ranger agreed. Some even primped.

“Linda recognizes that most conservation problems are caused by people, but she strongly believes that people are also the solution,” Flanagan says.

Long-term Vision: Conservation Happens Slowly

“Projects can take 50 years,” says Cayot. “That’s a hell of a long time! But those are the projects that push conservation forward.”

Cayot has always maintained a long-term vision. But working in the Galápagos honed it from years to decades and centuries.

The successful projects she worked on included repatriating tortoises to Española, the southernmost island. In the 1960s park rangers found just 14 tortoises there.

They took them to the Santa Cruz breeding center, added a male from the San Diego Zoo, and launched a breeding program Cayot later supervised. When young tortoises born at the center were old enough to survive out of captivity, they were released on the island of their ancestors.

In June Galápagos Park marked the successful conclusion of the project by returning the original tortoises to Española — 55 years after removing them — to join their progeny and the offspring they in turn had produced.

Cayot also had a central role in eradicating invasive species from the islands. When she first arrived in Galápagos, the southern rim of Alcedo Volcano was covered with Zanthoxylum trees. By the early 1990s, invasive goats were destroying the forest, a critical area for giant tortoises. Cayot coordinated Project Isabela, the largest invasive species eradication ever attempted anywhere.

It took nearly a decade. Today the vegetation is slowly regenerating. Full restoration will take decades more, but that’s not a problem in her mind: Cayot views Galápagos conservation in 100-year increments.

“I worked on the everyday details of Project Isabela, but I was thinking ahead to a century and beyond,” she says.

Serendipity: Learn From Surprises

“Don’t worry if it takes a long time,” says Cayot. “Emerging knowledge may result in significant changes and greater success in the end.”

In 1972 Lonesome George, the last Pinta Island tortoise, was taken to a Santa Cruz Island pen for his protection. Scientists later decided to return tortoises to Pinta, where the habitat was declining without them. Although they would not be the endemic Pinta species, they would still disperse native plant seeds and modify habitat to help other animals and plants thrive, scientists reasoned.

Lonesome George
Photo: Arturo de Frias Marques (CC BY-SA 3.0)

But the herpetologists working on Galápagos tortoise conservation disagreed, and breeding tortoises were never moved to Pinta.

It ended up being a fortuitous delay. Soon expeditions to Wolf Volcano, a remote island where a variety of tortoise species roamed, discovered living tortoises with mixed ancestry, including the Pinta tortoise. That sparked hope that scientists might eventually find others more closely related to Lonesome George — a better option for release on Pinta.

For now, though, this northernmost island remains without the tortoises that evolved there. And that may be for the best.

“We don’t know everything,” says Cayot. “The more knowledge we get the more carefully we can find the right tortoises for that island.”

Collaboration: One Solution From Many Agendas

“You can see the excitement growing when you come up with solutions no one had thought of before,” says Cayot.

When Cayot began coordinating Project Isabela, she knew it would only succeed if Galápagos Park Directorate and Charles Darwin Research Station worked together.

Because they’d never officially co-run a project, Cayot spent an evening sewing. She took a park hat and a station hat — each of which bore an image of a tortoise — cut them both in half and stitched them back together, making the bisected embroidered tortoise whole again. Cayot wore that hat when she gave talks, pulling it on if discussions became contentious.

Linda Cayot
Linda Cayot made this hat out of a Galápagos Park cap and a Charles Darwin Research Station cap to symbolize and promote the cooperation required for the projects they shared. (© Jane Braxton Little, used with permission)

The grand plan to restore giant tortoises to their historic numbers and distribution included an international workshop in 2012 that she facilitated. Scientists and rangers were beginning to design expeditions to Wolf Volcano. The geneticists focused on finding animals with genetic material from two extinct species and breeding them, a process that would involve multiple generations and take at least 100 years. Conservationists also wanted to find the highest genetic matches possible, but their priority was getting tortoises onto the islands, where they’re key to habitat restoration; they couldn’t wait a century.

These differences challenged geneticists and conservationists alike to be creative. The solution they adopted is the basis for an ambitious plan to revive extinct species and restore island ecosystems. They’re using the knowledge of the geneticists to select the best animals to breed in captivity. Those with lesser genetic material will be released to the islands of their ancestors, satisfying the conservationists’ goal.

“With everyone willing to think outside the box, we ended up with novel solutions, ones that we all liked better than our own individual plans,” Cayot says. “That can only happen when everyone values each other’s input and respects each other’s knowledge.”

Creative Commons

Biden Can Leverage Larger Trends to Make Climate Progress

Even if Republicans hang onto the Senate, Biden can use these three strategies to make major progress on climate issues.

With the next president of the United States finally decided, we can now begin moving on to the work at hand.

Joe Biden’s election creates an exciting opportunity for climate action. But there’s one clear hurdle: Unless the January runoff elections in Georgia for two Senate seats deliver surprising success to the Democrats, President-elect Biden will face a Senate led again by Mitch McConnell. That narrows the range of available policy instruments, but Biden should still be able to make real progress.

He has the advantage of the tide moving in the direction of clean energy. Market forces are shifting strongly away from fossil fuels and toward renewables and energy storage. State governments are moving in the same direction. And public opinion has shifted, with more people recognizing the importance of climate change and the benefits of clean energy. The trick will be to leverage these trends into faster and larger changes.

I’d advocate a three-pronged approach to take advantage of these trends: (1) aggressive use of established regulatory tools; (2) funding to improve and deploy new technologies; and (3) government support for state and private sector climate efforts.

The first prong was utilized heavily by the Obama administration.

Like Obama Biden needs to make aggressive use of existing law. Given a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court, it would be best to avoid anything that looks legally innovative and instead push as hard as possible on legally established channels.

That would mean strictly regulating conventional pollution from fossil fuels, using the Clean Air Act as well as other environmental statutes. Additional avenues include ramping up standards for methane emissions, cutting back on leasing public lands for fossil fuels, and higher fuel-efficiency standards.

There will be industry resistance to these efforts, but economic trends may help dampen that.

turbines in field
Wind turbines. Photo: Shawn Meng, Oregon Department of Agriculture (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

The second prong is legislative.

Although a GOP or 50-50 Senate will be a challenge, some kinds of legislation may have a chance of sneaking through.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski has an energy bill she has been trying to get to the floor that seems to have bipartisan support. The bill focuses on spending for research and demonstration projects. Even when the GOP controlled Congress during the first two years of Trump’s presidency, Congress voted to increase funding for renewable energy for the Defense Department and to increase funding for research into innovative new energy technologies.

If Murkowski and fellow Republican Sen. Susan Collins can be brought on board, it may also be possible to adopt energy-related amendments to must-pass bills.

Finally, increased funding for adaptation-related spending by FEMA, the Defense Department and the Army Corps of Engineers may also be feasible.

The third prong involves climate efforts outside the federal government.

During the Trump administration, many states increased their use of renewable energy and a smaller group have adopted serious carbon reduction targets. The federal government can defend these efforts in court; can provide states technical resources; and can use its regulatory powers over energy markets to reinforce state climate programs.

We’ve also seen a serious movement by investors away from fossil fuels and toward renewables. The federal government can support these trends through its regulation of financial markets.

And the power of presidential jawboning should not be underestimated. Presidential appeals to business leaders can carry considerable clout, as can public praise or shaming.

Even if Biden is handicapped by the lack of Senate control, a lot can still be done. And the climate crisis is too urgent for us to pass up any available tool for addressing it.

The opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Revelator, the Center for Biological Diversity or their employees.

Creative Commons

The Biggest Environmental Wins and Losses of the 2020 Election 

The planet needed a big win, and from the top to the bottom of the ballot there were a number of crucial victories.

Election Day 2020 — the day before the United States officially left the Paris climate agreement — didn’t deliver an immediate rebuke to President Trump or relief for environmentalists.

That would have to wait.

“The election hasn’t produced the outcome that the planet badly needed,” Bill McKibben of 350.org summed up in The New Yorker the following day.

But as the votes continued to be counted in battleground states, the mood shifted from despair to hope, and finally, on Nov. 7, to celebration when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were pronounced victors.

So much was riding on this election — and not just in the United States.

“There is no pathway to meaningful global climate action without our federal government playing a prominent part,” wrote Mary Annaïse Heglar in The New Republic just before the election.

A Biden-Harris victory doesn’t undo all the environmental harm caused by the Trump administration and its 125 rollbacks of environmental protections, but it provides a much-needed opportunity to restore scientific integrity and take action on climate change, environmental justice, biodiversity and other pressing concerns.

That’s good news. And looking down the ballot there were also other environmental victories — as well as some places where ground was lost. Here are the biggest takeaways:

The Good Stuff

Few big-ticket wins were clear early except for the fact that Democrats held onto the House of Representatives — an expected but not inconsequential victory. And although their majority slimmed, several new additions will be a boon for environmental issues.

One of those is progressive Cori Bush, who cruised to victory in Missouri’s 1st congressional district. She’s the first Black woman from the state to be elected to Congress. The nurse, pastor and Black Lives Matter activist is also a Green New Deal supporter.

In gubernatorial fights, Washington’s climate champion Jay Inslee won re-election. So did Democrat Roy Cooper in North Carolina, which E&E News called a significant victory in the state’s push for clean energy.

Mark Kelly flipped a Senate seat blue in Arizona, and so did John Hickenlooper in Colorado.

Hickenlooper, a booster of the fracking industry during his time as Colorado governor, is not exactly beloved by environmentalists in the state. But his defeat of Cory Gardner was hailed by the League of Conservation Voters, which called Gardner one of “worst anti-environmental candidates” running this year. It was also the first time in 84 years that Democrats swept all statewide races in Colorado.

Along with those victories came one for wolves, too. Colorado voters passed Proposition 114, which will require the state Parks and Wildlife department to develop a restoration and management plan for the reintroduction of gray wolves. It comes less than a week after the Trump administration removed federal protection from gray wolves across the country.

Wolf howling
Photo by Steve Felberg/Pixabay (CC)

In other statewide races, Nevada’s Question 6, which would require electric utilities to get 50% of their electricity from renewables by 2030, was approved by voters. But how much that helps the state’s clean energy future is a matter of debate. Nevada has already passed similar legislation. Enshrining this benchmark into the state constitution could help protect it from future rollbacks — or it could make efforts to raise the target even harder.

Much further down the ballot, climate champions made gains in city council positions in major cities such as Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Diego, San Jose, San Francisco and Portland.

Denver also approved an increase in sales tax to help fund climate and clean energy initiatives. And Columbus, Ohio passed a measure that would help the city secure more locally sourced renewable energy.

“City leadership is important for advancing climate action but new research finds U.S. cities falling behind,” Daniel Melling, communications manager for the UCLA Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, wrote for Legal Planet.

The Bad Stuff

An anticipated, decisive retaking of the Senate by Democrats never materialized, and whether it remains in Republican hands won’t be decided for bit. Two Georgia races are headed to a January runoff.

If Republicans do hang on to the Senate, that will mean any bold new climate legislation — or likely any meaningful environmental legislation at all — coming out of the House will be stymied, especially if Mitch McConnell retains his role as Senate leader.

Meanwhile several Republican senators with dismal environmental records will be back, including Iowa’s Joni Ernst, Mississippi’s Cindy Hyde-Smith, Alabama’s Tommy Tuberville and Roger Marshall from Kansas. Lindsay Graham, who has a mixed at best record when it comes to climate legislation, also returns.

While Colorado may have seen a blue wave, Montana was awash in red. A Republican sweep across the state included a victory by coal-industry ally Greg Gianforte, who took the governor’s mansion out of control of Democrats for the first time in 16 years.

Gianforte previously said he “would advocate as governor for increased port capacity on the West Coast to get coal to market,” reported E&E News. Montana coal production fell 21% during the pandemic.

train snaking through plains
Coal train loading at Spring Creek mine, Montana. Photo: WildEarth Guardians, (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0).

“Montana didn’t just go Republican on Tuesday,” wrote Gwen Florio in The Nation. “It went deeply conservative Republican.” The effect of that will be felt not just on energy policy, but the fate of public lands and wildlife, including sage grouse and grizzlies.

In a new low, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia became the first QAnon conspiracy theory believer elected to Congress. In addition to a record of racist statements, she ran on a platform that included blocking the Green New Deal.

Democrats had hoped to make a small gain in Texas. But even $2.5 million in backing from Michael Bloomberg couldn’t get Democrat Chrysta Castañeda elected to the Texas Railroad Commission, which oversees issues related to oil and gas — a state race that has worldwide impact.

The race was won by Jim Wright, whom the Huffington Post describes as “a hardcore climate change denier and owner of an oil-field services company.”

The oil industry may have also garnered a victory in Alaska. There Measure 1, which would raise taxes on some North Slope oil companies, is trailing by a wide margin.

But when you tally it all up at the end of the day — or week, really — even McKibben had to concede that overall things are looking up.

“It could have gone much better,” he wrote on Nov. 7. “(Specifically, a deadlocked Senate will make action on the dominant issue of our lifetimes, climate change, more difficult to address than it should be.) But it went.”

Creative Commons

7 Environmental Takeaways From the 2020 Election Season

Even while we wait for the final ballots to come in, several key themes are clear.

Well, that was interesting…and hair-raising. At press time the harrowing presidential race of 2020 remains too close to call, as do a few key congressional and Senate seats. The Senate may not even settle out until January, when Georgia will hold runoff elections and we’ll find out which party controls that house of government.

But while we wait — patiently or otherwise — for those votes to be tallied, let’s take a moment to step back and look at several big-picture environmental takeaways from the election season.

1. Climate Change Came Calling

Despite the lack of real policy debate — let’s face it, this was less an election of ideas and more a contest of ideologies — climate change played an unexpected and thankful role. That started most noticeably in the unannounced climate question during the first presidential debate. After that several political ads made climate an issue, and some Democrats stumped on it. We didn’t see any speeches solely about climate, but Biden and Harris brought it up strongly several times during the last days of the campaign.

And yes, the very real risks of climate change played a role in driving people to the polls. A survey conducted last month found that 58% of Americans were either “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about the threats of climate change. That included 90% of voters who favored Biden at the time. Biden and Harris spoke to that, and voters listened. Life lesson: When you talk about and take seriously issues that affect peoples’ lives, they lend you their ears.

This growing support for climate action means that if Trump ultimately wins reelection, and then continues to ignore climate (as he obviously would), there will be prices to pay on the international stage starting in January and again at the polls in 2022.

2. The Forgotten Crisis

But the extinction crisis did not get any real play in this election, even from progressive Democrats. Considering the oversized role of wildlife trafficking in the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, preserving biodiversity will need to become a major policy initiative moving forward.

Luckily many environmental organizations made this a key call during the campaign, so we can expect to see some progress on this if Biden is confirmed as the next president. (If not, expect more Trump attacks on the Endangered Species Act and other wildlife policies.)

3. Equality

Racial inequality was one of the main themes of the election, but the candidates did little to address income inequality, the greatest driver of political and social unrest in this country. If we don’t take dramatic action about that soon, it will give further strength to the Proud Boys, QAnon conspiracy junkies and their extremist ilk — and that will spill out into environmental issues like livestock ranching, public lands protection and environmental justice.

Fortunately the presidential and vice-presidential debates, and Democratic candidates themselves, made a big deal out of other issues related to inequality, such as racism, LGBTQA+ rights and women’s rights.  Unfortunately, the fact that nearly half the country voted to reelect a racist misogynist — and many other candidates who rode on his coattails — does not bode well for the future. These are all issues that have deep environmental implications, so we as a people and as a country need to do a lot better.

4. Suppression

People like to vote. And record numbers turned out this year, even amidst the pandemic. But who knows how many more votes would have been counted — and how many races would have had different outcomes — if not for the 29 Republican techniques for voter suppression used during this election?

So come on, Republicans, stop trying to prevent our citizens from doing their democratic duty. If you can’t play fair, get out of the game. (And while you’re at it, stop suppressing science related to pandemics and climate change, ’K?)

Everyone else: Watch your back. The same Republican-appointed, Federalist Society loyalist judges who have ruled (and may yet rule) on so many of this year’s voting lawsuits will soon find cases about climate change and other environmental threats on their dockets.

5. Fossils

The Democratic Party needs to refine its messaging on oil and gas. It’s got some decent policies — such as ending subsidies and stopping development on federal land — but that doesn’t ease the fears of people terrified by a forced transition in their lives and careers. The evidence is clear that these industries not only harm the planet and peoples’ health, they’re also failing financially. The faster we transition those jobs, the less pain we’ll all feel when oil, gas and coal collapse like a house of cards.

6. Faux News

Speaking more broadly, the media landscape remains hopelessly bifurcated, and that seeds division within the country, reaching from politics to basic information such as COVID-19 safety measures and crises like climate change. That needs to change. To address this issue, education standards should include teaching media literacy — and all adults should be encouraged to learn how to spot disinformation and bias. (It’s telling that Media Literacy Week 2020 was held the week before the election.)

It’s all a bit bigger than this, obviously. Most people self-identify as belonging to — or diverging from — one political party first, then pick the media outlet that supports that worldview. But the right-wing media notoriously spreads more disinformation about environmental issues, so finding a way to break that chokehold will go a long way toward bridging that divide.

7. Money, Money, Money

An obscene amount of money was collected and spent on this election — a record $14 billion, according to OpenSecrets, which tracks political spending.

On the one hand, we saw an amazing increase in small, individual donations. That’s great.

But corporation and PACs poured cash into candidates’ coffers (either directly or in support of their campaigns), and it felt like most of that went to fund blatantly dishonest campaign ads.

And what’s the ultimate cost of those donations? Will special interests return with their hands out? We’ll never know for sure, since most of those dollars (on both sides of the political aisle) are hidden from the public record, although it’s certainly happened before. That needs to change if we ever hope to transform this economy and save the planet.

Creative Commons

Keep Looking Forward: 20 Instagram Accounts for Environmental Inspiration

Whether you’re stuck inside during the pandemic or just waiting for election results, these accounts will keep you motivated and connected to the natural world.

These days many of us have a natural inclination to “doomscroll” — that constant refreshing of social media so we can gnash our teeth at the most recent bad news.

There’s an alternative. Let’s call it hopescrolling — the art and act of looking for beautiful things and important information to keep us inspired.

With the pandemic and election results still looming over our heads, here are 20 of our favorite nature- and environment-related Instagram accounts. May they fill your days with beauty and drive you to fight for the planet.

iNaturalist

Some of the best photos from the app that helps scientists and everyday citizens keep track of the natural world.

Joel Sartore

The famed National Geographic photographer is on a mission to capture the world’s biodiversity before it disappears.

Everyday Climate Change

Six photographers team up to showcase the very real effects of climate change around the world.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

This is Amanda Perobelli @amandamperobelli taking over @everydayclimatechange Instagram this week and sharing my work about the Pantanal, the world’s largest wetland on fire, on assignment for Reuters with journalist Jake Spring Dorvalino Conceicao Camargo, 56, who works on a ranch, attempts to put out a fire with a tree branch Sweating from the effort, Camargo said he had never seen fires this bad. “Everything is suffering,” he said. Camargo recalled navigating the waters as a child in boxy canoes. Back on the ranch where he works, he showed the farm’s high-water mark – 70 centimeters (2.3 feet) off the ground – hewn into the post of a cattle corral. Even in a dry year it’s typically about half that, he said. This year, the floods never came. Only a little bit of water pooled in a ditch nearby, he said. Now as water evaporates in the dry season, the Paraguay River that traverses the Pantanal has receded to its lowest point since 1973, according to Julia Arieira, a climate researcher at Brazil’s Federal University of Espirito Santo. With Jake Spring, for Reuters Link for the full text and story in my bio @amandamperobelli #climatechange #globalwarming #climatecrisis #pantanal

A post shared by Everyday Climate Change (@everydayclimatechange) on

Virunga National Park

This park is famously home to mountain gorillas, but its account shows so much more.

Cornell Lab of Ornithology

All birds, all the time.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

#BirdsOfHalloween

A post shared by Cornell Lab of Ornithology (@cornellbirds) on

BBC Earth

We’ve all seen the documentaries, but there’s a lot more photos and videos to enjoy through this account.

Zoe Keller Art

One of The Revelator’s favorite nature artists. (Check out our interview with Keller here.)

Alex Wild

Among the world’s best insect photographers — and an important entomologist to boot.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A Megachile leafcutter bee gathers pollen from a summer aster. Saint Louis, Missouri. #bees #megachile #pollinators

A post shared by Alex Wild (@alexwildology) on

Carls of Ohio

A groundhog that lives in a friend’s backyard. Hey — urban biodiversity matters.

The Caterpillar Lab

So much color, plus background on some species (and body stages) that we tend to overlook.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

Caterpillar-of-the-Day Follow Along: Day 286⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ Like Some Heavy Fruit:⁠⠀ Big Poplar Sphinx⁠⠀ Pachysphinx modesta⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ Three poplar trees stand isolated in a large field in Gardner, Massachusetts. Like some heavy fruit or nut, the sphinx, clasping to remnant leaf petioles, dangle precariously in the wind. Far below, in the late July heat, I discover their frass and bits of discarded leaves. The big poplar sphinx is always out of my reach.⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ ——-⁠⠀ • Caterpillar: Pachysphinx modesta – Big Poplar Sphinx⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ • Range: Eastern and Central North America
, west across the Northern US and Canada.⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ • Host Plants: A specialist feeder on poplars and willows. Seems to show a preference for Cottonwood here in the Northeast.⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ • Season: Caterpillars active in the Summer⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ • Where are they now: Pachysphinx overwinter as pupa in soil.⁠⠀ ——-⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ If you would like to follow along with us this year you can find posts like this one here on Instagram, follow us on Facebook, or just visit the front page of our website to see our expanded calendar graphic. For the best experience, order one of our physical Caterpillar-A-Day calendars so you can follow along, add notes, and learn more, as we go.⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ ⁠⠀ #moths #mothsofinstagram #thecaterpillarlab #caterpillar #caterpillars #nature #naturephotography #science #entomology #lepidoptera #scienceeducation #naturalhistory #art #artandscience #buglife #exciting #insects #bugs #insectsofinstagram #followalong #lifecycle #2020 #macrophotography #insectphotography

A post shared by The Caterpillar Lab (@the_caterpillar_lab) on

David Attenborough

The conservation icon doesn’t plan to be on Instagram very long — hey, he’s in his nineties — but this account is gold.

Drone the Whales

Amazing aerial footage of cetaceans around the world.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

Humpback whale creating rainbows! 📷: @markgirardeau 🚢: @newportcoastaladventure

A post shared by Drone The Whales (@dronethewhales) on

Roger Peet

This amazing artist/activist frequently works with our parent organization, the Center for Biological Diversity, but that’s just a fraction of his inspirational output.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

This work, “Make it Through”, was the first artwork I made this year, all the way back in January, what seems like a lifetime ago. I was trying to rework the idea that inspired “Face It” (second slide) to get at something that I missed the first time. The bird in Face It is a Scrub Jay, enduring the storm in the black walnut tree that grew in behind my house in 2009. The bird in Make it Through is a Wandering Albatross- great pelagic voyagers, crossing vast oceans with hardly a wingbeat. That was something more of the endurance that I wanted to convey, and goddamn it has taken a lot of endurance to get through this year up to this point- and it’s not over yet. No matter how you are engaging with this experience I wish you the strength to go all the way through it and arrive, sunlit and with gentler winds, on the other side. . . . Make It a Through is available, send a DM. #art #print #printmaking #reliefprint #linocutprint #linoleumprint #reliefprint #blockprint #albatross #makeitthrough #justseeds

A post shared by Roger Peet (@toosphexy) on

National Park Service

Not only does this agency help protect amazing landscapes, it also employs some incredibly talented photographers. And they share great tips.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

“How to recognize different trees from quite a long way away. No. 1 The Larch”⁣ ⁣ Larix occidentalis, the Western larch, turns a luminescent yellow in the fall, lighting up slopes in golden patches. As the days grow shorter and temperatures drop, photosynthesis becomes more difficult. The tree saves nutrients by ceasing the process. Larch needles change color as chlorophyll (the light-absorbing pigment that provides energy for photosynthesis) is absorbed back into the tree, leaving behind a yellow pigment, xanthophyll. Eventually the needles drop off the tree, leaving it bare-limbed until spring.⁣ ⁣ Image: Larch trees in the western and southern portions of Glacier National Park turn bright yellow during the mid-to-late October.⁣ ⁣ #findyourpark #nationalparkservice #larch #glacier #fallcolors

A post shared by National Park Service (@nationalparkservice) on

Winona LaDuke

The famed Native American activist is a source of constant inspiration.

Public Lands Hate You

See what certain people do wrong when they try to celebrate the natural world — and remind yourself not to follow in their footsteps.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

The number of people who defend their off-trail travels as not having an impact is astounding. The thing is, humans are inherently lazy. We tend to take the path of least resistance. So, if someone wants to travel to the other side of a field, and they see a slightly beaten path that may have been taken by one or two people before them, they take it. This is how new trails are formed. The hiking community calls these “social trails”. They are unofficial trails that people use as the path of least resistance from Point A to Point B.⁣ ⁣ The problem with social trails is that as they become more frequently used, they become permanent. First the vegetation is slightly disturbed. The people that follow then beat the vegetation flat. Continued use compacts soils to the point that they won’t support new growth. This breaks up what was previously homogenous habit into small fractured pieces. It’s not good for vegetation. It’s not good for wildlife. And it certainly doesn’t make for good pictures.⁣ ⁣ The 1st picture was taken by @waterproject. The 2nd is a Google Earth satellite image of the same location taken a few years prior. Notice the difference? How can someone look at these two photos side by side and say that there hasn’t been an impact? How much longer do you think this area can withstand this amount of abuse before it comes a dirt hillside with a couple of flower patches protected behind wooden fences?⁣ ⁣ The next photos are close up views of what these new social trails look like, progressing from slightly disturbed vegetation, to fully flattened and dead vegetation, to fully compacted soils and new dirt “trails” that will require either human intervention or decades of natural forces to recover. This is the progression that we want to avoid. Resist the temptation to use social trails. Stick to the official dirt trails. They are obvious. They are generally wide enough for two or more people to walk side by side. They are a fully dirt surface with no vegetation present. You don’t need to create new trails for beautiful pictures that others will love, as seen in the last two photos.⁣ ⁣ #leavenotrace #poppy #wildflowers #ethics #mindfulness #publiclands

A post shared by RESPECT OUR PUBLIC LANDS (@publiclandshateyou) on

United Nations Environment Programme

This great account frequently features world-saving initiatives both large and small.

NASA Climate Change

Images and science about the planet. Expect lots of photos of melting icebergs.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

Study: If greenhouse gas emissions continue, Greenland and Antarctica’s ice sheets could contribute more than 15 inches (38 centimeters) of global sea level rise by 2100 – which is beyond the amount that has already been set in motion by Earth’s warming climate. • Full story: https://sealevel.nasa.gov/news/194/emissions-could-add-15-inches-to-sea-level-by-2100-nasa-led-study-finds • 📸: Ice shelves in Antarctica, such as the Getz Ice Shelf seen above, are sensitive to warming ocean temperatures. Ocean and atmospheric conditions are some of the drivers of ice sheet loss that scientists considered in a new study estimating additional global sea level rise by 2100. Credit: NASA/Jeremy Harbeck • #nasa #globalwarming #climatechange #sealevelrise #sealevelchange #greenland #antarctica #greenhousegas #fossilfuels #humanactivity #humanactivities #science #study #icemelt #iceloss #icesheet #water #ocean #carbon

A post shared by NASA Climate Change (@nasaclimatechange) on

International Dark-Sky Association

This organization is devoted to protecting us from light pollution, and these photos will inspire you to look up into the night.

The Center for Biological Diversity

Our parent organization’s Instagram account will both entertain you and keep you engaged in important activism. Just when you’re needed most.

Creative Commons

Conservative Court to Consider Four Key Upcoming Environment Cases

One legal doctrine that courthouse reporters are eyeing closely is that which currently authorizes the EPA to control greenhouse gas emissions.

The Supreme Court term that began in October will touch on a few significant cases involving environmental law.

Just as importantly, it could see attempts to elevate cases from lower courts to take advantage of the Court’s new solid conservative majority (newly confirmed Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett was sworn in Oct. 26, just in time to hear oral arguments on virtually all of this term’s cases).

While the few environmental cases will not be blockbusters, they may offer telling clues about the court’s future trajectory on the environment.

One legal doctrine that courthouse reporters are eyeing closely is that which currently authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to control greenhouse gas emissions of carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act.

The Court’s landmark 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA prevailed by a scant 5-4 vote (with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with the majority). The new 6-3 conservative majority could overturn that precedent if it were inclined to.

Right now there are no cases clearly headed to the Supreme Court to test this principle. But some might be expected.

The following cases have been scheduled by the Court for argument during the current term:

Texas v. New Mexico

This case involves a water dispute involving the two states, which means the Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction” (that is, it goes straight to the high court). The case involves interpretation of the Pecos River Compact that allocates the water of the Pecos River between Texas and New Mexico. The disagreement arose from a 2014 tropical storm, when Texas had to release water from the Red Bluff Reservoir because it was full. The question is whether this unused water counts toward Texas’ allotment. The eight sitting justices heard arguments (subscription required) in the case Oct. 5.

Florida v. Georgia

This case actually was already “decided” in 2018, but it is hardly over. It involves a dispute between the two states over water from the Chattahoochee, Flint and Apalachicola Rivers. It went before the court during preliminary phases twice and the court appointed a judicial adjunct known as a special master. The question before the Court this term is an appeal by Florida of a particular decision by the special master. It is not clear whether the Court will give it a hearing or make a decision.

BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore

Baltimore sued 26 multinational oil and gas companies in state court, claiming they had injured the city by causing climate change. It’s actually one of a growing set of climate liability cases. Two of the companies sought to have the case moved to federal court, where they thought they would have a better chance to prevail. A federal district and a federal appeals court left the case in state court. The companies appealed those rulings to the Supreme Court.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service v. Sierra Club

This case will test what documents must be made public when federal agencies are considering rules under the Endangered Species Act. It goes back to a 2011 EPA’s proposed rulemaking over industrial cooling water intakes. EPA’s rulemaking involved extensive back-and-forth communications with NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In the course of that interchange, EPA switched from effectively saying the rule would harm aquatic life to saying it would not. The Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group, sought records of the interchange under the Freedom of Information Act. The agencies withheld some of the documents under the “deliberative process” exemption to FOIA. Some observers see the case as a challenge to the recent trend toward broader interpretations of the deliberative exemption. The Society of Environmental Journalists has joined 28 media groups in supporting disclosure. For more, check out the recent SEJournal WatchDog Opinion column on the case.

This article was originally published by SEJ Journal and is reprinted with permission. © 2020 Society of Environmental Journalists.

Wolves to Lose Protection

A final rule to remove the iconic species from the Endangered Species Act has now been published. Read more about the science and politics of wolf conservation.

As expected the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today issued a rule that would remove gray wolves (Canis lupus) from the protection of the Endangered Species Act.

The long-in-the-works move becomes effective 60 days after its publication in the Federal Register on election day — Jan. 4, 2021. It will put wolf conservation back in the hands of states and tribes, each of which would then have the right to decide on their own acceptable wolf population levels or hunting limits.

Ironically, the new rule comes less than a week before residents of Colorado will vote on a ballot measure to reintroduce wolves to the state. Many states maintain their own endangered species lists, which can offer protection if federal rules do not, but experts argue that states lack the resources to protect endangered species within their borders without federal support.

The announcement was made during an off-the-record phone call to which few media were invited, and to which this reporter’s request to attend received no response.

Still, it immediately generated criticism from scientists and conservationists, who have worked for decades to restore the species in the lower 48 U.S. states.

“This delisting is an unfortunate and politically driven decision as the best available science provides evidence that the gray wolf’s population is not fully restored throughout its historic range,” wrote Jacob Carter of the Union of Concerned Scientists. “Five scientists who are experts on gray wolf taxonomy, ecology and genomics reviewed the FWS’s proposed delisting of the gray wolf last year and found serious issues with the science.”

The Service and livestock trade groups, on the other hand, position the current state of wolf recovery as a major success. “Today’s action reflects…the parameters of the law and the best scientific and commercial data available,” Secretary of the Interior David L. Bernhardt said in a press release, which positioned the rule as part of ongoing efforts to “reform” the Endangered Species Act. “After more than 45 years as a listed species, the gray wolf has exceeded all conservation goals for recovery. Today’s announcement simply reflects the determination that this species is neither a threatened nor endangered species based on the specific factors Congress has laid out in the law.”

Conservationists argue that wolf populations have not reached sustainable levels and that delisting the species would then open them up to future hunting, which could further devastate populations. To see what could happen, look no further than Idaho, where wolf hunting is legal. Recent analysis by the Western Watersheds Project found that 570 wolves — including 35 pups, some just weeks old — were killed by hunters, trappers and government officials in the year ending June 30.

This delisting effort continues a twisting, turning path toward wolf conservation in this country, which has seen the iconic species gain and lose protection multiple times.

And as always, the story is not yet fully written. Conservation groups have already announced their intention to sue — a process they’ve won in the past.


The Revelator archives contain extensive coverage of the politics and science of wolf conservation. To learn more, check out these stories:

The Ethics of Saving Wolves

What Do Wolves Need to Thrive?

Rethinking the Big, Bad Wolf

How to Protect Both Wolves and Livestock

Will Voters Welcome Wolves Back to Colorado?

The Trump Administration Pushes to Delist Wolves — and History Repeats Itself

Can We Learn to Coexist With Wolves? Denmark May Have Answers

Tigers and Wolves: The Reigning Cats and Dogs in Conservation?

Turning Power Over to States Won’t Improve Protection for Endangered Species

(Correction: This article originally mentioned a 30-day comment period on this new rule. Because this is a final rule, there will be no comment period.)

Creative Commons