News from the South - Alabama News Feed

Looking to keep wildlife out of the ‘emergency room,’ states expand managers’ role

Published

2 months ago

May 19, 2025

Staff Editor

alabamareflector.com – Alex Brown – 2025-05-19 12:01:00

by Alex Brown, Alabama Reflector
May 19, 2025

This story originally appeared on Stateline.

State wildlife agencies have a big job.

While the federal government protects animals listed under the Endangered Species Act, states are tasked with keeping the vast majority of other species out of the “emergency room.” Habitat loss, pollution and climate change are making that job much more difficult.

At the same time, states are finding it harder to count on the hunting and fishing revenues that have long funded most of their work. Agencies say they have more challenges than ever before, and less money to take them on.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

In many states, lawmakers are rethinking the long-standing model for wildlife management. They’re considering new funding sources to make the agencies less reliant on license fees. They’re asking wildlife managers to expand their work beyond traditional “game” species, adding protections for threatened insects and other animals. And some are scrutinizing the commissions that have long governed wildlife management.

Some of the proposals have seen broad support from outdoors lovers who want to strengthen their wildlife agencies. Others have drawn opposition from sporting groups, who fear the new focus will diminish hunting and fishing opportunities.

“We’re seeing quite a bit of action this year,” said Logan Christian, wildlife and habitat specialist with the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, a forum for state lawmakers. “We definitely have noticed that states are working on strengthening their wildlife agencies.”

As Stateline previously reported, New Mexico enacted the most sweeping overhaul this year. It renamed the Department of Game & Fish as the Department of Wildlife, giving it a more explicit focus on non-game species. Budget writers provided $10.5 million in new funding over the next three years to help threatened species. And lawmakers created a new process for appointing the agency’s commissioners, with guidelines ensuring a diversity of expertise and experience.

Wildlife advocates in other states say the New Mexico overhaul was a game changer. But lawmakers elsewhere are taking a more piecemeal approach.

Dollars

Numerous states are reconsidering their wildlife agencies’ funding model.

“There’s definitely a growing awareness that the current management system is outdated and really unfit for 21st century challenges,” said Michelle Lute, executive director of Wildlife for All, a nonprofit focused on overhauling state wildlife governance. “State wildlife agencies are seeing that they can’t rely on hunting and fishing license fees to be able to do this work.”

There’s definitely a growing awareness that the current management system is outdated and really unfit for 21st century challenges.

– Michelle Lute, executive director of Wildlife for All

Earlier this year, lawmakers in Utah enacted a new tax on wind and solar projects that will help fund the state’s wildlife agency. The revenue could double the department’s funding to protect non-game species, from $5 million to $10 million.

“We have a funding model in place for game species,” said Paul Thompson, administrator of the Species Protection Account with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. “Funding to work on some of our native species programs has been really hard to come by.”

The new revenue could allow the agency to invest in more biologists, conservation easements, watershed restoration projects and native fish hatchery programs. State Rep. Casey Snider, the Republican who sponsored the bill, argued that the clean energy sector should pay because its development is harming Utah’s habitat.

“Wind and solar projects have an outsized impact on [non-game] species, and they have not been contributing financially,” he said.

But industry leaders said the law will threaten the state’s energy development.

“[The measure will] severely strain the economics of an existing project and send a negative message to developers and the financial institutions that provide capital for these projects,” said Theresa Foxley, chief of staff to rPlus Energies, a renewable developer, in testimony to lawmakers.

Lawmakers in Oregon are considering an increase to the state’s tax on hotel and short-term rental stays to help fund non-game wildlife work. The proposal would bring in about $30 million annually. State Rep. Ken Helm, the bill’s Democratic sponsor, said the state wildlife agency’s division to manage non-game species “has come and gone over the last 30 years as funding is available.”

Growing concerns about climate change and biodiversity have created urgency to find a stable funding source, he said. Helm said the lodging tax is a logical source, because the state’s tourism industry is centered on the outdoors. He noted that Oregon’s natural resources agencies receive only a tiny fraction of the state’s general revenue.

Travel and tourism groups oppose the bill, arguing it could drive visitors elsewhere. Helm has also proposed a bill that would bring in wildlife funding through an income tax increase.

He said his message to fellow lawmakers was: “I’ve given you two ways to get the money we need for this agency. Nobody’s been able to come up with a better idea. Just pick one.”

The bill was heard in committee earlier this month, but has not yet advanced.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in Hawaii approved a “green fee” — a lodging tax increase of 0.75% that Democratic Gov. Josh Green’s office estimates will bring in $100 million annually to help protect the state from climate change. While the fund is not explicitly focused on wildlife, it’s expected to contribute to efforts such as coral reef restoration and watershed protection that will benefit important habitats.

State Rep. Amy Perruso, a Democrat who was among the advocates for a green fee, said the COVID-19 pandemic was a wakeup call.

“With the absence of tourists, we saw a lot more fish in the ocean, everything about the environment was so much more healthy because we didn’t have 10 million extra people,” she said. “If we’re going to do something to protect the environment, [tourism] is a logical connection.”

Washington state was among the first to significantly invest in non-game conservation through state tax revenue, with legislation enacted two years ago. The budget passed by lawmakers this session continues that work, with $14 million set aside for biodiversity and species recovery each of the next two years.

Lawmakers in Kansas and North Carolina also proposed using more general fund revenue for wildlife work, although those measures have not advanced.

Mission

In other states, lawmakers are focused on expanding their wildlife agencies’ mission to more non-game species. Last year, Colorado gave wildlife managers the authority to manage insects and other invertebrates, as well as rare plants.

“Invertebrates are wildlife, and their conservation benefits the entire ecosystem, including the species [state wildlife officials] traditionally managed,” said Richard Reading, vice chair of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission. “They do everything from creating our soils to filtering our water to pollinating the food we eat.”

Reading also serves as vice president of science and conservation at the Butterfly Pavilion, an insect zoo. He noted that studies are showing that many invertebrate species are in rapid decline. In addition to expanding the agency’s authority, lawmakers provided funding for six staff members to take on the additional work.

A similar bill in Nevada, focused on invertebrates, advanced through the Assembly’s natural resources committee.

“There’s definitely concerns about declines in pollinator species,” said Assemblymember Howard Watts, a Democrat who sponsored the bill. “Our wildlife agency can and should take proactive action to do research, surveys and habitat improvement to keep these species off the [endangered species list].”

Watts said the bill would allow wildlife managers to consider insects in state plans to protect imperiled species. He said the Nevada Department of Wildlife has requested an entomologist position if it’s asked to take on the additional species. Beyond that, he said, the measure would not require additional money, as it’s focused on voluntary, proactive work, rather than additional regulations.

Another bill in Pennsylvania would expand wildlife managers’ authority to include insects. That measure has been approved by the House Environmental and Natural Resources Protection Committee.

Sporting groups have largely been supportive of efforts to provide new funding sources to manage non-game species. But some are skeptical of plans to expand agencies’ mission without an increase in revenue.

“Most hunters and anglers understand that healthy game populations are dependent on ecosystem integrity,” said Devin O’Dea, Western policy and conservation manager with Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, a nonprofit focused on public lands. “But when you take a model that’s been developed with the intent of enforcing regulations for fish and game species, expand that scope without funding and additional capacity, it’s a recipe for something to fall off the plate.”

Governance

Meanwhile, some legislators want to rethink the commission model that oversees wildlife governance. Critics say that governors often select commissioners who are hunting guides, farmers and political donors. Once appointed, they enact wildlife policies to suit their economic interests.

Florida state Rep. Anna V. Eskamani, a Democrat, drafted a bill that would overhaul the state’s Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Her proposal would increase the board from seven to nine members. It would designate seats for scientists, conservationists, local officials, farmers, hunters and anglers.

“The commission has made decisions not based on science or conservation, but based on developers or landowners that engage in agricultural practices,” she said. “We tried to strike a balance to ensure there are voices with an environmental background, with a conservation and wildlife background, with an academic background.”

The bill did not advance, but Eskamani said grassroots support is building for systemic changes in wildlife management.

Some sporting groups are more wary of commission overhaul proposals.

“We have seen examples where proposed changes to commissions were politically motivated or motivated by anti-hunting and anti-angling interests,” said Kent Keene senior manager for Western states and agriculture policy with the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, a group that promotes hunting and fishing priorities on Capitol Hill. “When those changes are focused on science-based needs, then the sportsmen’s community has a long history of supporting those steps to ensure we are protecting our heritage.”

Some hunting and fishing groups have emphasized that the expanded mission should come with additional funding, so agencies aren’t stretched thin. Keene noted that hunters and anglers pay an excise tax on the purchase of gear, which provides an important funding source for wildlife agencies. Some have proposed a similar “backpack tax” on gear for hikers, birdwatchers and others.

Another proposal in New Hampshire would give the wildlife agency’s executive director the authority to make policy decisions, relegating the Fish and Game Commission to an advisory body. That bill did not advance.

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

Alabama Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alabama Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Brian Lyman for questions: info@alabamareflector.com.

The post Looking to keep wildlife out of the ‘emergency room,’ states expand managers’ role appeared first on alabamareflector.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This article discusses the challenges and evolving approaches to wildlife conservation and funding in various U.S. states, highlighting efforts to expand protections beyond traditional game species and to diversify funding sources, including new taxes and fees. The focus on environmental conservation, support for climate-related fees, and the framing around expanding government roles in wildlife protection align with generally center-left priorities. However, the piece presents multiple perspectives, including opposition from industry and sporting groups, maintaining a balanced tone without strong partisan language.

Up Next

News 5 Now at 12:30 p.m. | May 19, 2025

Don't Miss

Alert Day Tuesday: Severe Weather returns to Alabama’s forecast Tuesday night

News from the South - Alabama News Feed

Anti-abortion leader argues US was not ready for Roe or Dobbs decisions

Published

13 hours ago

July 5, 2025

Staff Editor

alabamareflector.com – Sofia Resnick – 2025-07-05 07:01:00

by Sofia Resnick, Alabama Reflector
July 5, 2025

Despite heading one of the oldest anti-abortion organizations in the country at a time of huge upheaval for abortion rights, John Mize is new to the movement.

The father of four became the CEO of Americans United for Life in January 2024. Previously he worked for the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation, after more than a decade in the for-profit health care sector. Mize said he didn’t grow up in what’s traditionally known as the “pro-life” movement, but he was drawn to this position because of his Christian faith and his involvement in the foster care community.

“My wife and I have been foster parents for like a decade; we’ve had a lot of kids in our house,” Mize said. “I come from very humble origins. My mom was pregnant with me, and my biological father cheated and left her with two little boys and me, and she chose to give me life.”

AUL is older than its CEO by more than a decade, founded two years before the U.S. Supreme Court established federal abortion rights in Roe v. Wade in 1973. The organization published legal strategy on how to reverse Roe through the courts, while steadily helping to pass and then defend hundreds of state laws that incrementally affixed regulations and gestational limits to pregnancy termination, making abortion increasingly harder to access. Currently, AUL is pushing restrictions on medication abortion at the federal and state level. Mize previously told States Newsroom that when he interviewed for the position at AUL he talked about using insurance claims data to research harms of medication abortion.

John Mize, CEO of Americans United for Life, said the group would continue pushing state and federal policies that make abortions harder to provide and access and would help pass a bipartisan federal bill to help fund birth costs. (Courtesy of John Mize)

The organization’s dominant message is that women are victims of abortion and are preyed on by organizations that provide abortion, like Planned Parenthood. In its catalog of anti-abortion model legislation, AUL has a section called “Defunding Abortion.” The group filed an amicus brief in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, in which the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled that Medicaid patients don’t have the right to sue to see the doctor of their choice. The decision will allow South Carolina, and likely other states, to exclude from government health programs any reproductive health clinic that also offers abortion. At issue in the case, South Carolina’s governor had removed abortion clinics from its list of Medicaid providers, but the services covered were not related to abortion. Reproductive health advocates expect far-reaching impacts from the decision, combined with proposed cuts affecting reproductive health clinics in the federal reconciliation bill still working its way through Congress.

“Now, more states can move forward with their plans to defund Planned Parenthood,” Mize wrote in an email newsletter after the Medina decision.

Going into the third year that Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization’s widespread effects ripple throughout the country, Mize said AUL would continue incrementally pushing state and federal policies that make abortions harder to provide and access. Mize said AUL is also eager to help pass a bipartisan federal bill to help fund birth costs. When it comes to some of the reported consequences of Dobbs, like miscarriage treatment denials, Mize said some clarity in laws are likely needed. But he, like other leaders and doctors who oppose abortion, believe it is the responsibility of medical associations like the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG) to create state-specific guidelines around abortion bans.

“Clinicians should be 100% protected in providing miscarriage care,” Mize said. “If it’s an area where there is still ambiguity, I would think the medical societies would be the best place to go to help clear up that ambiguity.”

ACOG has published post-Dobbs guidelines, including guidance on health exceptions in abortion bans, which says “the practice of medicine … cannot be distilled down to a one-page document or list that is generalizable for every situation,” and encourages doctors to focus on a patient’s individual circumstances over a state’s law. ACOG has also published questions for hospitals systems and guidance addressing prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) and when abortion care might become necessary.

In an emailed statement, an ACOG spokesperson said, “ACOG cannot and does not provide legal advice to its members. ACOG’s clinical guidance is based on scientific evidence and data, and science does not change based on state laws.”

This interview with Mize was edited for brevity and clarity.

States Newsroom: How would you characterize this period since Dobbs?

John Mize: I would say there’s been significant wins. There’s been significant setbacks. It’s a much more complicated world than it was. Certainly I don’t believe that Dobbs resolved the issue. I think the best thing that came out of Dobbs, from our perspective, is that there’s not a constitutional right to abortion, but now we’re in this very complex world where you have different states that have different populations and popular support for different laws.

SN: The stories of women that have come out having been denied miscarriage care, do you recognize that as a problem, as a consequence of these state bans?

JM: Yeah … any potential ambiguity needs to be flushed out if it hasn’t already, stripping away as much as possible the agendas on both sides.

The laws are not super complicated across the country. There’s no law that should prosecute a woman for a D&C. There’s no law that disallows a woman that is having a miscarriage from receiving treatment. Now, with that being said, there might be confusion at the clinic level, and that’s where the guidance from medical societies is really important. And they’re not providing that guidance. So, I point the finger, largely at medical societies, like ACOG, for example, not providing really clear guidance about what the law says, even though the laws, again, the law’s not super complicated. In Texas, for example, I think it’s like a couple of paragraphs. It’s very clear what the law says.

[Editor’s note: After Texas banned abortion, dozens of women testified that their medically necessary abortions were delayed or denied, and at least three women died. This year the legislature passed a clarification to the law called the Life of the Mother Act, which allows abortion if the pregnant woman has a“life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function.” The law notes that “a life-threatening physical condition is not necessarily one actively injuring the patient.”]

SN: Americans United for Life helps write laws that implicate people’s health care, implicate people’s medical treatments. … ACOG was not pushing for these kinds of laws, but you want ACOG to be the ones to try to help states understand them. But at the end of the day, a lot of these abortion bans were not really written by medical providers, right?

JM: I think if you believe that elective abortion is not a medical necessity, then your opinion is going to be a lot different than if you do believe that it’s a medical necessity. And so we hold a very strong opinion that it’s not a medical necessity, that it’s elective. And because of that, honoring the dignity of human life in the womb changes our opinion significantly in that regard, because then it becomes an ethical issue and a moral issue, and more than a healthcare issue.

SN: I’ve been talking to some of the organizations and activists that track pregnancy criminalization, like Pregnancy Justice. … And there have been a couple of these cases where pregnancy outcomes have resulted in charges — they’re not necessarily charged under abortion bans, but the thesis is that with the escalation of abortion bans, more prosecutors are emboldened to charge women for their outcomes. Even if they’re not charging them for the death of the fetus, they’re charging them for something.

JM: I absolutely loathe the idea of prosecuting women, even women that have had abortions. I don’t feel like we are in any sort of capacity to make an assumption as to why a woman has gotten an abortion. In fact, we should be doing the opposite of persecuting. We should be offering to provide post-abortive support services for that woman, because, again, you don’t know what’s happened. She could have been coerced. She could have been forced to have an abortion. She could be absolutely in a very difficult financial situation.

SN: How do you think that AUL has helped people who might have chosen abortion because of their finances or because they were in a domestic or abusive situation, or all the reasons that people choose abortion? How do you think in these past three years, AUL has helped more people avoid abortion and have their babies?

JM: I mean, you look at states that have implemented good pro-life policy, and I think you do see a decrease in the abortive rate.

[National abortion rates have increased since Dobbs, according to abortion-rights organizations like the Guttmacher Institute and the Society of Family Planning, but there are record rates of patients traveling to other states for abortion, as well as accessing abortion medication via telemedicine.]

And, I think it’s policies like Make Birth Free that are super important, and we need to be doing more of them. We also were very active in the extension of the Child Tax Credit. I’m a firm believer in the baby bonus. And the next thing I’d love to begin addressing, from a policy perspective, is, how can we further encourage marriage.

[Make Birth Free refers to a policy recommendation from AUL, which alongside groups like ACOG has endorsed a bipartisan bill in Congress that would require private health insurance companies to fully cover the costs of childbirth and related maternity care.]

SN: With Make Birth Free, what do you see the prospects of that passing?

JM: I think there’s a lot of momentum. We’ve got to get through this big bill and reconciliation, and I think that the attention is going to be drawn to what’s next. This is bipartisan. It has some really big names backing it, and I know there’s an effort in the House to move legislation, as well. So, as they run up to the midterms, they’re going to be looking for things that they can say, “Hey, we were bipartisan, we’re helping families.” So I think there’s actually an opportunity to get this piece of legislation passed.

SN: When it comes to the One Big Beautiful Bill and some of the projected cuts to Medicaid and some of the moves with Title X, what do you think about that in terms of the goals of trying to make it easier for people to have babies when they want to?

JM: Certainly I believe that Medicaid reform is absolutely needed. I have two children on Medicaid. I have a child with a disability, and I have a child that we adopted from foster care. And unfortunately, the way that the reimbursement structure is established from the Affordable Care Act, healthy individuals who are enrolled into Medicaid are reimbursed at a much higher level from the federal government than my daughter and my son, and so there’s an incentive to enroll healthy, able-bodied adults into Medicaid. That to me, that’s where we need to solve the problem, and in fact, I think in doing so, that will vastly increase the benefits for people that really do need Medicaid.

SN: How do you feel about the so-called abortion abolitionist movement?

JM: This idea that we should abolish all abortion; not only is it not very realistic, I think it doesn’t follow where the public is right now.

When the pendulum swings too fast, one way or the other, it will tack back, and that’s something at AUL, we’ve always been incremental in nature, and we don’t believe in getting ahead of public sentiment that would put this country in a position where it’s not ready for, for example, a constitutional amendment on life. Just like I would argue a portion of the country was never ready for Roe, a portion of the country would never be ready for the opposite.

The post Anti-abortion leader argues US was not ready for Roe or Dobbs decisions appeared first on alabamareflector.com

Political Bias Rating: Right-Leaning

This article presents a clear right-leaning bias by focusing on the perspective and activities of Americans United for Life (AUL), a prominent anti-abortion organization. The language emphasizes the organization’s goals to restrict abortion access and portrays abortion providers like Planned Parenthood negatively. It highlights pro-life policies and the CEO’s Christian faith, fostering a sympathetic view toward anti-abortion efforts. While the article includes some contextual information about abortion-rights groups and medical associations, the framing and emphasis primarily support conservative, pro-life positions, reflecting a right-leaning ideological stance.

News from the South - Alabama News Feed

Huntsville Celebrates Independence Day At Mid City | July 4, 2025 | News 19 at 10 p.m.

Published

21 hours ago

July 4, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WHNT News 19 – 2025-07-04 22:31:43

SUMMARY: Huntsville’s Independence Day celebration at Mid City featured a packed crowd enjoying a full day of festivities, including live music, sparklers, and family-friendly activities at Hollow Park. Attendees, some traveling from as far as St. Louis, Missouri, shared that it’s a growing tradition to gather peacefully with family and friends. The highlight was a spectacular 25-minute fireworks show that wrapped up the evening, creating lasting memories. Despite the large turnout, the festive atmosphere continued as people prepared to leave, with ongoing music and anticipation of heavy traffic as the event concluded.

Today is Independence Day, and people all over the Tennessee Valley spent the afternoon celebrating.

News 19 is North Alabama’s News Leader! We are the CBS affiliate in North Alabama and the Tennessee Valley since November 28, 1963.

https://whnt.com/
https://www.facebook.com/whntnews19
https://www.instagram.com/whntnews19/
https://twitter.com/whnt

Source

News from the South - Alabama News Feed

News 5 NOW at 5:30pm | July 4, 2025

Published

1 day ago

July 4, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WKRG – 2025-07-04 17:50:03

SUMMARY: A Nissan recall affects 480,000 Rogue, Altima, and Infiniti SUVs from 2019-2020 due to a power loss risk; owners will be notified for free repairs. The Mobile Museum of Art now offers free entry every Thursday to all Alabama residents through September 30, expanding from Mobile County only. The 51st annual Grand Bay Watermelon Festival continues with contests and free watermelon, ending with fireworks tonight. Weather for Gulf Coast fireworks looks mostly clear, with a slight chance of showers in northwest Florida. Marines from North Carolina will assist ICE in Florida with non-law enforcement duties. Locals share Fourth of July grilling plans, and a poll reveals 71% call drink sleeves “koozies.” Stay safe and hydrated this holiday.

A big car recall for Nissan owners, a museum in Mobile expanding its free entry, plus what kind of weather you can expect during firework shows tonight.

Source