It is particularly special for its accessibility, providing a serene environment where you can observe diverse wildlife at the intersection of various ecosystems. The refuge is not just “a park.” It’s a spectacular destination for birders, paddlers, SUPers, recreational anglers and hunters—and, most importantly, a vital landing spot for migrating birds. It is also a living landscape of Indigenous history, outdoor recreation, but facing growing development pressure.

Grab your binoculars, breathe in the fresh air, and soak in the sights. Now look up. You’ll find a towering tree cradling a massive bald eagle nest. Now peer toward the shore: In the shallows at low tide, you’ll see a great egret fishing quietly. Further downstream, the cackle of a kingfisher hovering over the water breaks the silence.

Just off Interstate 5, less than an hour from Portland, this mosaic of wetlands, grasslands and forest offers an immediate escape into the wild. But Ridgefield is more than a scenic stop. It is a critical resting and feeding ground along the Pacific Flyway, a place where thousands of migrating birds can land, refuel and continue their journey. It is also a living landscape of Indigenous history, outdoor recreation and growing development pressure.

An abundance of birds and history

Established in 1965, the Refuge is a lifeline for millions of migratory birds making their way along the Pacific Flyway, the major north-south flyway for migratory birds in the Americas, extending from Alaska to Patagonia. More than 200 bird species have been observed here, including large numbers of ducks and geese. Peak migration populations are estimated to include 35,000 geese, 3,000 swans, and 1,500 cranes.

For thousands of years, the area has been home to Chinookan Peoples of the Lower Columbia River. In 1805, it was a landing spot for the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Camping near Post Office Lake, Clark may have lost some precious Zzzzzs due to the prolific birdlife of the area.

He wrote: “I could not sleep for the noise kept by the Swans, Geese, white & black brant, Ducks &c. on an opposite base, & Sand hill Crane, they were emensely numerous and their noise horrid.”

Despite the raucous birdlife, there is a rich history of Native settlements here. The village of Cathlapotle, excavated in the 1990s, is located on what is now the refuge’s Carty Unit and was one of the largest villages on the river.

New development at the water’s edge

National wildlife refuges face many challenges today, among them, the lack of adequate funding. The Ridgefield Refuge is no different. But now the refuge is facing pressure from a different direction. A proposed 40-acre waterfront development would bring a hotel, housing and retail space to the opposite shore of Lake River.

The Port of Ridgefield says the project would generate jobs and economic activity. Conservationists caution that the potential economic benefits could come at considerable and irreversible environmental cost.

Habitat fragmentation and degradation are among the first potential impacts, coupled with runoff pollution from the hotel and housing developments. Motor oil, trash and other pollutants could flow directly into the water without treatment.

What about the birds? 

Corina Newsome of the National Wildlife Federation said “migrating birds already face many challenges. National wildlife refuges provide places where birds can feed, breed, nest and rest.

They need healthy habitat, free from heavy traffic, bright lights and excessive noise. These refuges also give the public access to experience the incredible bird diversity found in the region, and to witness the amazing spectacle of migration.”

The benefits to endangered fish species of the area should not be overlooked either, said James Adkins, executive director of the Association of Northwest Steelheaders.

“Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge is most often thought of as a vital refuge for migratory birds, but the wetland, lake and riverine habitat in and around the refuge provides critical rearing areas for endangered fish species throughout their life cycle,” said Adkins. “By attempting to capitalize on the benefits of the wildlife refuge for nature and the public enjoyment, the proposed development will end up compromising the integrity of the entire ecosystem.”

Flight for birds, sights for birders

As fall approaches, the action is already underway for the many birders who flock to national wildlife refuges along the Columbia River Basin. Fall migration has begun, and the skies of the Pacific Flyway are full of motion. In mid-September, nearly 900,000 birds passed through Clark County, home to the Ridgefield Refuge. The figures climb by approximately 100,000 birds a night and will gain momentum through November.

Fast facts for birdwatchers along the Pacific Flyway: 

• During fall migration, most birds pass through the contiguous U.S. from early September through October.
• Migration is largely invisible from the ground. Birds usually begin migrating 30 to 45 minutes after sunset, with the greatest number in flight two to three hours later.
• Migrating birds regularly fly between 1,000 and 3,000 feet, with some flying as high as  10,000 feet above ground! Seasonal timing and weather conditions can  impact their migration patterns.

Pine, or conifer, needles are leaves that evolved into a very different shape from the flat, broad deciduous leaves we normally think of as leaves. They’re narrow, waxy, and tough, and built to hang on through cold and drought rather than drop and regrow every year.

A pine tree’s needles come bundled in little sheathed clusters called fascicles, with either two, three, or five to a bundle. Each one of these is doing the same thing broad leaves do—catching light and turning it into food through photosynthesis.

Evergreen Doesn’t Mean Forever

We tend to learn to sort trees into two large bins: deciduous trees that drop their leaves, and evergreen trees that keep theirs. But “evergreen” doesn’t mean a needle lasts forever. It means that the tree as a whole will always be green, because it will always be holding a few years’ worth of leaves at once.

Most pine needles live somewhere between two and five years before dropping to the ground. Because the tree sheds only its innermost, oldest needles while the newest growth stays green at its branch tips, this loss usually goes unnoticed. Eastern white pines are the exception: they shed so many two- and three-year old needles at once that the interior of the tree turns vibrant yellow in the fall!

No pine ever sheds its needles all at once. Instead, they release needles to the ground in a slow, steady trickle, year-round or in short bursts like the white pine. The result on the forest floor is not a seasonal blanket but a deep, springy, ever-renewing layer. And that layer is habitat.

What Lives in Needle Duff

A thick layer of dead needles may look devoid of life, but peel that layer back and you’ll find one of the busiest neighborhoods in your garden. The mat of fallen needles, often called duff, shelters countless tiny species, including mites, beetles, spiders, ants, and centipedes.

These invertebrates serve as valuable food for the toads, salamanders, turtles, and snakes that live on and under the needle layer. Because most of our backyard birds depend on insects to feed their young, needle duff can also provide a buffet for many bird species.

Learn about the National Wildlife Federation’s work to restore longleaf pine habitat here!

Needle Layer vs. Broadleaf Layer

Needles are built differently from broadleaves, and they behave differently once they fall. A waxy cuticle, and slow-to-digest compounds means needles decompose far more gradually. Where a broadleaf layer can be half-gone by midsummer, matted down and well on its way to soil, a needle layer breaks down at a patient, steady pace and may remain for years after the tree dies.

Slow decomposition has its own gifts. Needle duff is durable and deep, and its interlocking, water-shedding structure knits into a mat that stays put on slopes and open ground where lighter leaves would simply blow or wash away. Instead of a seasonal blanket that arrives in fall and thins by summer, it offers steady, year-round cover to wildlife. Different tenants, a different rhythm, but still unmistakably alive.

So when the leaves come down this fall, remember that the needles coming down alongside them are leaves too. They’re feeding the soil, holding the ground in place, and sheltering an entire understory of small lives!

Learn how backyard birds use the leaf layer and take action this year by reducing your yard waste and putting the leaves to work!

A Place to Forage

Backyard birds may love your feeders, but most of their food comes from foraging in the natural environment. The leaf layer is a great place to forage. Under the leaves hide many food sources: fallen nuts and seeds, insects, and invertebrates. The leaves provide a moist environment where many of these small creatures thrive and hide. 

Birds that forage in the leaves can use their feet to sift through and uncover food. Plus, the leaf layer offers a good amount of camouflage from predators while birds are searching for food! You can often find red and brown species like thrushes, sparrows, and juncos foraging in the leaf layer. 

Nesting Material

Come breeding season, birds need a wealth of materials to use in their nests. Many species of backyard birds use fallen leaves and twigs. By leaving these materials unraked or in a pile at the edge of your garden, you are supplying birds with key building materials. 

Not only this, but some species, like Kentucky warblers and ovenbirds, will even build their nests nestled into the leaf layer. A deep leaf layer plays a crucial role in their nesting success, providing it with effective camouflage from predators as well as warmth for the young. 

Supports the Food Web

Even birds that may not directly visit the leaf layer to forage still benefit from the fallen leaves. A lot of insects spend most or even just part of their life in the leaves. For example, many butterflies and moths will overwinter there and those fireflies we love to see in the summer often spend the first stages of their life in the leaves too. 

All of these insects and arthropods are an essential part of the food web, and birds are especially dependent on them. In fact, about 95% of North American terrestrial birds rely on insects to some extent to rear their young. Unfortunately, terrestrial bird species dependent on such insect food have declined by a startling 2.9 billion individuals over the last 50 years, a 111-fold difference from species that do not depend on insects.

Read up on some of the species that depend on the leaf layer:

• Fireflies
• Moths and Butterflies
• Eastern Red Bat
• Seven Species that Need You to Leave the Leaves

Thank You to Our Habitat Champion: Wild Birds Unlimited!

Not only have Wild Birds Unlimited and its founder, Jim Carpenter, been amazing advocates for birds, but they have long understood the connection between birds and the larger need for habitat restoration. While seed feeders do a great job of supporting songbirds, most seed-eating species still depend on insects to feed their young. These insects, in turn, depend on native habitat. 

It’s clear that birds and native habitat are intrinsically connected. With this knowledge, Wild Birds Unlimited has been a staunch advocate for creating habitat as a way to support birds and other wildlife. This stance has formed the strong foundation of their long partnership with the National Wildlife Federation’s Certified Wildlife Habitat® program.

Los polinizadores son esenciales para la vida silvestre y su contribución es vital para los ecosistemas y la cadena de alimentos. Todas las abejas, mariposas, polillas, murciélagos y colibríes autóctonos son polinizadores de las plantas que proporcionan los alimentos de los seremos humanos, crean los hábitats de otras especies de la fauna, estabilizan y mantienen los suelos. Lamentablemente, debido a la destrucción del hábitat, el uso de pesticidas, las enfermedades, el cambio climático y las especies invasoras, los polinizadores están disminuyendo en toda Norteamérica.

• Más de 1 de cada 5 especies de polinizadores tiene un riesgo elevado de extinción en Norteamérica, según un estudio liderado por NatureServe.
• A nivel mundial, en promedio, el 85% de las especies de plantas con flores dependen de la polinización animal. Esto incluye plantas silvestres que forman la columna vertebral de las redes tróficas, estabilizan los suelos, regulan los ciclos del agua y proporcionan hábitat a otras especies.
• El declive en los polinizadores de fauna silvestre provoca descensos paralelos en las plantas que dependen de ellos, con efectos en cascada en muchas otras especies.
• Las investigaciones demuestran que la pérdida de polinizadores puede reducir la rendición de los cultivos y afectar la nutrición, amenazando la salud humana.

La creación de un centro nacional para conservar a los polinizadores

Para afrontar la crisis de los polinizadores, el Departamento del Interior estableció el Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores, en el Servicio de Pesca y Vida Silvestre de EE. UU. (USFWS). A pesar de su historial y logros significativos, su futuro está en riesgo debido los recortes presupuestales que han sido propuestos para el año fiscal 2027.

Desde su fundación en 2022, el Centro ha sido una entidad de colaboración entre gestores responsables de tierras, científicos, líderes de programas y socios comunitarios para compartir buenas prácticas y coordinar los esfuerzos de conservación de los polinizadores a nivel nacional.

Construyendo las bases

Las principales acciones de conservación del Centro han estado enfocadas en apoyar la salud de los polinizadores:

• El Plan de Acción para Polinizadores. El Centro reunió a más de 170 grupos socios de conservación de los polinizadores y creó el Plan de Acción para Polinizadores, guiando los esfuerzos de conservación en los Estados Unidos.
• Dos herramientas emblemáticas, la North American BeeTool y la Monarch Conservation Opportunities Tool, han proporcionado mapas y directrices a los socios y gestores de las tierras en EE. UU., Canadá y México. Estas herramientas ayudan a identificar los lugares donde las acciones en favor de la conservación son más necesarias y tienen mayor impacto.
• Otros programas como las encuestas de ADN ambiental (eADN), las evaluaciones de hábitats asistidas por drones y otros análisis, han sido fundamentales para reunir a los investigadores y proporcionar datos basados en la ciencia que apoyan la conservación de los polinizadores.

El Plan de Acción para Polinizadores incluye aumentar la disponibilidad de las semillas y las plantas autóctonas; simplificar las regulaciones para crear hábitats; mejora la colaboración e integración de las iniciativas de conservación y tomar en cuenta las decisiones acerca del uso del suelo y las nuevas infraestructuras.

Un ejemplo, es la iniciativa de “Colaboración de Monarcas del Oeste de San Joaquín”, en el valle central de California, en donde se ha desarrollado una estrategia regional de conservación de las mariposas monarca con un plan de trabajo de dos años.

Estudios y monitoreo del hábitat de los polinizadores

Los estudios y el monitoreo del hábitat son la columna vertebral de la conservación eficaz de los polinizadores. En 2024, gracias al trabajo del Centro, se estudiaron los Refugios Nacionales de Vida Silvestre y los distritos de gestión de humedales para determinar la situación de los hábitats y las poblaciones de los polinizadores, así como examinar el uso de pesticidas y la restauración de praderas. Los resultados de estos estudios ayudaron a identificar los lugares donde los polinizadores están prosperando, donde tienen dificultades y es necesario fortalecer las colaboraciones.

La importancia del financiamiento para la protección de los polinizadores

La propuesta de recortar el presupuesto federal para el año fiscal 2027, incluiría eliminar hasta el 20% de los fondos del Servicio de Pesca y Vida Silvestre de EE. UU., poniendo en peligro a los programas del Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores y perjudicando la recuperación de estas especies de la vida silvestres.

El financiamiento del Centro se encuentra dentro de las asignaciones de Aplicaciones Científicas y Refugios Nacionales de Vida Silvestre, lo que hace que su financiamiento sea aún más vulnerable.

Reducir los fondos del Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores significa:

• Reducir el personal, eliminando las herramientas y las colaboraciones que son necesarias para la conservación.
• Reducir los recursos para mantener el hábitat y monitorear a los polinizadores.
• Eliminar las oportunidades para formar a los gestores de las tierras, los líderes comunitarios y la próxima generación de expertos en polinizadores.

No podemos tomar a la ligera el impacto que tendría reducir los fondos del Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores, especialmente teniendo en cuenta las crecientes amenazas que enfrentan.

Defendiendo la Conservación de los Polinizadores

Los polinizadores no tienen voz y no pueden expresar el gran valor que aportan a nuestros ecosistemas y nuestra salud. El Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores es una importante voz que ayuda a conectar la ciencia y sus herramientas prácticas en favor de estas especies que son vitales. Todos podemos amplificar esa voz siguiendo las siguientes recomendaciones:

• Contacta a los líderes de tu comunidad. Pídeles que incluyan presupuestos para conservar polinizadores y planificar del uso del suelo teniendo en cuenta proyectos de transporte, energía y programas agrícolas. Anímalos a fomentan alianzas con iniciativas federales, como el Plan de Acción para los Polinizadores.
• Haz que los polinizadores formen parte de la conversación sobre la conservación ambiental. Resalta la conexión entre el hábitat de los polinizadores y las decisiones que favorecen su conservación. Guía tu mensaje con información fiable; ¡Asegúrate de revisar bien tus datos! La información creíble es más poderosa que el mensaje que pretende ser más fuerte.
• Defiende la capacidad de la ciencia. La conservación de los polinizadores requiere el personal necesario para monitorear a estas especies y su hábitat en el largo plazo. También es necesario contar con herramientas prácticas basadas en la ciencia y con la colaboración entre las comunidades y en diferentes jurisdicciones. Alienta a los líderes a considerar decisiones de largo plazo durante los procesos de toma de decisiones y las conversaciones en público.

El Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores es más que un programa. Es una entidad que ayuda a mantener unida a una red nacional de conservación. El Centro, conecta la ciencia, los socios y las acciones de conservación, ayudando a los Estados Unidos a estar mejor preparado para proteger a nuestros polinizadores, los ecosistemas, la cadena de alimentos y nuestras comunidades.

NWF en acción
National Wildlife Federation apoya la recuperación de las mariposas monarca y de todos los polinizadores mediante la restauración del hábitat, la investigación y las asociaciones con líderes estatales y tribales, contribuyendo a la creación de planes a nivel estatal y los programas de conservación comunitarios como, Mayors’ Monarch Pledge, y la iniciativa Garden for Wildlife.

Lean este blog en inglés aquí.

Aviso legal: Este artículo está preparado de forma independiente por NWF, utilizando registros gubernamentales públicos e investigaciones científicas. Sus afirmaciones fácticas se basan en esas fuentes. Las opiniones expresadas no representan las del Servicio de Pesca y Vida Silvestre de EE. UU., el Centro para la Conservación de los Polinizadores, el DOI ni el Gobierno Federal.

Pollinators are essential to wildlife yet often overlooked contributors to our food systems and ecosystems. All native bees, butterflies, moths, bats, and hummingbirds are pollinators and play a crucial role in sustaining the plants that provide food for humans, create habitats for wildlife, stabilize soils, and maintain entire food webs. Unfortunately, these populations are declining across North America due to factors such as habitat destruction, pesticide use, disease, climate change, and invasive species.

• More than 1 in 5 species of pollinators have an elevated risk of extinction in North America, according to a study led by NatureServe.
• Globally, on average, 85% of flowering plant species depend on animal pollination. That includes wild plants that form the backbone of food webs, stabilize soils, regulate water cycles, and provide habitat for other species.
• Decline in wildlife pollinators leads to parallel declines in the plants that rely on them, with cascading effects on many other species.
• Research shows that the loss of pollinators can reduce yields and affect the nutrition of many crops, threatening human health.

From Pollinator Crisis to a National Conservation Center

To confront this crisis, the Department of the Interior established the Center for Pollinator Conservation at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Despite its clear track record of significant accomplishments, its future is now at risk due to the proposed 2027 fiscal year budget. Established in 2022, the Center created a national hub for land managers, decision-makers, scientists, program leaders, and community partners to share best practices and coordinate pollinator conservation efforts nationwide.

Building the Foundation

Since then, the Center’s key conservation actions have become the foundation of actions to support the health of the nation’s pollinators:

• The Pollinator Action Plan. The Center brought together more than 170 pollinator conservation partner groups and created the Pollinator Action Plan to guide U.S. conservation efforts.
• It launched two flagship tools—the North American BeeTool and the Monarch Conservation Opportunities Tool—making maps and guidance available to managers and partners in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. These tools help identify where conservation is most needed and which actions are likely to have the greatest impact.
• Other technical programs and investments, such as environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys, drone-assisted habitat assessments, and social network analyses, have been critical in bringing together pollinator researchers to provide fact-based data to support pollinator conservation.

The Pollinator Action Plan outlines key areas of focus, including increasing the availability of native seeds and plants, streamlining regulatory processes for creating pollinator habitats, enhancing collaboration among partners and initiatives, and integrating pollinator conservation into broader land-use and infrastructure decisions.

The Center began implementing this plan through tangible actions, such as the San Joaquin Western Monarch Collaborative in California’s Central Valley, which is developing a regional conservation strategy for monarchs and a two-year work plan.

Surveys and Monitoring Pollinators’ Habitat

Surveys and monitoring are the backbone of effective conservation, and the Center has built that backbone for pollinators.

In 2024, National Wildlife Refuges and wetland management districts were surveyed and monitored to establish baseline habitat and populations, and to examine pesticide drift and prairie restoration practices.  The outcomes of these surveys identify where pollinators are thriving or struggling, which habitats best support pollinators, and where collaborations can be strengthened.

Funding Proposals and the Capacity to Protect Pollinators

Despite the urgency, proposed federal budget cuts of up to 20% for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Fiscal Year 2027 would jeopardize these programs and harm pollinators most in need of recovery. The Center’s funding falls within broader Science Applications and National Wildlife Refuge allocations, making it vulnerable to across-the-board funding reductions.

Reduced funding could mean:

• Many fewer staff to maintain tools and drive collaborations.
• Insufficient resources to support pollinator habitat and monitoring.
• Elimination of opportunities to train land managers, community leaders, and the next generation of pollinator experts.

Scaling back the Center for Pollinator Conservation is a decision that shouldn’t be taken lightly, especially given the numerous facts highlighting the growing threats to our pollinators and the genuine risk of a future pollinator catastrophe that would be difficult to recover from.

Protecting the Foundation for Pollinator Conservation

Pollinators cannot express the pressures they face or the values they provide to our natural ecosystems and our health. The Center for Pollinator Conservation has been an important voice for pollinators and their conservation, helping connect science, practical tools, and partners across landscapes. You can help amplify that voice.

• Reach out to local leaders. Encourage them to consider pollinator conservation budgets, land-use planning, transportation and energy projects, and agricultural programs, while also nurturing partnerships with federal initiatives, such as those listed in the Pollinator Action Plan.
• Make pollinators part of the conversation. Highlight the connection between pollinator habitat and the decisions under discussion. A well-timed question can make an overlooked pollinator crisis visible. Lead your message with reliable information; double-check your facts! Credible information is more powerful than the loudest message.
• Defend capacity, not just awareness. Pollinator conservation requires people, long-term monitoring, accessible science, practical tools, habitat work, and collaboration across communities and jurisdictions. In public conversations and decision-making processes, encourage leaders to consider what it takes to sustain these functions over time.

The Center for Pollinator Conservation is more than a program; it is the connector that helps hold a nationwide pollinator conservation network together. By sustaining the national Center that connects science, partners, and conservation action, the United States can be better prepared to protect our pollinators and the natural ecosystems, food systems, and communities they support.

NWF in Action

The National Wildlife Federation supports monarch and all pollinators’ recovery through habitat restoration, research, and partnerships with state and Tribal leaders, contributing to the creation of state-level plans and community-based conservation programs such as the Mayor’s Monarch Pledge and Garden for Wildlife.

Read this blog in Spanish here.

Disclaimer: This article is independently prepared by NWF using publicly available government records and peer-reviewed research. Its factual statements are based on those sources. The views expressed do not represent those of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Center for Pollinator Conservation, the DOI, or the Federal Government.

Picture millions of small wetlands scattered across the grasslands of the northern Great Plains: these are the Prairie Potholes. They were formed when ancient glaciers retreated over 10,000 years ago, leaving millions of shallow depressions that fill with snowmelt and water in the spring creating a vast network of seasonal wetlands.

These shallow wetlands are known as potholes, and they provide critical habitat for a large array of wildlife and are one of the most important migratory bird habitats in the western hemisphere, home to more than 50% of North American migratory waterfowl.

Not only do these potholes support a vast amount of biodiversity, but they also deliver many ecosystem services. Wetlands help recharge groundwater systems, reduce flooding by acting as natural sponges, and assist with filtering out pollutants and excess nutrients from agricultural operations—helping to purify our drinking water. In addition, they also store carbon securely underground.

Why These Potholes Matter

Due to its important role in supporting migratory waterfowl, the Prairie Pothole region is also known as North America’s Duck factory. Each year it provides the resources and habitat needed to support 10 million ducks. Some of these duck species include the northern pintail, blue-winged teal, northern shoveler and more.

The region also supports an incredible array of additional bird species, including songbirds, waterbirds, raptors, shorebirds, and upland game birds. Impressively, forty different species of breeding waterbirds including herons, American white pelicans, and sandhill cranes can be found in the US part of the region. The Prairie Potholes also support a variety of other wildlife species, from frogs, turtles, deer, and more.

These wetlands are small but mighty, delivering a huge impact not only for wildlife and the environment but also surrounding communities. But right now, the Prairie Potholes are at risk due to proposed changes to protective provisions.

Wetland Loss and Swampbuster

These wetlands face many threats and over the years have suffered substantial losses. The grasslands of the Great Plains have faced intense degradation from agricultural conversion. Many wetlands have been drained or filled, and grasslands have been converted to cropland for agricultural uses. Estimates show that over 50% of the potholes have been lost or degraded and over 60% of the native grasslands have been lost.

Due to the intense agricultural activity in the region, Prairie Potholes also face threats from pollutants, excess nutrients, and chemical runoff. Climate change has also had an impact, with rising temperatures and increased drought events, the prairie potholes are at risk of drying up more often, greatly impacting their ability to provide for the many wildlife species that rely on them.

With the substantial loss of wetlands in the Prairie Potholes that has already occurred, it is even more imperative to protect this region. One tool we have is through USDA’s Swampbuster provision which was created in the 1985 Farm Bill and is instrumental in protecting and preventing wetland conversion.

Under the Swampbuster provision producers are eligible to receive publicly funded subsidies on commodities, crop insurance premiums, and conservation programs as long as they preserve wetlands on their farm. Since its creation Swampbuster has been successful in helping to protect wetlands and preventing draining of the Prairie Pothole region. The provision applies nationwide, so it also protects rural wetlands in other parts of the country.

Swampbuster has been an effective provision for multiple reasons, it has built in flexibility for producers and provides motivation for conservation compliance while allowing farmers to graze or even crop the wetlands when weather permits.

Protect Swampbuster, Protect the Prairie Potholes

Swampbuster works because it relies on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to use a scientific and objective process to determine wetland boundaries. These delineations help ensure that landowners are able to prevent impacts to wetlands. Current wetland criteria are governed by standards set by the Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, and USDA in 1996.

For many years USDA has been working on updating inaccurate early wetland maps that were previously given to farmers prior to the 1996 standards. Updates to these maps have been made through on-site visits to correct and certify wetland boundaries. However, USDA has recently issued an interim rule that would automatically approve all pre-1996 wetland delineations without making sure they are accurate.

USDA is making the change without doing an inventory or estimate of how many unverified wetland maps remain, without an environmental assessment, without consulting the Fish & Wildlife Service about the impacts on threatened or endangered species, and without consulting Native American Tribes that could be affected.

This rule would weaken Swampbuster and significantly impact wetlands, leading to damage to these important habitats. The Prairie Pothole region and the millions of wildlife species that rely on it are counting on the protections afforded by Swampbuster especially as other protections for these vital areas, such as the Clean Water Act, have been lost through rollbacks.

You can lend your voice to help protect the Swampbuster provision and in turn provide protection to important wetlands and the many wildlife that rely on them. Please join the National Wildlife Federation in calling on the USDA to strengthen and protect Swampbuster.

Help Protect the Prairie Pothole Region – Take Action with the NWF Action Fund

For further reading, check out this report from NWF and the Izaak Walton League: Wetlands Conservation in the Farm Bill

But environmental justice communities are not only experiencing these challenges; they are addressing them. Through advancing nature-based solutions projects, such as planting trees, restoring wetlands, and reclaiming green spaces, environmental justice communities are creating healthier, safer, and more resilient neighborhoods.

On June 10th, the Environmental Justice, Health, and Community Resilience and Revitalization (EJHCR2) program hosted a Clean Economy Coalition of Color (CECC) virtual roundtable event to bring together a panel of community leaders and experts to discuss their experiences working with nature to advance environmental justice. The conversation was moderated by Sam Zeno with Center for American Progress, and one of the lead authors of The Nature Gap: Communities of Color and Those With Low Incomes Are Bearing the Brunt of America’s Nature Loss. The roundtable’s panelists included:

• Gloria Tom, Senior Strategic and Special Tribal Policy Advisor, National Wildlife Federation
• Dr. Na’Taki Osborne Jelks, Co-Founder, West Atlanta Watershed Alliance
• Rashida Ferdinand, Founder and Executive Director, Sankofa Community Development Corporation
• Paulina López, Executive Director, Duwamish River Community Coalition

Throughout the discussion, three key themes emerged. First, panelists described how nature-based solutions projects can safeguard communities. Second, they emphasized how those most impacted by environmental harms are best positioned to identify solutions, such as nature-based projects. Finally, they underscored the beneficial power of authentic partnerships, based on trust and shared decision-making, when advancing nature-based solutions in environmental justice communities.

Nature Can Safeguard Communities

Throughout the discussion, panelists shared several examples and described how nature-based solutions create healthier, safer, and more resilient environmental justice communities.

Dr. Na’Taki Osborne Jelks explained that the West Atlanta Watershed Alliance (WAWA), a community-based organization, recognizes that caring for and stewarding natural resources is important for addressing the challenges their community faces, saying “we understood that a healthy environment, a healthy ecosystem, that those are things that contribute to healthy communities.” She gave an example of how residents of West Atlanta experience chronic stormwater and flooding challenges, including basement backups and poor local water quality linked to aging sewage infrastructure.

To reduce pressure on aging sewer systems and improve local water quality by filtering runoff, WAWA identifies and advances green infrastructure solutions in the community, such as rain gardens, trees, and green spaces, to absorb and slow stormwater.

The Sankofa Community Development Corporation, a community-led organization in the Lower 9^th Ward neighborhood of New Orleans, also utilizes nature-based solutions to build resilience to flooding while revitalizing the neighborhood. The Lower 9^th Ward still has damage from Hurricane Katrina and continues to experience flooding, a problem worsened by inadequate infrastructure. Rashida Ferdinand described how the Sankofa Community Development Corporation explored how nature-based solutions could reduce flooding while restoring healthier environmental conditions to the Lower 9^th Ward community.

As Ferdinand explained, “nature-based spaces become an asset to how we can retain water and use our natural resources in a way that supports healthy water drainage and healthy water cleaning.” Sankofa put that approach into practice by leading a wetland restoration and park project on a 40-acre site that had been degraded since Hurricane Katrina. The project created public green space with the capacity to store 8 million gallons of stormwater annually, supporting neighborhood revitalization while reducing flooding impacts.

Together, these examples show how nature-based solutions can have a meaningful positive impact on the health, safety, and resilience of environmental justice communities. When nature-based solutions are designed around community needs, they can improve local environmental conditions and support long-term resilience from environmental hazards, like flooding.

Communities Know Best

For decades, environmental justice communities have been left out of decision-making processes. To advance environmental justice, projects that impact communities must meaningfully involve those who are most affected in decision-making. The panelists emphasized that because these communities directly experience environmental harms, they are best positioned to identify local priorities, needs, and opportunities, including what and where nature-based solutions may be most effective.

Paulina Lopez, from the Duwamish River Community Coalition, established this clearly in the beginning of the discussion when she said, “community is always the way to make things happen, and they, as being the impacted ones, they will be the best ones to define how the future, should look like. You know, like we say, nothing about us, without us.”

She shared an example from South Seattle’s Duwamish River Valley community of how those most affected by environmental hazards know what is best for themselves.  In 2001, the US Environmental Protection Agency declared the Lower Duwamish Waterway a Superfund Site and the port authority proposed turning the contaminated shoreline site into a parking lot. But the community who lived nearby the Superfund Site recognized the lack of green space and tree canopy their neighborhood and saw the potential for the site to become restored habitat and public green space instead.

The community successfully advocated for a full clean-up of the contamination and for their vision of the shoreline. Because of the involvement of the community, the site is now a park and shoreline marsh that improves community access to the water, creates habitat, and reduces flooding.

The example of the Duwamish River Valley community illustrates how environmental justice communities are best poised to identify and shape solutions to the harm they experience.

The Power of Authentic Partners

Authentic partnerships, based on trust and shared decision-making are beneficial and powerful when advancing nature-based solutions in environmental justice communities.

During the roundtable, the panelists discussed how authentic partnerships are a key aspect of their nature-based solutions work. Dr. Na’Taki Osborne Jelks stated that “partnerships are the cornerstone” of WAWA’s work.  Panelists explained that nature-based solutions projects require collaboration across residents, community leaders, grassroots organizations, nonprofits, consultants, and government agencies.

By building genuine relationships and working toward a shared goal, these diverse groups combine their unique skills and strengths, achieving much more together than they could individually. Rashida Ferdinand highlighted “partnerships allow us to understand that we’re not in this alone… it just touches my heart and gives me joy, and that keeps me going and keeps me inspired to do this work.”

Panelists also emphasized that partnerships with environmental justice communities are only successful when they are based on trust and shared decision-making.

Gloria Tom summarized this by saying “the basic requirement in all of this is trust. Being able to trust each other, whether you’re native, whether you’re not, being able to ensure that you’re all on the same level in terms of that trust relationship that you have and not having to worry about negative impacts to the community, negative impacts to the resources…. just trusting each other.”

It was clear throughout the discussion that, when based on trust and shared decision-making power, authentic partnerships can strongly support the success of nature-based solutions in environmental justice communities.

In Conclusion

We are so grateful to these experts and leaders for joining the roundtable and generously sharing their perspectives and experiences. There was so much to take away from this conversation (like the importance of looking back on the past to inform the future, youth, bugs!, and more). I encourage everyone to listen to the full recording to hear more about the connections between environmental justice, community resilience, and nature-based solutions.

While each panelist spoke about different communities, cultures, geographies, and challenges, a unifying pattern stood out throughout the discussion: when those most affected by environmental hazards are meaningfully involved as project leaders or authentic partners, nature-based solutions can be a powerful tool to support healthier, safer, and more resilient environmental justice communities.

In some areas across the United States, cavity-nesting owl populations, including the American barn owl, have declined. One reason for this decline is loss of nesting habitat, including standing, dead timber that is perfect for some owl species to find a safe space for their young.

In 2024, Morrisville’s environmental sciences department, in collaboration with their sustainability council, launched the Owl Conservancy Project. Over the last two years on Earth Day, students, faculty, staff, and community members have built more than 20 owl boxes to place around campus to provide safe habitat for their owls within the more than 1,000 acres of college woodland. The campus is home to the American barn owl (Tyto alba), the eastern screech-owl (Megascops asio), and the northern saw-whet owl (Aegolius acadicus).

This 2026-2027 academic year, through a donation of the Reolink TrackMix LTE, students studying wildlife management will be able to observe owls on campus.

The dual-lens, 4K camera provides expansive 360° coverage, intelligent animal tracking, and reliable 4G LTE connectivity, making it ideal for remote locations without Wi-Fi or traditional power sources.

The video footage collected will help answer some of the research group’s key questions, including are the nest boxes being used by any of the three target species, what other animals are using the boxes, is the use by other animals creating competitive interference to the box use by owls, and are there extrinsic factors which are prohibiting box use by owls.

Additionally, students enrolled in the environmental interpretation and education course will develop signage, programming, and educational materials to promote owl conservation.

About Reolink 

Reolink offers smart security solutions for homes and businesses, aiming for a seamless security experience with its wide range of products. Serving millions globally, it provides video surveillance and protection, standing out for its commitment to security technology innovation.

For more information about Reolink, please visit the website.

About National Wildlife Federation

Founded in 1936, the National Wildlife Federation is America’s largest and most trusted grassroots conservation organization with 52 state and territorial affiliates and more than six million members and supporters, including hunters, anglers, gardeners, birders, hikers, campers, paddlers, educators, and outdoor enthusiasts of all stripes.

For more information about National Wildlife Federation, please visit our website.

A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to take flight over one of the country’s data center hotspots. Within the hour, I got a bird’s-eye view of what attracts data centers to an area like the Columbia River: hydroelectric dams, which provide plentiful energy, large swaths of land to house the large buildings and servers, and energy generation and grid infrastructure. 

But what was truly striking was the size of these data centers and the scale of the supporting energy infrastructure nearby. Like many others, I’ve heard considerable discussion about energy demands, but seeing the onsite generation gave me a clearer perspective on how much energy is required. 

The Larger the Growth, the Bigger the Impacts

Nearly 20 years ago, Oregon’s first data center was built in The Dalles by Google. Since then, the Lower Columbia River has grown into a data center hotspot. Columbia Riverkeeper, a nonprofit in the Pacific Northwest, estimates that there are more than 100 data centers being proposed, under construction, or operational in the Lower Columbia River basin in Oregon and Washington. 

Industry advocates will be quick to point out that we have had data centers for decades. While that is true, it is important to remember that the data centers built today are significantly larger than the ones built at the start of the internet. As a result, they require more resources to operate which further impacts our energy and water systems as well as the communities that depend on them.

Energy Use

Data centers consume a significant amount of energy and that is only expected to grow in the coming years. In 2024, data centers accounted for nearly 5 percent of total U.S. electricity consumption, and that consumption is expected to at least double by 2030.

In the Columbia River region, existing and planned data center capacity could reach four gigawatts, which could use enough energy to power 2.3 million households each year. 

To meet demand, utilities will often look to new fossil fuel generation and other infrastructure, producing harmful pollutants that endanger nearby communities and wildlife. Without strong guardrails, these financial and health costs can be passed on to households and businesses. Safeguards can include policies that require large energy users to pay more for electricity, pay for the extra electricity generation needed and related grid infrastructure, prioritize clean energy over fossil fuels, and prevent developers from stranding assets.

Last year, Oregon passed the Protecting Oregonians with Energy Responsibility (POWER) Act which put these protections into law in addition to requiring that new data center loads not impede clean energy and greenhouse gas emission targets. 

Water Use

Data centers also require substantial water, primarily for cooling. Large data centers can consume millions of gallons of water per day. In 2025, Amazon Web Services (AWS) reported withdrawing more than 240 million gallons of water from Oregon. It’s worth noting that AWS has initiatives that aim to return more water to communities than they use in direct operations.

Large water withdrawals can have significant impacts, and can affect drinking water supplies, groundwater levels, streamflows, and aquatic ecosystems, especially in areas that are experiencing droughts like Oregon and Washington. The impacts of the drought were evident during the flight. I had expected to see lush green fields and trees, but much of the landscape appeared brown and dry. 

However, it is difficult to know how much water is being used by data centers since there is no overarching requirement for companies to disclose water usage and for those who provide information voluntarily, it is not standardized. States across the country are working to tackle this issue with proposals being discussed in New Jersey, California, and Texas. In Oregon, Senator Wyden has sent letters to Google, Apple, Meta, and Amazon demanding information on how their companies are minimizing water usage and impacts to communities.

To protect our water resources, there need to be regulations on water transparency and consumption. At the very least, data centers should be mandated to report water consumption, and reporting requirements should be standardized. 

What We Can Do

The National Wildlife Federation calls for federal, state, and local leaders to strengthen wildlife, climate, and environmental safeguards for the planning, siting, development, and operation of data centers. Without robust policy and corporate accountability implemented across all levels of government, data center growth could threaten our communities and the environment, including reversing our progress on conservation, increasing threats to public health, and harming wildlife and natural ecosystems. With the gratuitous rise of AI-driven data centers, we must act now.

In the days that followed, people understandably began asking who was responsible. Gary’s Mayor Eddie Melton criticized the pace of restoration. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun called the situation unacceptable and requested an investigation into Northern Indiana Public Service Company, or NIPSCO, the electric utility serving Gary and much of northwest Indiana.

Residents have questioned whether the utility adequately maintained vegetation around power lines. A lawsuit has made similar allegations, which NIPSCO disputes. Some residents also ask whether NIPSCO has been too focused on accommodating new energy-sucking data centers rather than upgrading existing electrical infrastructure.

These are important questions to ask to understand what went wrong and to ensure the city is more resilient to future natural disasters, which are becoming more “unnatural” in frequency and severity across the U.S. thanks to human-caused climate change. The residents of Gary deserve to know whether the systems they depend on were properly maintained and whether more could have been done to restore power sooner.

But if we spend all our time trying to determine who was at fault after the storm, we risk missing the bigger question that Gary should make us all think about.

Why are we still waiting until disasters happen to address vulnerabilities we already know exist?

Gary had already made its vulnerabilities and climate risks clear.

Two years before this storm, the city released Climate Ready Gary, its first climate resilience plan. The plan was designed to help Gary prepare for the effects of a changing climate and more extreme weather. It specifically identified the need to “increase resilience in local power distribution.”

Gary is not alone. Across the country, communities have spent years identifying the climate risks they face. We know where extreme heat is most dangerous. We know which neighborhoods flood repeatedly. We know where infrastructure is more fragile and where residents have fewer resources to recover when it fails.

The problem is not that communities have failed to identify their vulnerabilities. It is that identifying a risk does not give a community the resources or authority to reduce it. Gary residents and city officials could recognize that its power system needed to become more resilient, but many of the decisions about how that system is maintained and strengthened rest with utilities, regulators, and other decision-makers.

For many Gary residents, losing power for more than a week was not simply an inconvenience. Families lost groceries. People struggled to keep medical equipment operating. Schools closed and local businesses lost income.

Another reality that decision-makers in Indiana had known for years was that Gary was entering any major natural disaster from a position of deep disadvantage.

Gary is a majority-Black city where roughly one in three residents live in poverty. Decades of industrial decline, population loss, and disinvestment weakened the city’s tax base and limited investments in infrastructure. Those conditions mean that Gary is more at-risk of experiencing significant damage and suffering from natural disasters with recovery taking more time compared to more white and affluent communities.

Climate resilience, then, is not only being prepared for the hazard itself. It is also having the infrastructure and resources to recover from it.

NIPSCO itself had already been making the case for resilience. As part of its most recent electric rate case, the utility said that by the end of 2025 it would have invested $769.5 million in upgrades intended to improve reliability and help harden the system against severe weather. Yet, were the investments significant enough to reduce the consequences of a disaster fueled by climate change? Did those NIPSCO investments go to where need is greatest?

These are precisely the kind of questions we should be asking before the next disaster. We should know whether investments are reaching communities with the greatest needs and whether they are reducing vulnerability as weather events become more extreme.

What are we doing with disaster risk assessments?

When a city identifies extreme heat as a major threat, resulting plans should mean fewer residents are at risk when the next heat wave arrives. When a community identifies repeated flooding as a vulnerability, the next major storm should cause less damage.

If we know that an extended power outage could become a serious public health emergency, resilience means that power systems are less likely to go dark and are restored quickly with more lives saved.

Helping underserved communities access rooftop and community solar and energy efficiency upgrades, investing in underground power lines, and building microgrids are just some ways to improve energy resilience. In fact, renewable energy is usually more resilient to disruption from extreme weather than fossil fuel-based power.

In other words, completing a resilience plan should not be the final outcome. The goal should be ensuring that communities have the capacity and resources to reduce their vulnerability. That also means decision-makers need to understand which communities face the greatest risks and use that information to help determine where resilience investments should go first.

Communities do not begin from the same starting point. Gary has lived through decades of economic disinvestment. Its residents should not have to overcome that history on their own every time another storm arrives. If we distribute resilience resources without accounting for those differences, we can spend a great deal of money while leaving the vulnerability gap largely intact.

There will now be investigations into what happened in Gary, and there absolutely should be. They may tell us whether particular infrastructure should have been stronger or whether maintenance should have been handled differently.

But we should not need an investigation to tell us that Gary was vulnerable. Gary already told us that.

Communities across the country have been telling us the same thing through climate plans and through lived experience. At some point, knowing has to be followed by doing.

The question after Gary should not only ask  who was responsible for what happened. It should also ask: When are we going to act on what communities have already told us? Where are the resources needed to reduce those risks? Where is the capacity to turn resilience plans into actual protection?

And most importantly, when those resources and that capacity are missing, we should be asking why.