AUSTIN, Texas – A new report says the federal Renewable Fuel Standard, created to spur ethanol production and cut air pollution, is responsible for a number of negative environmental impacts, including reduced water supplies in Texas and other drought-prone areas.

Producing a single gallon of ethanol can require up to two thousand gallons of water. Nathan Hendricks, associate professor of agricultural economics with Kansas State University, says federal policies promoting biofuel production led to higher prices for corn, soybeans and other crops.

"Changes in market prices change the incentive for farmers,” says Hendricks. “There's going to be more planting of corn on existing cropland, and there's going to be an incentive to bring non-crop land into crop production."

From 2009 to 2016, the RFS led to the transformation of 1.6 million acres of forests, grasslands and wetlands to crop production. Supporters of the fuel standard aimed to reduce air pollution through the increased use of plant-based fuels, which burn cleaner than conventional gasoline, and to reduce the nation's dependency on foreign oil.

The Renewable Fuel Standard also led to widespread loss of critical habitat for wildlife. David DeGennaro, agriculture policy specialist with the National Wildlife Federation, says the new research eliminates any remaining doubt that U.S. biofuels policy is making the environment worse, not better.

He says the RFS has resulted in a total loss of nearly three million acres – roughly the size of Delaware – that would otherwise be wildlife habitat or non-farm lands to corn and soybean production.

"And putting that into industrial crop production, you release a huge amount of carbon from the soil that has been stored there for decades, you destroy wildlife habitat, and the process of farming sends a lot of fertilizers and soil and other pollution downstream," says DeGennaro.

Public officials are preparing to rewrite national biofuel policy because of a mandated "re-set" of the law. DeGennaro says he hopes the new research will help move the nation closer to solutions to promote clean fuels in a way that works for farmers, communities and wildlife.


get more stories like this via email

"The Creature from the Black Lagoon" is a scary story told around Halloween, but conservationists say the real danger in Georgia's swamps is how humans mistreat the wetlands.

The group Defenders of Wildlife is launching its "Real Scary Movies" campaign to show how pollution, overuse and habitat loss are the real danger to places such as the iconic Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.

Christian Hunt, a senior federal lands policy analyst for Defenders of Wildlife, said while the swamp's alligators, snakes and other creatures can be scary, humans remain the wetland's biggest threat.

"The true threat is how people manage wetlands. It's through pollution, mining, or the draining and conversion of wetlands and swamps. The only horror, the only creature, if you will, is our treatment of the places we vilify," he said.

October 13 through 19 is also National Wildlife Refuge Week, a time to visit America's network of lands and waters that conserve and protect our wildlife heritage. During this time, entrance fees to many refuges will be waived.

The Okefenokee refuge is home to hundreds of species, many listed as threatened or endangered. Hunt said nearby operations such as power plants and other industries can cause damage through pollution, mining, or draining swamps.

"Frankly, many people are scared of wilderness," he explained. "They're scared of the wild, and they create villains, such as, say, the creature of the Black Lagoon, to rationalize that fear."

Hunt added groups such as Defenders of Wildlife are working to preserve refuges like the Okefenokee, and says if those lands are damaged or destroyed, they might be gone for good.

"They protect some of the last vestiges of wilderness, particularly in the Southeast. It's hard to quantify what would be lost if we were to lose these places, but the loss would certainly be immense," he contended.

Indiana is considering a limited bobcat trapping season and the Department of Natural Resources is seeking public input on the proposal.

The plan would allow trapping in about 40 southern Indiana counties starting in November 2025, with a statewide quota of 250 bobcats. Trappers would have a one-bobcat bag limit and be required to purchase a special bobcat license.

Geriann Albers, furbearer and turkey program leader for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, said the proposal includes strict monitoring, and requires trappers to report their catches within 24 hours.

"We do have a population model for bobcats," Albers explained. "We're very confident with that 250 quota that it will not negatively impact bobcat populations. What that 250 was set on was the population model we have that shows that's a sustainable level of harvest."

Opponents argued even a limited season could threaten bobcat populations. Environmental groups, including the Humane Society, said the DNR's population model may not fully account for the bobcat's slow reproductive rate and threats from habitat loss. They contended reintroducing trapping could undermine years of conservation work that helped the species recover in Indiana.

Albers noted the DNR invited public feedback on the proposal.

"On that rule-making docket page the comment button is available for people to submit comments now," Albers pointed out. "That went up pretty quickly after the meeting but the first round of comments, we haven't scheduled yet because that usually coincides with when we do a public hearing."

A public hearing, tentatively set for November, will offer both in-person and virtual participation options. The DNR said updates will be posted on its website.


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups are slamming a Biden administration effort to remove federal protections for the endangered gray wolf.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service just appealed a 2022 court decision reinstating protections for the gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act; protections lost in the Trump era.

Derek Goldman, Northern Rockies senior field representative for the nonprofit Endangered Species Coalition, said federal officials are making contradictory moves.

"On one hand, they said earlier this summer that they want to write a national recovery plan. But then they appealed to reinstate the Trump wolf delisting rule, which would presumably mean they don't have to do a recovery plan," Goldman pointed out. "This is kind of sending a mixed message here."

In the suit, Justice Department attorneys argued the gray wolf is no longer in danger of extinction. The National Rifle Association and hunting and livestock groups also supported the Trump-era policy, which would send protections back to the states.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife said seven confirmed packs of gray wolves have made their way down from Oregon. Goldman acknowledged the wolves enjoy state-level protections but have a long way to go.

"They certainly haven't recovered throughout all the suitable habitat that's in California, like the Sierra Nevada mountain range," Goldman noted. "But without the resources provided by the Endangered Species Act, they won't fully recover."

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service set a deadline of December 2025 to produce a new federal gray wolf recovery plan.