SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
30x30
Biden’s 30X30 Conservation Plan Falls Far Short of What Is Needed
To the delight of oil drillers, miners, trophy hunters, ranchers, farmers, loggers, and factory trawlers, the Biden plan calls for not initiating any conservation action at the federal level.
Jan 30, 2024
Protecting America’s marine and terrestrial ecosystems and biodiversity to give them the best chance to survive the climate catastrophe this century is a critical national challenge. In Executive Order 14008 “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” issued during his first month in office, President Joe Biden committed to address this national imperative by pledging to conserve 30% of U.S. lands and waters by the year 2030—known as the “30x30” initiative.
But now, after three years, the administration’s much-trumpeted plan has clearly fallen far short of what is needed.
This failure was designed from the start. In the program’s 2021 rollout: “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful,” the administration conceded that it does not intend to initiate protections of more federal lands or waters itself, but instead would simply support “locally led, voluntary” efforts to “conserve” working lands and waters. Ironically, the decision to rely on “locally led” conservation efforts was made in a closed-door, top-down process in D.C., with no public input.
Our terrestrial and ocean ecosystems are in turmoil from decades of overuse, pollution, and climate change, and we need to do everything possible to reduce all anthropogenic impacts and stressors.
In its “America the Beautiful 2023 Annual Report,” the White House lists a number of worthy conservation initiatives, but most focus on public recreation, urban parks, jobs, economic development, and supporting “fishers, ranchers, farmers, and forest owners.” These are all helpful, but collectively fall far short of what is urgently necessary to sustain America’s declining ecosystems in the face of climate change and decades of overexploitation. Nowhere does the administration report any quantitative progress toward the stated “30x30” goal, as there has actually been so little.
Worrying signs in the framing of America the Beautiful included statements such as the following:
Rather than simply measuring conservation progress by national parks, wilderness lands, and marine protected areas in the care of the government, the president’s vision recognizes and celebrates the voluntary conservation efforts of farmers, ranchers, and forest owners… [and] contributions and stewardship traditions of America’s hunters, anglers, and fishing communities….
and
...the president’s challenge specifically emphasizes the notion of “conservation” of the nation’s natural resources (rather than the related but different concept of “protection” or “preservation”) recognizing that many uses of our lands and waters, including of working lands, can be consistent with the long-term health and sustainability of natural systems.
To the delight of oil drillers, miners, trophy hunters, ranchers, farmers, loggers, and factory trawlers, the Biden plan calls for not initiating any conservation action at the federal level, instead ceding federal responsibility on this to local, parochial politics.
This “locally led” approach is an old trope used by anti-federal interests to feign concern for the environment while continuing to profit from environmental destruction. And the fabricated distinction between “conservation” and “protection or preservation” has been an industry rhetorical device for decades, dating back to the 1980s “Wise Use” movement. In fact, these terms are synonymous and interchangeable. This semantic distinction is an attempt to justify the environmentally unjustifiable—business as usual. Clearly, this is not a plan designed to protect ecological habitat and biodiversity in the face of decades of overexploitation and the growing climate catastrophe.
The America the Beautiful effort makes no mention of the many candidate species the administration continues to ignore for listing under the Endangered Species Act, presents no assessment of critical habitat conservation needs, and essentially ignores the results and recommendations of billions of dollars of ecological science.
Indeed, local conservation efforts are an essential part of the overall puzzle, but alone will not protect the large ecosystems necessary for habitat and biodiversity conservation. For that we need bold leadership at the federal level to establish new, large-scale, strongly protected national parks, wildlife refuges, and national monuments, onshore and offshore.
Put simply, America the Beautiful is a necessary—but not sufficient—response to the catastrophic decline in America’s natural treasures, ecological habitat, and biodiversity. It is a populist palliative, tidying up the deck of the sinking Titanic.
While local communities adjacent to federal lands and waters certainly deserve a voice—even a priority voice—in how these federal resources are managed, they cannot be afforded an exclusive voice or veto authority. Yet that is precisely what the Biden approach does. The federal government has a constitutional mandate to manage federal lands and waters in the national interest, on behalf of all 340 million Americans.
Local interests do not always align with national interests. When they do, great. But when they don’t, the federal government must secure the national interest, even if it upsets local politicians and commercial interests.
For instance, had former President Jimmy Carter taken a “voluntary, locally led” approach on federal lands in Alaska with the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)—ultimately protecting 157 million acres of some of the most spectacular national parks, preserves, refuges, wilderness areas, and monuments in the world, the largest expansion of protected lands in U.S. history—that historic conservation achievement would never have happened due to overwhelming local opposition in Alaska. In fact, many of America’s national parks were established over the objections of local communities.
If the intent of the 30x30 initiative is to give our struggling terrestrial and marine ecosystems the best chance possible to make it to the far side of the climate chaos this century, the current approach clearly fails. As has been clear for decades, there are things that only the federal government can, and must, do.
The nation deserves more. Our terrestrial and ocean ecosystems are in turmoil from decades of overuse, pollution, and climate change, and we need to do everything possible to reduce all anthropogenic impacts and stressors. That can only be done through bold federal leadership. During the previous administration, we lost four years of federal momentum on this, and if the previous president were to be reelected this November, we will lose another four critical years. This may be our last best chance to get this right.
We now need President Biden to summon his inner Jimmy Carter, identify all of our nation’s most critical and threatened onshore and offshore ecosystems, and use his executive authority under the Antiquities Act to designate strongly protected, large-scale national monuments to fully protect these natural treasures from further exploitation and damage.
Our precious and troubled ecosystems deserve no less.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As UN Members Adopt Oceans Treaty, Campaigners Urge Countries to Quickly Ratify Deal
"It is now up to governments to seize this opportunity," said one campaigner, "and to turn all their ocean-related commitments into action by signing and ratifying the treaty as soon as possible."
Jun 19, 2023
Conservation advocates on Monday urged world governments to "keep up the momentum" and ratify the United Nations global oceans treaty as quickly as possible after U.N. members formally adopted the agreement in New York, bringing the world one step closer to achieving crucial protections for the high seas.
The treaty—formally called the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Treaty—will protect ocean waters that lie beyond territorial borders, and has been called a key component of achieving the U.N.'s "30x30" goal of protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030.
The language of the agreement was agreed upon in March, and the formal adoption of the treaty was called "a win for all life on this planet" by Chris Thorne of Greenpeace's Protect the Oceans campaign.
"Now those same governments which agreed it must urgently ratify and begin delivering vast ocean sanctuaries on the high seas," said Thorne in a statement. "2030 looms large on the horizon, and the scale of our task is vast."
Greenpeace gave credit to grassroots campaigners who have worked for decades to pressure policymakers to protect the world's oceans and marine life.
\u201cThere\u2019s still work to do but for now let's take a moment to celebrate this historic moment\ud83c\udf89 And with you by our side we\u2019ll keep working to make sure we #ProtectTheOceans for generations to come!\n\n#ProtectTheOceans\u201d— Greenpeace International (@Greenpeace International) 1687188904
The 30x30 goal was agreed upon last December as part of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, and scientists say it is the minimum level of protection needed to maintain healthy oceans, which are home to hundreds of thousands of marine species and are crucial for maintaining biodiversity, the world's economies, and a key carbon sink.
The treaty text allows for the creation of "vast ocean sanctuaries, free from destructive human activities on the high seas," said Greenpeace, as well as requiring environmental impact assessments for human activities and equity in the sharing of benefits from marine resources.
Sixty governments need to ratify the BBNJ to ensure that it enters into force and becomes legally binding, and advocates want the ratification process to be completed within the next two years.
"Less than 1% of the high seas are protected," Thorne said. "We will work day and night to ensure this treaty is ratified in 2025, and ocean sanctuaries free from destructive human activities covering 30% of the oceans become a reality by the end of this decade."
The treaty will become international law 120 days after the 60th country ratifies it, and will provide the first legal framework to protect the world's oceans outside of territorial boundaries.
"We praise countries for moving one step closer towards putting this political accord into action in the water by formally adopting this landmark treaty today," said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance. "Countries must now ratify it as quickly as possible to bring it into force so that we can protect our ocean, build our resilience to climate change and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people."
The new milestone on the road to a legally binding treaty came weeks after scientists warned that carbon emissions are pushing crucial Antarctic currents toward collapse, threatening the distribution of oxygen and nutrients to marine life, and as researchers warn of the "exponential growth of microplastics in the global ocean."
"With today's adoption of the BBNJ agreement, governments have taken a significant step towards protecting the ocean, building resilience to climate change, and proactively addressing and preventing transboundary pollution," said Fabienne McLellan, managing director of OceanCare. "It is now up to governments to seize this opportunity and to turn all their ocean-related commitments into action by signing and ratifying the treaty as soon as possible."
"This treaty can be the game-changer the ocean and we all desperately need," said McLellan. "The state of the ocean is dire, we simply cannot afford to fail."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular