Winter 2002 Newsmagazine Volume 32, Number 4

CLIMATE CHANGE:Say Goodbye to

Sugar Maples and More…

2

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O L U M N

Stand Up,Keep Fighting

No one should read thisyear’s midterm elec-tions as a sign that thepublic is giving pol-luters free rein to

poison the air we breathe, the waterwe drink or the land we love. In fact,most of those who won on ElectionDay did so by claiming to be environ-mentalists. Several candidates withvery bad environmental records evenprofessed to be strongly for environ-mental protection and were able toget elected.

But the environment suffered ablow on Election Day, when allies inCongress were defeated by candi-dates who have actually voted againstclean water, clean air and naturalresource stewardship. In some states,challengers with strong environmen-tal credentials fell just short ofdefeating anti-environmental incum-bents. By the day’s end, we saw theGOP regain control of the Senate andexpand their majority in the House.

President Bush has made it clearthat he’ll use his newfound control ofCongress to push priorities that theDemocratic Senate had stymied. Weexpect quick action on a homelandsecurity bill that provides corpora-tions with sweeping exemptions frompublic disclosure laws. Congress mayalso move quickly on a stalled energybill, and could very well put drillingin the Arctic National WildlifeRefuge (ANWR) back on the table.

And that’s only this winter. The108th Congress could bring newassaults on laws that most Americanstake for granted. President Bush hasalready begun chipping away at theClean Water Act, and his administra-tion has announced plans to rewritethe law so it no longer protectsnumerous wetlands, streams andother “isolated” waters. He has begundismantling the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act, the corner-stone of environmental law. Withcontrol of Congress, Bush will boldlycontinue to push these rollbacks.

Our nation suffered an evengreater loss this election season inthe death of Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.). He was a true fighter for theenvironment, and his tragic deathleaves the Senate without its most

passionate advocate for the publicinterest. Whether battling interna-tional trade deals that underminedenvironmental laws or defending nat-ural treasures like ANWR, Paul wasdriven by principle and stood by hisconvictions.

Paul’s tragic death reminds us allof the importance of fighting for theissues we care about. In honoring hismemory, we must strive to do whathe did best: stand up and keep fight-ing. And that’s just what Friends ofthe Earth will do in the next twoyears. The political odds we facemake that fight more important thanever, and will demand new and cre-ative strategies. We’ll work to stopCongress and the president fromrolling back critical laws, but we’llalso continue to pursue a diversearray of actions such as public educa-tion, corporate campaigns, legalmeasures and state-level initiatives.

Despite losses on Election Day,the American public still clearlyfavors strong measures to protect ourair, land and water. Friends of theEarth will work harder than ever tomobilize this public opinion againstPresident Bush’s dirty-energy, anti-environmental agenda, and I hopeyou’ll join us. Stand up and keepfighting.

Brent Blackwelder

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 3

Table of Contents

Volume 32, Number 4 Winter 2002Friends of the Earth (ISSN: 1054-1829) is published quarterly by Friends of the Earth, 1025Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005-6303, phone 202-783-7400, 877-843-8687(toll free), fax 202-783-0444, e-mail: foe@foe.org, Web site: www.foe.org. Annual membership duesare $25, which includes a subscription to Friends of the Earth.

Northwest Office: 6512 23rd Avenue, NW, Suite 320, Seattle, WA 98117, phone 206-297-9460,fax 206-297-9468, e-mail: foenw@foe.org.

Northeast Office: 87 College Street, Burlington, VT 05401, phone 802-951-9094, fax 802-860-1208, e-mail: foene@foe.org.

The words “Friends of the Earth” and the FoE logo are exclusive trademarks of Friends of theEarth, all rights reserved. Unless otherwise noted, articles may be reprinted without charge or specialpermission. Please credit Friends of the Earth and the article author; send us a copy. Friends of theEarth is indexed in the Alternative Press Index. Periodicals postage paid at Washington, DC.

Postmaster: Send address changes to Friends of the Earth, Membership Dept. 1025 VermontAvenue, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005-6303.

Board of DirectorsEd Begley, Jr.; Jayni Chase; Harriett Crosby; ClarenceDitlow; Dan Gabel; Alicia Gomer; Michael Herz; AnnHoffman, Chair ; Marion Hunt-Badiner, Secretary; DougLegum; Patricia Matthews; Avis Ogilvy Moore, ViceChair; Charles Moore; Edwardo Lao Rhodes; ArlieShardt; Doria Steedman; Rick Taketa; David Zwick,Treasurer

StaffBrent Blackwelder, PresidentNorman Dean, Executive DirectorSandra Adams-Morally, Membership AssociateLisa Archer, Safer Food, Safer Farms Grassroots

CoordinatorLarry Bohlen, Director, Health and Environment

CampaignsShawn Cantrell, Director, NW OfficeMichelle Chan-Fishel, International Policy AnalystHugh Cheatham, Chief Financial OfficerKeira Costic, Publications ManagerLeslie Fields, Director, International ProgramColleen Freeman, International Grassroots CoordinatorRosemary Greenway, Director of Membership and

MarketingLisa Grob, Executive AssistantVonetta Harris, AccountantMark Helm, Director of Media RelationsSteve Herz, International Policy AnalystDavid Hirsch, Director, Economics for the Earth

ProgramYasmeen Hossain, Executive AssistantCheryl Johnson, Receptionist/Office AssistantDiane Minor, Director, Communications and

DevelopmentHarriet Nash, Fisheries CampaignerSherri Owens, Office ManagerChris Pabon, Director of Foundation RelationsErich Pica, Economics Policy AnalystJon Sohn, International Policy AnalystKristen Sykes, Interior Department WatchdogDavid Waskow, Trade and Investment Policy CoordinatorChris Weiss, Director of D.C. Environmental NetworkCarol Welch, Deputy Director, International ProgramSara Zdeb, Legislative Director

Publications StaffKeira Costic, EditorDesign by JML Design

InternsFrancesca Silvestri

Consultants/AdvisorsBrian DunkielBill FreeseMegan HavrdaDorothee Krahn

Member GroupsArgentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium,Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria,Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia,Costa Rica, Croatia, Curacao, Cyprus,Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, ElSalvador, England-Wales-Northern

Ireland, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany,Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary,Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania,Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mali, Malta,Mauritius, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua,Nigeria, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru,Philippines, Poland, Scotland, Sierra Leone, Slovakia,South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden,Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Ukraine, United States,Uruguay.

AffiliatesAfrica: Earthlife Africa; Australia: Mineral Policy Institute;Australia: Rainforest Information Centre; Brazil: Amigosda Terra Amazonia - Amazônia Brasileira; Brazil: Grupo deTrabalho Amazonico; Czech Republic: CEE Bankwatch;Japan: Peace Boat; Latin America: REJULADS; MiddleEast: Friends of the Earth (Israel, Jordan and Palestine);Netherlands: Action for Solidarity, Equality, Environmentand Development Europe; Netherlands: Stichting DeNoordzee (North Sea Foundation); Netherlands: CorporateEurope Observatory; United States: International RiversNetwork; United States: Project Underground; UnitedStates: Rainforest Action Network

Victims of Global Warming Take U.S. Agencies to Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pg. 4

Frontline Activists Join in High-Level Meetings, CleverProtests of World Bank . . . .Pg. 6

Campaign Victory! World Bank Pulls Plug onControversial Gold Mine . . . .Pg. 8

The Disappointing 107th Congress . . . . . . . . . .Pg. 9

Green Scissors Make Sense,Now More Than Ever – As O’Neill Eyes Tax Codes . . .Pg. 10

The Interior Department –Devastating Our Public Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pg. 11

Earth Summit’s Agonies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pg. 12

Chefs Net Critical Mass on Engineered Salmon . . .Pg. 14

Video Calls for CorporateAccountability . . . . . . . . . .Pg. 16

EarthShare giving campaigns allowyou to designate a donation to Friendsof the Earth. Federal employees candonate through the Combined FederalCampaign by marking #0908 on theirpledge forms.Friends of the Earth is printed with soy ink on

100% recycled paper, 30% post-consumer content. Bleached without chlorine.

Friends ofthe EarthInternational

UNIONBUG

By Keira Costic

Concerned residents inBoulder, Colo., foreseewater shortages fromdecreased snowpack andrising temperatures. One

of the largest maple syrup producers inVermont is concerned that their busi-ness is jeopardized by maple forestsmigrating to cooler climates in thenorth. A marine biologist feels his life’swork is at risk from coral reefs disap-pearing due to bleaching from risingocean temperatures and other threats.

All of these people are victims ofglobal climate change, and Friends ofthe Earth, Greenpeace and the City ofBoulder have filed a groundbreakingfederal lawsuit on behalf of their mem-

bers and citizens, respectively. The suitcharges that two U.S. governmentagencies – the Export Import Bank(Ex-Im) and the Overseas PrivateInvestment Corporation (OPIC) – arenot complying with the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Lawsuit Details“The lawsuit seeks no financial com-pensation – only compliance withNEPA, which requires all federal agen-cies to assess how their actions anddecisions contribute to global warm-ing,” said attorney Brian Dunkiel. “Ofall federal government agencies, theseagencies are far and away responsiblefor the biggest chunk of climate changeand carbon emissions.”

To meet NEPA requirements, fed-eral agencies prepare a detailedstatement known as an EnvironmentalImpact Statement (EIS), or first pre-pare an Environmental Assessment(EA) to determine if an EIS is neces-sary. However, over the past 10 yearsOPIC and Ex-Im provided over $32billion of U.S. taxpayer money infinancing and insurance for oil fields,pipelines and coal-fired power plantslocated overseas without preparing EAsor EISs. The U.S. government is bla-tantly breaking its very own laws.

“The United States is the largestgreenhouse gas emitter and Mr. Bush isnow going around the world to get asmuch oil as he can to bring it back hereand burn it,” said Jon Sohn, interna-

A Bolder CityIn May, Boulder, Colo., officialsadopted emission-reduction goals forthe city based on the 1997 KyotoProtocol, which seeks to reduce green-house gas emissions. The protocol is thevery same international climate pactPresident Bush withdrew from duringhis first two months in office. Themayor and city council are concernedabout drinking water shortages andflooding.

Boulder depends on melting snow-pack – slow-melting, packed snow – forits water needs. Readings taken theweek of April 29 showed that snowpackat the lower mountain elevations hadcompletely evaporated, a conditionnever seen in the many decades ofrecord keeping at the site. The city’s

upper snowpack is at 25 percent of theaverage readings over the past decades.Boulder has spent billions of dollars ona water infrastructure dependent onreservoirs designed to capture thisspringtime runoff from the mountains.

Now it rains more than snows, andthe steep canyons surrounding the citymake it prone to severe flooding. Also,winter and nighttime temperatures arebecoming warmer. The colder tempera-tures kept pest species away, but nowwith warmer temperatures, they are ableto extend their ranges. The peststhreaten native species and put to wastethe hundreds of millions of dollars thecity invested in protecting ecosystems.

“All of the work that the city ofBoulder does to maintain the quality oflife for our residents will be negatively

impacted by the detrimental effects ofclimate change. We believe that thislawsuit is one way to force the federalgovernment to start paying attention tothis critical issue,” said Boulder MayorWilliam Toor. “Global warming will bethe defining issue of the next century –our grandchildren will ask, ‘What didyou do to prevent this from happening?’”

Climate Changing Citizens’ Lives

4

C O V E R S T O R Y

Victims of Global WarmingTake U.S. Agencies to Court

Continued on Page 5

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 5

Sugar Maples: Syrup Going SourArthur and Anne Berndt, members ofFriends of the Earth and Greenpeace,have owned and operated MaverickFarm in Sharon, Vt., since 1998.Maverick Farm is one of the largestmaple syrup producers in Vermont.The Berndts plan to continue operat-ing the farm for at least the next 20years, and either pass the farm on totheir children or conserve the land.

However, as a result of globalwarming, scientists predict that

within a mere 10 or 20 years, mapletrees may virtually cease to exist inVermont, and will instead only sur-vive and spread in cooler, Canadianlatitudes. The diminished populationof sugar maples will cause a loss ofsyrup production in Northern NewYork and New England. The tree pop-ulation could decrease sooner if thewarming is accompanied by out-breaks of pests or disease.

“We all feel nervous about cli-mate change. If we have no maples,we have no farm income and the aes-thetic value of the land will be

devastated,” said Berndt. “It is not aninalienable right of Americans toconsume as much energy as we wantwithout regard for other people in theworld.”

The Coral Reef: TheCanary in a Coal MineDr. Phillip Dustan is a full-time profes-sor in the Biology Department at theCollege of Charleston in Charleston,S.C., and is a member of Friends of theEarth. He began his study of coral reefsin 1969. Then in 1974, he establishedlong-term reef monitoring sites in theKey Largo National Marine Sanctuary.In 1995, Dr. Dustan was asked to be aprincipal investigator on theEnvironmental Protection Agency’sFlorida Keys Coral Monitoring Project.

“The climate change impacts oncoral reefs are tantamount to visitingSequoia National Forest and finding

every 90 out of 100 trees dead or onthe ground,” said Dr. Dustan. “I have tospeak up. Coral reefs are the canary inthe coal mine. They are the first indica-tion that something is wrong.”

The Coral Reef Monitoring Projectdocumented an overall 38 percent loss

of living coral cover in the FloridaKeys National Marine Sanctuarybetween the years 1996 and 2000. Inwarmer waters, coral lose their abilityto harvest sunlight and grow, and theysuffer from more acidic, corrosivewater. There is an increased concentra-tion of carbon dioxide in warmerwaters, which is very acidic and leadsto “osteoporosis” in the corals. Stormsand boats easily break the coral whenit’s in this state.

“I don’t think there’s any doubt inany rational scientists mind that climatechange is a reality. The question is,‘How do we stop it?’ Obviously, weshould halt or slow the combustion offossil fuels,” said Dustan.

tional policy analyst for Friends of theEarth.

One example of this is the Chad-Cameroon oil and pipeline project– oneof the largest private sector investmentson the African continent. On June 6,2000, the World Bank approved $3.7billion in funding to this project, withover $200 million of U.S. taxpayer sup-port through Ex-Im. ExxonMobil isbuilding 300 oil wells in Chad and con-structing a 600-mile pipeline to theAtlantic coast. The oil extracted will beshipped to Europe and the UnitedStates to feed already unsustainableconsumption patterns that cause globalclimate change. Not only will the

pipeline fuel 445 million tons of carbondioxide emissions, it is already exacer-bating human rights abuses, destroyingtropical forests, undercutting the rightsof indigenous peoples and despoilingwater resources in the region. Ex-Imdid not perform an EA or EIS beforefunding this project, even with theobvious negative impacts to the envi-ronment (See Page 6).

More Damaging ProjectsHead for ApprovalAs the lawsuit proceeds, more environ-mentally destructive projects head for

approval. The Camisea natural gasproject in Peru is under considerationfor financing. Corporations have begunpreliminary seismic testing and otherprep work but full construction isdependent on loans from Ex-Im andother financial institutions.

The natural gas and resulting emis-sions from this project will be greaterthan those proclaimed by dozens ofcountries on two continents in the year2000. Half of this gas is anticipated tobe shipped to the United States to sup-ply West Coast energy markets. Yet,

Continued on Page 8

C O V E R S T O R Y

6

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

By Colleen Freeman

In September Friends of theEarth hosted activists fromaround the world who aredirectly affected by oil, gasand mining projects financed

by the World Bank.Friends of the Earth

International, our network of membergroups in 70 countries, broughtactivists from Cameroon, ElSalvador, Georgia, Nigeria, Peru andRomania to Washington during theannual meetings of the World Bankand International Monetary Fund(IMF). They testified to the humanand environmental damage caused bythese projects and pressed Bank offi-cials to stop financing them. For overa decade, we have attended thesemeetings and succeeded in influenc-ing the Bank (See sidebar story).

We arranged meetings with Bankstaff on two existing projects: theChad-Cameroon oil pipeline and the

Yanacocha gold mine in Peru. Wealso set up meetings on two proposedprojects: a gold mine in Romania andan oil pipeline through Azerbaijan,Georgia and Turkey. Soon after themeetings, the World Bank pulled outof the gold mine in Romania.According to a Bank source, WorldBank President James Wolfensohnpersonally pulled the plug on theproject after speaking with the twoRomanian campaigners. (See Page 8)

Friends of the Earth Internationalalso met with officials in charge ofthe oil, mining and gas department aswell as the Bank’s two private sectorlending arms – the InternationalFinance Corporation and theMultilateral Investment GuaranteeAgency. These meetings gave ourcolleagues the opportunity to providethe World Bank with first-hand, on-the-ground information to challengethe Bank’s assessment that these proj-ects generate economic growth,

Frontline Activists Join in High-LevelMeetings, Clever Protests of World Bank

■ 2000: Pressured the WorldBank to commission a compre-hensive review of the damindustry. The WorldCommission on Dams issued agroundbreaking report in Nov. 2000, with strong recom-mendations for mitigatingfuture dam projects.

■ 2000: Stopped World Bankfunding of the Western ChinaPoverty Reduction project,which would have resettled60,000 ethnic Chinese intoTibetan lands.

■ 1997: Pushed the World Bankto admit to the failures of itsstructural adjustment programs,which overhaul a country’swhole economy. It agreed to aWorld-Bank-government-civilsociety thorough review ofsuch programs in several coun-tries.

■ 1996: Teamed with theJubilee Debt Campaign move-ment to double the Bank’sHeavily Indebted PoorCountries initiative in 1996.While still insufficient, it isdelivering real reductions indebt payments and allowing forgreater spending on health careand education.

■ 1993: Worked with membersof Congress to push the U.S.Treasury Department to createan Independent InspectionPanel and Ombudsperson toinvestigate complaints of WorldBank policy violations.

Success in Spurring Bank Reforms

1993-2000

Friends of the Earth activists delivered “World Bank Springs” tap water bottles to thefront door of the World Bank, which wants is putting basic water rights in the hands ofcorporations.

Ph

oto

Cre

dit

:Ja

nn

eke

Bru

il

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 7

alleviate poverty and promote sus-tainable development.

Last year the Bank launched theExtractive Industries Review (EIR) tohelp assess its role in oil, gas andmining projects. EIR was establishedone year after Ricardo Navarro, Chairof Friends of the Earth International,directly challenged Wolfensohn torecognize the negative impacts ofextractive industry projects.

“Despite its good intentions, theBank has used the EIR as a publicrelations tool to claim it is committedto openly reviewing its activities andconsulting with civil society,” saidCarol Welch Friends of the Earth’sdeputy director of international pro-grams. “In reality, the bank hasshown no willingness to change itscurrent approach to oil, gas and min-ing.”

In addition to raising concernswith Bank staff, Friends of the Earthassisted our colleagues in media out-reach and alliance building. Wehelped Friends of the Earth-Cameroon file an Inspection Panelclaim, which cites numerous viola-tions of World Bank safeguardpolicies during the construction ofthe Chad-Cameroon pipeline. TheInspection Panel is a three-memberbody created in 1993 to provide anindependent forum for private citi-zens who allege harm caused by aWorld Bank-financed project.Cameroonian community memberscomplain of polluted water sources,loss of crops and forest land, failureto compensate affected people fornegative impacts, labor rights viola-tions and health impacts– especiallythe spread of HIV/AIDS – directlyrelated to the influx of workers andjob seekers.

Friends of the Earth also co-organized a “clean energy” rallyoutside the World Bank headquarters.Speakers included Ricardo Navarroand Asume Osouka from Friends ofthe Earth-Nigeria. Along with

Greenpeace USA, Sierra StudentCoalition and others, Friends of theEarth delivered a giant “TrojanHorse” that symbolized the WorldBank’s continued support for destruc-

tive oil, gas and mining projects indeveloping countries. This peacefulprotest received extensive media cov-erage. ■

Citizens worldwide have expressedserious concern, and in some casesoutrage, over the World Bank’spolicy of promoting the privatiza-tion of water systems indeveloping countries. These planshave often placed the provision ofbasic water services in the handsof multinational companies and, intoo many cases, have led to signif-icant increases in water rates forlow-income users.

The most notorious case ofwater privatization under pressureby the World Bank occurred inCochabamba, Bolivia. The waterrates for poor residents rose ashigh as 25 percent of theirincomes when a consortium leadby the U.S.-based BechtelCorporation privatized the

Cochabamba water system in1999.

To draw attention to theseissues, Friends of the Earth deliv-ered large quantities of “WorldBank Springs” tap water bottles to the front door of the World Bank,along with a water bill for $318 million. The bill represents 25percent of the World Bank’s annualadministrative budget, which is arate comparable to the water ratesBechtel charged to poorCochabamba residents.

A representative of the WorldBank’s External Relations depart-ment received the water bottle, andengaged in an impromptu debatebefore CNN’s cameras withFriends of the Earth Trade PolicyAnalyst David Waskow.

Bank Privatizes Water atSteep Cost to the Poor

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

We put this label, picturing World Bank President James Wolfensohn, on the bottlesof water we delivered to the World Bank.

8

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

By Carol Welch

The World Bank’s decisionnot to consider a loan fora controversial projectcame only two weeksafter Friends of the Earth

International brought two Romanianactivists to directly challenge WorldBank President James Wolfensohn at atown hall meeting in Washington, D.C.The activists presented Wolfensohnwith drawings by Romanian childrenwho would be impacted by the goldmine.

The International FinanceCorporation (IFC), a private sectorlending arm of the World Bank, wouldhave made the loan to a Canadian gold-mining corporation for the controversialRosia Montana project in Romania.

“The $400 million Rosia Montanaproject would displace more than2,000 people and tear down nearly 900homes where the mine is planned.Environmentalists also opposed plansto build a 1,000-acre reservoir to col-lect cyanide tailings left over from the

mining process,” reported the WallStreet Journal.

The project would be Europe’slargest gold mine. The four open-pitmines would generate roughly 196 mil-lion tons of cyanide-laced waste andonly employ approximately 300-500people over the mine’s 15-year lifespan.

Romania has a bad history withgold mines. In 2000, at Baia Maregold mine, a cyanide spill polluted theTisza and Danube Rivers, contaminat-

ing the drinking water supplies of 2.5 million people and killing 1,200 tons of fish.

Furthermore, the sponsor of RosiaMontana, Gabriel Resources, has nomining experience and already startedthe expropriation of 900 houses in theRomanian valley. Workers started toconstruct a reservoir lake to capturecyanide, which is used to extract goldfrom the rock, potentially destroying4000-year-old archaeological discover-ies. However, without World Bankfunding it will be more difficult forother public agencies to justify financ-ing this problem project.

In its official statement, the IFCclaimed that it was in the mutual inter-est of the IFC and the sponsor not tocontinue discussions, due to the avail-ability of alternative financing and thepotential that IFC involvement woulddelay the project. According to a Banksource, however, Wolfensohn person-ally pulled the plug on the project afterspeaking with the two Romanian cam-paigners and reviewing the project. ■

Campaign Victory! World Bank PullsPlug on Controversial Gold Mine

Ex-Im has indicated that NEPA is notapplicable to this project.

It doesn’t matter to the U.S. gov-ernment that the project is located inone of the world’s most ecologicallyprized rainforests in the PeruvianAmazon. The region is described bythe International Union for theConservation of Nature scientists as“the last place on earth” to drill for fos-sil fuels. The region also has land thathas been set aside as a reserve for sev-

eral voluntarily isolated and uncon-tacted indigenous peoples. However,that is being ignored and abused by thecompanies, banks and governmentsinvolved.

“This first-of-its-kind legal actionis urgently called for because we needto compel the Bush administration totake some action against global warm-ing,” said Friends of the EarthPresident Brent Blackwelder.

The Bush administration admitsthere is global climate change, yetwon’t do anything about it. If OPIC

and Ex-Im were complying withNEPA, current projects may not havebeen approved. At a minimum, theprojects’ adverse impacts would be mit-igated, and alternatives considered,instead of carrying on with business asusual.

For more information visithttp://www.climatelawsuit.org.Listen to Attorney Brian

Dunkiel on National Public Radio. ■

Continued from Page 5

Ph

oto

Cre

dit

:Ja

nn

eke

Bru

il

Romanian activists present World BankPresident James Wolfensohn with drawingsby Romanian children who would beimpacted by the Rosia Montana gold mine.

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 9

O N T H E H I L L

The Disappointing 107th CongressBy Sara Zdeb

The 107thCongress isdrawing to aclose, leavingbehind a ques-

tionable environmentallegacy. On issues fromenergy to trade to cleanwater, the Republican Househas teamed with the Bushadministration to push anti-environmental initiatives.And while the DemocraticSenate has proved adept atblocking the worst proposals,they have failed to accom-plish any forward progress on theenvironment.

When the 107th Congress wassworn in nearly two years ago, envi-ronmentalists worried that Republicancontrol of both chambers would leadto quick passage of the president’santi-environmental agenda. Early stepsby Congress confirmed our fears.

The Senate approved the presi-dent’s nominees to key administrationpositions, confirming industry offi-cials and academics who were hostileto environmental regulations. Theyinclude Interior Secretary GaleNorton, who argued against severalenvironmental laws that Americanshold dear; Attorney General JohnAshcroft, whose anti-environmentalSenate record led many to doubt hiswillingness to enforce environmentallaws; and Office of Management andBudget Administrator for RegulatoryAffairs John Graham, who believes incontroversial “cost-benefit analysis”techniques that devalue human healthand environmental quality.

In May 2001, the balance ofpower in Congress shifted dramati-cally when Sen. James Jeffords (I-Vt.)announced that he would leave the

Republican Party and throw control ofthe chamber to the Democrats.Environmentalists hoped this wouldspur the Senate to pass proactive envi-ronmental legislation. Over theremainder of the 107th Congress,however, the Democrats’ razor-thinmajority at best served as a backstopfor the administration’s anti-environ-mental agenda.

Assaults on environmental protec-tion took many forms throughout the107th Congress. When the Bushadministration released an energy planin April 2001, the Republican Housequickly followed suit by crafting amassive bill full of regulatory roll-backs and taxpayer handouts forpolluters. In fact, the House energybill doled out nearly $40 billion in taxbreaks and subsidies for the coal, oiland nuclear industries. A paltry 17cents of every dollar in tax breaks inthe bill would promote clean energy;the other 83 cents went to polluters.

The Senate later passed a bill thatwas superior in only two ways: it didnot allow drilling in Alaska’s ArcticNational Wildlife Refuge, and it pro-vided marginally fewer subsidies topolluters.

“While clearly betterthan the House version, theSenate bill offers no coherentview of how to fuel oureconomy in a cleaner way. Itwould have reflected for-ward-thinking when GroverCleveland was president,”said Friends of the EarthPresident Brent Blackwelderin a Washington Post article.

The Senate bill failed topromote any increase inautomobile fuel efficiencyand even weakened currentstandards for pickup trucks.And it extended the Price-Anderson Act, a dangerous

subsidy for nuclear energy that forcestaxpayers, not industry, to foot the billin the case of deadly accidents.

Congress also put up little resist-ance to the Bush administration’sinternational trade bill, which gavepolluters expansive new rights. Thebill, known as “fast track,” expanded aprovision of the North American FreeTrade Agreement that allows corpora-tions to sue governments if anenvironmental standard has impairedtheir profit margin. The bill passed theSenate after an amendment to fix thisprovision failed, and squeaked throughthe House with a one-vote margin.

While initial signs were promisingfor a bill reforming agricultural subsi-dies, Congress ultimately passed itsbiggest farm bill ever.Environmentalists have long been con-cerned with the U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s (USDA) system of farmsubsidies, which encourage environ-mentally harmful overproduction.Worse, the few USDA programs thatencourage farm conservation remainperpetually underfunded. The House

Continued on Page 10

The Bush administration did its best to push its anti-environmentalagenda through Congress, like handing out $40 billion in tax breaksto the fossil fuel and nuclear industries.

G R E E N S C I S S O R S

10

By Erich Pica

President Bush and his cor-porate friendly cabinetmembers appear to beready and willing to dish-out as many subsidies to

polluters as their lobbyists can carryout of the White House. At the sametime the administration is funding anti-environmental actions, the federalbudget has plunged into deficit onceagain. After more than four years ofsurplus, the White House BudgetOffice estimates that the deficit will benearly $160 billion in 2002.

The Green Scissors Campaign,which has cut more than $26 billion inenvironmentally wasteful spendingover the last nine years, is watching theadministration closely. Hard-foughtGreen Scissors victories reducedspending on fossil fuels projects,forced mining companies to pay ade-quate bonds to clean up toxic minesites and kicked the nuclear powerindustry off the public dole. Yet theWhite House and Congress are stillcreating new ways to aid polluters.

Secretary of Treasury Paul O’Neillis heading a process in the Departmentof Treasury to re-write portions of thetax code. Although early in theprocess, any revisions of the tax codecould open a Pandora’s box of corpo-rate glut.

Supposedly arcane tax provisionshave provided billions of dollars topolluting industries. Once passed intolaw, reviews of tax provisions takeplace when they expire (usually five to10 years after passage), or whenCongress wants to change or modify aprovision, which is rarely done.

Revisiting or re-writing the taxcode is not inherently bad. In fact,Friends of the Earth strongly believesthe current tax code is one of the rootcauses of environmental destruction.The tax code creates huge economichurdles for recycling and renewableenergy production by continuing tolavish billions of dollars on extractiveindustries such as mining, logging andoil and gas development.Unfortunately, given the president’senergy plan and other environmental

debacles,hopes are not high that theenvironment will benefit from anadministration-revision of the tax code.

Reworking the tax code must notturn into another excuse for the admin-istration to give more of your taxdollars to polluting industries. Friendsof the Earth and the Green ScissorsCampaign will continue to fight exist-ing tax breaks that are corrupting thetax code as well as additional efforts tocreate new ones. ■

Green Scissors Make Sense Now More Than Ever –

As O’Neill Eyes Tax Code

Boondoggle in YourBackyard?Friends of the Earth is nowaccepting nominations for newissues to be considered in theGreen Scissors 2003 report. Ifyou have a program that youthink needs consideration, pleasesend an e-mail to Erich Pica,epica@foe.org, or 202-783-7400.

defeated an attempt by Reps.Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and RonKind (D-Wis.) to shift funding fromcrop subsidies to conservation. Andwhile the Senate passed a bill thatplaced a cap on subsidies, the eventualconference report had a bigger-than-ever pricetag of $190 billion.

Despite these disappointments, we scored several environmental

victories over the past two years.Environmentalists worked with abipartisan group of House members topass a series of appropriations amend-ments protecting public lands andimproving water quality. Our victoriesincluded prohibiting drilling in theGreat Lakes, protecting national mon-uments from energy exploration,lowering the amount of arsenic indrinking water, and banning drilling

off the Florida and California coast-lines. Environmentalists also madeheadway in the fight to overhaul theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers(Corps) by blocking a massive waterbill that failed to include reforms ofthe agency. The Corps is the nation’sbiggest destroyer of wetlands, and theoutlook for reforming this agency isnow better than ever. ■

Continued from Page 9

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 11

By Kristen Sykes

The Interior Department issupposed to be thenation’s principal conser-vation agency. However,as Friends of the Earth

continues to watchdog the actions ofInterior Department officials, we arefinding they are more concerned aboutconserving corporate profit rather thanthe environment.

Using the Freedom of InformationAct this past September, Friends of theEarth and the Citizens Coal Councilobtained calendars showing thatDepartment of Interior DeputySecretary J. Steven Griles met with hisformer energy company clients, afteragreeing not to, and worked on partic-ular issues that benefit them.

Griles was a lobbyist for over 40 coal, oil, gas and electric compa-nies and trade associations beforePresident Bush named him to theInterior post. He sold his lobbyingfirm and signed a recusal agreementpledging that while at Interior hewould not be involved in “any particu-lar matter involving specific parties inwhich any of my former clients is orrepresents a party.”

Back in May, Friends of the Earthcaught Griles violating his recusalagreement after he attempted to pres-sure the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency to change its analysis criticiz-ing a coal bed methane project in thePowder River Basin of Wyoming andMontana. Before his appointment tothe Interior Department, Griles workedas a lobbyist on behalf of several coalbed methane companies involved indrilling gas wells on public lands in thebasin.

“Once again we’ve caught Grileslobbying and meeting with his corpo-rate polluter buddies and violating hisethics agreement,” said Friends of theEarth. “President Bush should clean upthe dirty corporate influence at theInterior Department by firing Grilesimmediately.”

Meanwhile, Secretary of theInterior Gale A. Norton announced theappointment of Allan K. Fitzsimmons,who apparently knows little to nothingabout forestry, as the Department ofthe Interior’s Wildlands FuelCoordinator. In this newly createdposition Fitzsimmons will carry outthe Bush administrations’ so called“Healthy Forests Initiative,” to combatthe catastrophic wildfires that haveburned nearly 6 million acres of west-ern lands.

Environmental groups urged theadministration to focus on a strategythat reduces forest fire threats in theareas closest to communities. Yet as

written, the Bush plan would lead towholesale logging of national forestsby waiving environmental review.

To make things worse,Fitzsimmons appears to have neverworked in the forestry field and lacksexperience with forest ecology and firemanagement. In a number of articlesin academic journals, Fitzsimmonsstates that he does not believe in theconcept of an ecosystem and that heconsiders them to be simply “mentalconstructs.” In addition, he believesefforts to manage ecosystems to bejust an opportunity for new federalcontrols to infringe on economic activ-ity and property rights. Philosophicallyhe will fit in very well with PresidentBush’s other appointees at theDepartment of the Interior.

For more information aboutGriles and Fitzsimmons visitwww.foe.org/camps/leg/current/ ■

I N T E R I O R D E P A R T M E N T W A T C H D O G

The Interior Department –Devastating Our Public Lands

Our public lands could all start looking like these, since the new head of forest firemanagement at the Interior Department never worked in the forestry field and doesn’t evenbelieve ecosystems exist.

12

By Leslie Fields

In large part due to the obstruc-tionist role of the Unite States,negotiations at the U.N. WorldSummit on SustainableDevelopment (WSSD) in

Johannesburg, South Africa were pro-tracted and difficult and lacked theambitious outcomes of the previousSummit.

Only two documents were negoti-ated and adopted: the Plan ofImplementation (the Plan) and theJohannesburg Declaration onSustainable Development (theDeclaration). The Plan was designed asa framework to implement the com-mitments from the 1992 Rio Summit.

The Plan contained a shift in focusto a social and development agenda,which included poverty eradication,sanitation and health. Modest targetswere reiterated from the Millennium

Development Goals and other agree-ments.

The Declaration describes the roadfrom the Rio Summit and WSSD,emphasizes the challenges and illus-trates a commitment to sustainabledevelopment. With the United Statesobjecting vociferously to time-boundtargets and timetables, major areas ofdisagreement included: sanitation,renewable energy, energy subsidies,chemicals and health, biodiversity lossand fish stocks, natural resource degra-dation, the Rio Principles 7 and 15,governance, trade, finance, globaliza-tion, the Kyoto Protocol and health(including reproductive health) andhuman rights.

Determination DespiteOur Location Johannesburg is the largest city in theRepublic of South Africa, with thesprawl of Los Angeles and Atlanta

combined with the bustle of New YorkCity. The U.N. meetings were held inthe Sandton Convention Center,Sandton. Sandton is the richest suburb,in the richest province, in the richestcountry on the continent of Africa. Thecontrast between the gilded, yet lockeddown convention center and thepoverty of the outlying townships suchas Soweto and Alexandria was surreal.South Africa is only eight years out ofapartheid and much remains to bedone for the 85 million black peoplestill mired in vestiges of that racistregime.

The settings of the WSSD provedto be logistically very difficult for non-government organizations (NGOs) andcommunity activists interested inattending sessions. The NGO site wassome 37 miles away in a tired oldtheme park called Nasrec. Events suchas workshops, (on human rights, envi-ronmental justice and gender – just toname a few) commissions and a great

Earth Summit’s AgoniesI N T E R N A T I O N A L

We unveiled an art installation, “Hear our Voices,” outside the main entrance of the Earth Summit with 6,000 biodegradable statuesrepresenting the diverse voices of people struggling to defend their lives, their communities and their environment from giant multinationals.

Winter 2002 • Volume 32, Number 4 13

deal of networking commenced everyday, but few if any press made thejourney past downtown and the aban-doned gold mines to get to Nasrec.Needless to say, no governmental offi-cials ventured out either.

The South African Civil SocietySecretariat implemented an unreliablebus system by way of zones. Thus, ittook hours to get from one venue toanother in a day. The security was verytight, especially toward the end whenthe heads of state came into town. TheSouth Africans resurrected a pass sys-tem with much efficiency: We neededdifferent passes for almost every event.

The Troublesome Role ofthe United StatesThe Bush administration never wantedWSSD to succeed. A letter dated Aug. 2 from right wing foundationspraised President Bush’s decision notto go to WSSD. This letter alsoclaimed that global climate changewas the least important issue forWSSD. During all the prepatory meet-ings, the Bush administration tried toroll back from key Rio Earth Summitprinciples – major international agree-ments on climate change andbiodiversity established 10 years ago,while trying to roll in the Doha agendafor global free trade – an agenda thatpromotes global free trade over theenvironment and human welfare.

U.S. officials were not above backroom deals either. In the last waninghours, the Bush administration offi-cials tried to undermine the corporateaccountability negotiations. They triedto push their own interpretation of thecorporate accountability text onexhausted and unsuspecting delegates,by submitting a binding “Letter ofImplementation.” This would havemade the agreement on corporateaccountability only to do with “exist-ing” agreements –and scuttle thelanguage regarding developing newbinding international rules on environ-

mentally irresponsible behavior by cor-porations. Fortunately, due to somehard last-minute sleuthing by us andlobbying by our Friends of the EarthInternational network activists, the del-egates of Ethiopia and Norwaylaunched a successful proceduralobjection to the U.S. move.

Timetables? “No”Partnerships? “Yes”Although U.S. officials opposed tar-gets and timetables, WSSD promotedpartnerships to support the Plan ofImplementation commitment of halv-ing the proportion of people without

access to sanitation by 2015 and theMillennium Declaration Goal of halv-ing the proportion without safedrinking water also by 2015. DuringWSSD, U.S. officials announced $970million in investments on water andsanitation projects (of which only $20million is new money); the EuropeanUnion announced its “Water for Life”initiative; and the U.N. announcedabout $20 million worth of additionalwater and sanitation-related initiatives.U.S. officials led the fight to opposefirm targets on renewable energy, andinstead announced 32 fossil-fuelrelated “partnerships” with industry.

Next StepsIn many respects, WSSD is not over.Friends of the Earth will be vigilant inmonitoring important partnerships(and their funding). We are also plan-ning for the Fifth World TradeOrganization Ministerial meeting Sept. 2003, in Cancun, Mexico.Human rights and international envi-ronmental justice issues will beelevated within reorienting global eco-nomic policies towards a sustainabledevelopment framework, as opposed toacquiescing to the U.S.-led traderegime. The movement toward the cre-ation of a binding internationalframework for corporate accountabilityis gaining steam.

We will also be in the forefront ofthe domestic lobbying for anInternational Right to Know Act(IRTK) in Congress. IRTK will requirecompanies based in the United Statesor traded on U.S. stock exchanges todisclose information on overseas oper-ations along the lines of domesticdisclosure standards.

For more information onIRTK, visit: www.irtk.org. Formore information about the

WSSD, visit: http://www.foe.org/WSSD ■

U.N. MillenniumDevelopment Goals1 Eradicate extreme poverty

and hunger2 Achieve universal primary

education 3 Promote gender equality

and empower women4 Reduce child mortality5 Improve maternal health6 Combat HIV/AIDS,

malaria, and other diseases7 Ensure environmental sus-

tainability8 Develop a global partner-

ship for development

Rio Principle 7 States shall cooperate in a spiritof global partnership to con-serve, protect and restore thehealth and integrity of theEarth’s ecosystem.

Rio Principle 15In order to protect the environ-ment, care should be taken inadvance by States according totheir capabilities.

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

14

N O R T H W E S T

By Shawn Cantrell

In a story that madeheadlines all over thecountry this fall, morethan 200 grocers,famous chefs and restau-

rants and seafood distributorspledged not to purchase or sellgenetically engineered fish.Friends of the Earth, along withthe Center for Food Safety andClean Water Action, coordinatedthe pledge campaign. The sup-port illustrates the growingconcern about the environmentaland human health impacts of geneti-cally engineered fish.

We are helping spearhead the cam-paign to stop the domestic marketingand importation of genetically engi-neered fish – including a ban on theiruse or release into open net pens andponds.

“Scientists and corporations areplaying with genetics without knowingthe consequences. As a restaurantowner and chef, I chose to act responsi-bly by refusing to serve any geneticallyengineered fish,” said Eric Ripert, exec-utive chef of New York’s internationallyacclaimed and award-winning seafoodrestaurant, Le Bernadin.

The concern about the potentialintroduction of genetically engineeredfish arose after an application was filedwith the Food and Drug Administration(FDA) for market approval of an exper-imental salmon developed by AquaBounty Farms. Friends of the Earth andover 70 other organizations filed a legalaction with the federal government inMay 2001 seeking a moratorium on the

approval of genetically engineered fishuntil the ecological and human healthconsequences are fully examined.

Over 40,000 individuals joined theeffort and submitted comments to theFDA opposing approval of geneticallyengineered fish. The FDA couldapprove the application at any time, put-ting the first engineered fish on dinnerplates, grocery shelves and in restau-rants across the country.

Of particular ecological concern,are dozens of salmon populations onboth the Pacific and Atlantic coastsalready listed under the EndangeredSpecies Act. The release of fast-growinggenetically engineered salmon wouldlikely impose yet another significantburden on these wild fish species strug-gling to survive.

“I am concerned about the impactgenetically engineered fish could haveon wild fish populations. My restaurantdepends on the ability to provide cus-tomers with the best quality product,”said Jack Amon, owner of Alaska’sMarx Bro’s Café, and Member of theBoard of Directors of the National

Restaurant Association and theAlaska Seafood MarketingInstitute. “Genetically engi-neered fish escaping from opennet pens could be a major eco-logical disaster.”

Scientists from PurdueUniversity found that if just 60 genetically engineeredsalmon escaped from theirbreeding pens and joined a pop-ulation of wild salmon, the wildpopulation could become extinctin 40 generations of fish. A newstudy by the National Academyof Sciences also recognized the

immediate and serious human health,environmental and ethical concernsassociated with introducing geneticallyengineered animals, including fish, intothe food supply.

Even if developers of geneticallyengineered salmon are able to sterilizeevery fish egg they sell (a highlyunlikely prospect), genetically engi-neered salmon that escape into the wildwould still compete with wild fish forfood and habitat. Hundreds of thou-sands of conventionally-bred salmonescape every year from the fish farmsin the United States, Canada, Europeand South America. These are the samefish farms where genetically engineeredsalmon would likely be raised.

For more information onFriends of the Earth’sCampaign to Stop

Genetically Engineered Fish, contact Shawn Cantrell by e-mail atscantrell@foe.org or by phone at (206) 297-9460. Visit our website,http://www.foe.org/camps/reg/nw/salmon/. ■

Chefs Net Critical Masson Engineered Salmon

Genetically engineered salmon reach market size in 18 monthsinstead of three years, are more aggressive, eat more food andattract more wild mates, which threatens natural species.

Elemental T-Shirt$15 members, $18 non-membersThis vibrant four-colored cotton teeboldly represents the fourelements–fire, wind, earth and water.Available in size Large.

Bumper Stickers $2 each, $5 for all threeShow the world how you feel abouthigh-polluting Sport Utility Vehicles.The slogans came from a contest heldat www.suv.org.

Large Tote Bags$10 members, $15 non-membersThe perfect alternative topaper and plastic shop-ping bags. Our populartote bag features organiccotton and brighter shadesof blue and green.

Reuse Envelope Labels $5 members, $7 non-membersSave trees! Reuse your envelopeswith Friends of the Earth’s labels. Juststick the 3” x 5” label over the oldaddress and you can reuse oldenvelopes, reducing the amount ofwaste that you produce.

NA M E

AD D R E S S

CI T Y/STAT E/ZI P E-M A I L PH O N E

ITEM SIZE QUANTITY COST TOTAL

x =

x =

x $25 =

Subtotal:___________________________

Shipping:___________________________

Grand Total:___________________________

Allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery.Contact info: Make checks payable to “Friends of the Earth” and mail to Friends of the Earth Merchandise Department, 1025 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC20005-6303. To expedite your order, call toll-free 1(877) 843-8687, ext. 0 or order on-line from our secure web page at www.foe.org.

Shipping costs:

$0 - $5.99: $2$6 - $9.99: $3

$10 - $14.99: $3.50$15 - $19.99: $4

$20 - over: $5

❏ VISA ❏ MASTERCARD

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Expiration date: _________________________________________________________________________

Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________

F R I E N D S O F T H E E A R T H M E R C H A N D I S E

ORDER FORM

FoE Membership

PERIODICALS

POSTAGE PAID AT

WASHINGTON, DCAND ADDITIONAL

MAILING OFFICES

Changing your address?Please send mailing label and new address to:Friends of the Earth1025 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20005-6303

Printed with soy ink on 100% recycled paper, 30% post-consumer content. Bleached without chlorine.

Volume 32, No. 4

“Off the Books: How CorporationsHide Environmental and HumanRights Liabilities” is a 30-minute filmby Attorney Sanford Lewis thatdescribes the potential and limits of anenforceable, disclosure-based strategyfor corporate accountability.

Picking up on current public attention around corporate scandal,this film provokes discussion of broadissues regarding corporate disclosureof public health, social and environ-mental issues. It calls for betterenforcement and clearer reporting

standards from the Securities andExchange Commission.

Read more about the video andorder at www.offthebooks.org. Or fill outthe order form on the back of thispage. Cost is $18. ■

Video Calls for Corporate Accountability

Estate planning experts suggest reviewing your will annually. As a service to our members,Friends of the Earth is offering a free and concise booklet on tips to consider in preparing orupdating your will.

As you think about your will, please consider remembering Friends of the Earth in your plans. Help to leave this worldan even better place for our children and our children’s children.

❑ Please send me a free copy of How to Make a Will That Works.❑ I’d like to learn more about how to include Friends of the Earth in my estate plans. Please send me the appropriate wording

to bring to my attorney.❑ I have already included Friends of the Earth in my estate plans.

NAME (please print)

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

PHONE E-MAIL

Or call Diane Minor toll-free at 877-843-8687x 287 or e-mail dminor@foe.org.

We Don’t Inherit the Earth from Our Parents……We Borrow It from Our Children.