The theme of the 2012 NAEP Annual Conference—Science, Politics, and Policy: Environmental Nexus—was developed as a local initiative. Like all previous themes, there are also national and international aspects. This is a great theme for the National Association of Environmental Professionals. We pride ourselves, after all, with being a multidisciplinary association impacting all aspects of the professions. A review of membership reveals scientists, as well as lawyers and engineers. We are educators and we are policy makers. I can think of no other professional association that covers as many aspects of the environmental professions. No other single-issue association can provide the audience of NAEP with the information we need to do our job. Even the associated Certification as an Environmental Professional embodies the multidimensional aspects of the profession.

Over the past year and a half as NAEP president, I have been privileged to witness some great accomplishments in NAEP. I am extremely thankful to the preceding presidents, who made the Association a working machine of innovation, imagination, and growing influence. The board members have facilitated the cooperation to make things happen. I am fully aware now that the progress of the Association depends entirely on the volunteers and their vision. Whereas a president has the title, the board of directors determines whether things get done.

“But, would it be ethical?”

This is a question we don't hear often enough in daily professional practice. Why not?

Recently I was faced with an issue that has been a subject of discussion since I joined. Each time, it is answered for a new cohort of members, but we somehow do not seem to maintain that corporate knowledge or convey it effectively.

I am glad to be back on board as lead editor for volume 14 (2012) of Environmental Practice. Congratulations to my coeditor, Kelly Tzoumis, and her guest editors for publishing a diverse and robust collection of thematic issues in 2011 (volume 13). Kelly is now engaged in strategic planning for volume 15 (2013). The March issue of volume 14 was devoted to a hot button topic: green infrastructure. I am particularly grateful to my three guest editors who did the heavy lifting to bring this issue to fruition: Jeff Mengler, senior project scientist with Cardno ENTRIX in Barrington, Illinois; Jesse Elam, AICP, senior planner with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning; and Dennis Dreher, senior consultant with Geosyntec Consultants in Oak Brook, Illinois.

As of this writing, the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP) has wrapped up another successful annual conference in Portland, Oregon, and the June conference issue of Environmental Practice has arrived in subscribers' mailboxes. The editorial office of ENP employs a coeditor approach that alternates lead editorship annually between a natural scientist (James Montgomery) and a social scientist (Kelly Tzoumis), both of whom have practitioner experiences in environmental science and policy in the private and public sectors. The lead editor focuses on development of thematic topics, whereas the coeditor engages in strategic planning, including outreach to authors, for his/her lead year. This model is vital to maintaining the three “ships” that are vital to sustaining NAEP: membership, authorship, and readership. In addition, this model of shared leadership has been quite effective in bringing in new perspectives and topics on environmental issues to achieve greater interdisciplinarity, as well as maintaining the mission of NAEP by providing quality manuscripts that balance interests of both the practitioners and the scholars in the environmental profession. The daily operations of the journal are handled by our very capable managing editor, Dan Carroll. Dan has developed an efficient peer-review process and continues to reach out to potential reviewers. We have an active editorial advisory board (EAB) of 15 members who represent a mixture of scholars and practitioners from across the United States. EAB members have all reviewed or written manuscripts for the journal. We hope to expand the EAB to include more international representation.

Green infrastructure is becoming a prominently used term in planning, policies, and goals at all levels of government and throughout the country. But the term means different things to different people. In fact, there is enough variety in the green infrastructure concepts being bantered about that the definition of green infrastructure is a main tenant of one article (Allen 2012) in this special issue of Environmental Practice. The use of the term can indeed become very confusing among the uninitiated. Green washing is a term used to describe services or products that make an unsubstantiated claim of being green. Thus, it is important, as several of our authors note in this special issue, to be clear about what is meant by green infrastructure so as to not end up with it on the heap of green washing or discarded buzzwords.

Development of unconventional natural gas reserves has been made possible by the combination of hydraulic fracturing (or hydrofracturing) and horizontal drilling technologies and has expanded at a feverish pace over the last several years in the United States (US) and around the world. Hydrofracturing involves injecting large volumes of fluid, including water, chemicals, and proppant, under high pressure into a deep geologic formation to open fissures that then allow natural gas to flow up the wellbore. Technically recoverable shale gas reserves are estimated to exceed 600 trillion cubic feet (tcf) in the US (US Department of Energy, 2009), and, given the increasing demand for domestic energy production, the extraction of unconventional shale plays will continue to expand and intensify. Research on the environmental and human-community impacts of unconventional shale gas development are beginning to emerge, and this special issue of Environmental Practice contributes to that growing body of knowledge.

Trace metals were determined in the soil and water of four lagoons, two estuaries, and four heavy-traffic roads in Greater Accra along the Atlantic coast of Ghana. The results showed that water samples from all of the water bodies studied were polluted with mercury (Hg) and less polluted with arsenic (As), nickel (Ni), and cadmium (Cd). The pollution status of water samples was confirmed by contamination degree (CD) analysis, which yielded values of >1 of Hg and <1 of As, Ni, and Cd. Evaluation of the data from the soil sample was enhanced by the application of pollution quantification tools—the pollution load index (PLI) and the index of geoaccumulation (IGEO)—which showed that the mangrove swamp soil studied is progressively degrading with Hg, As, Ni, and Cd. It was also revealed that vehicular emissions were a potential source of lead (Pb), Ni, and manganese (Mn) in the roadside soils monitored. From the results of this study, it is clear that the mangroves are gradually degrading and that measures should established to control release of these metals into the environment.

Environmental Practice 14:173–183 (2012)

My term as lead editor is coming to an end, and I will soon hand over the reins to my coeditor and colleague Kelly Tzoumis for volume 15. Kelly has lined up an exciting suite of thematic issues for 2013. The year 2012 has been exciting and successful for Environmental Practice (ENP), with thematic issues devoted to green infrastructure, professional ethics, and fracking (this issue!). As always, the June issue was devoted to the theme of the National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP) annual conference. This year's theme was Science, Politics and Policy: Environmental Nexus. With the exception of the conference issue, the task of collecting manuscripts for the thematic issues was codirected by me and several diligent guest editors to whom I am extremely grateful. The editorial office of ENP employs a coeditor approach that alternates lead editorship annually between a natural scientist (James Montgomery) and a social scientist (Kelly Tzoumis), both of whom have practitioner experiences in environmental science and policy in the private and public sectors. The lead editor focuses on development of thematic topics, whereas the coeditor engages in strategic planning, including reaching out to authors, for his/her lead year. This model is vital to maintaining the three “ships” that are vital to sustaining NAEP: membership, authorship, and readership. In addition, this model of shared leadership has been quite effective in bringing in new perspectives and topics on environmental issues to achieve greater interdisciplinarity, as well as maintaining the mission of NAEP by providing quality manuscripts that balance interests of both the practitioner and the scholar in the environmental profession. The daily operations of the journal are handled by our managing editor, Dan Carroll, who has developed an efficient peer-review process and continues to reach out to potential reviewers. We have an active editorial advisory board (EAB) of 15 members, who represent a mixture of scholars and practitioners from across the United States (US). EAB members have all reviewed or written manuscripts for the journal. We hope to expand the EAB to include more international representation.

This research is part of an ULTRA NSF-US Forest service research grant addressing urban ecosystem metabolism in Syracuse, New York. This project explores local stakeholders' perceptions of green infrastructure (GI) and ecosystems services from both positive and detracting perspectives. Focus groups were used to elicit responses for a thematic analysis. Respondents displayed confusion about what ecosystems services are, as well as what GI is. Implementation barriers include costs (who pays), what the benefits are, unanticipated impacts, and scale of implementation.

Environmental Practice 14:6–16 (2012)

To enable successful public participation in environmental decision making, practitioners need to know what works, but evaluation of proposed and existing processes is often lacking. We tested three tools for evaluation—focus groups, Q method, and surveys—at two contaminated sites with extensive public participation. Each tool is evaluated based on its requirements for implementation, the information it produces, and its acceptability to stakeholders. Which tool is most appropriate depends heavily on the available resources, what is happening at the site, and the evaluator's goals.

Environmental Practice 14:101–109 (2012)

A classic debate in environmental ethics addresses the issue of whether the environment has intrinsic value. Proponents of an anthropocentric account contend that the environment is valuable only insofar as it is useful to human beings, where usefulness can be construed in either narrow or broad terms. Conversely, nonanthropocentrists claim that, in addition to instrumental value, the environment is intrinsically valuable. This debate has important practical implications for the way people conduct themselves concerning the environment. Nevertheless, it has been dismissed by some in the philosophical community as well as beyond. We argue that this debate is important and ought to be taken up by environmental professionals. The aforementioned different views are already reflected in environmental practice, including in the Society of American Foresters Code of Ethics. We argue that useful lessons can be learned from both areas of overlap between anthropocentrists and nonanthropocentrists, as well as from areas of disagreement. We will make our case, in part, by looking at the evolution of ethical responsibility in the engineering profession. Our broader claim is that philosophical discussions can and should be a part of professional practice.

Environmental Practice 14:184–189 (2012)

The development of large-scale shale gas production has been described as a game-changer for the US energy market and has generated interest in expanding the use of natural gas in sectors such as electricity generation and transportation. This development has been made possible by improvements in drilling technologies—specifically utilizing hydraulic fracturing in conjunction with horizontal drilling—that have enabled the production of natural gas from unconventional formations. However, the environmental implications of natural gas production and its use have been called into question. Environmental impacts associated with shale gas development can occur at the global and local levels and include impacts to climate, local air quality, water availability, water quality, seismic events, and the local community. A variety of technologies and practices are available to operators to reduce these impacts. Policies are currently under development at the federal, state, and local level to mitigate environmental impacts. In this document, we discuss the technologies involved in shale gas production, the potential abiotic impacts of shale gas production with an emphasis on air and water issues, and the practices and policies currently being developed and implemented to mitigate these impacts.

Environmental Practice 14:249–261 (2012)

Once-extensive Eastern Oyster (Crassostrea virginica) reefs in the Hudson-Raritan Estuary (HRE) were destroyed almost a century ago as a result of human activities. However, because of improvements in water quality, the potential exists to reintroduce this ecologically extinct species to the ecosystem. For over a decade, New York/New Jersey Baykeeper has conducted oyster restoration activities in support of target ecological goals proposed in the HRE Comprehensive Restoration Plan (CRP). The critical research question is whether existing conditions at a proposed restoration site can actually support long-term Eastern Oyster survival. To determine the feasibility of restoring this native species in Keyport Harbor, New Jersey, juvenile oysters were placed in research field plots, and survivorship and growth were monitored. Data from the first reported oyster restoration research in the New Jersey (NJ) portion of the HRE indicate that oysters could indeed be reintroduced into the ecosystem. After 11 months in situ, research oyster survival rates as high as 60% were observed. Qualitative tissue observations indicated female oysters produced eggs that appeared normal and were ready for spawning. Biodiversity of species collected from the field plots was two- to threefold greater with adult research oysters present, suggesting that oysters increased the density and abundance of other marine species. Sediment deposition patterns indicated that the presence of oysters in support structures may reduce the degree of topographic relief caused by winter storm energies. The research ended abruptly on August 9, 2010, when New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection rescinded the project permit because of concerns that research oysters were beginning to reach New Jersey's market size of 2.5 inches. Although initial data suggest that oysters can survive and reproduce in Raritan Bay and the potential exists to achieve oyster restoration goals included in the CRP, the project also highlights the current lack of agreement between shellfishery regulators and restoration practitioners with respect to oyster reintroduction in waters where shellfish harvesting is currently prohibited. Different shellfish management approaches are used in New England states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut), where local control is an important management tool, and in Chesapeake Bay states (Maryland and Virginia), where federal involvement is relatively high. Situated between these two distinct shellfish-producing regions, New Jersey and New York have not supported aggressive reestablishment of historic Eastern Oyster populations in the HRE, and unlike adjacent states, have not developed long-term oyster aquaculture plans. The reluctance to support oyster restoration is due to concerns related to human health and ecological questions. Examples of best management practices currently employed in neighboring states offer potential solutions to address regulatory concerns and could form the basis for developing a productive long-term strategy to reestablish Eastern Oysters in the HRE.

Environmental Practice 14:110–129 (2012)

Over the past decade, green infrastructure has evolved from a novel buzzword into a recognized planning practice. Definitions of green infrastructure inevitably have been tailored to appeal to diverse constituents with message points that address a particular professional discipline or resource issue. Commonly accepted definitions emphasize the interconnected network concept and are mostly differentiated by the scale at which green infrastructure planning is implemented. This commentary lays out an operational framework for green infrastructure that can be advanced at all scales, from the largest landscape to the smallest site, and illustrates examples of operationalizing the framework at each scale. What is ultimately needed is a seamless quilt of planning and implementation across scales and jurisdictional boundaries that make sense in terms of their benefits but also in terms of their economics, and every one can play a part in making that a reality in their communities.

Environmental Practice 14:17–25 (2012)

The global Slow Movement, a response to negative effects of speed on everyday life, seeks to reconnect people and their social and ecological environments. Slow Food and Cittaslow (Slow Cities) are allied Slow Movement networks operating in over 150 countries, including the United States (US). These two networks involve the interrelationship of numerous place-based factors important to social-ecological resilience: local and regional food markets, recovery and protection of biodiversity and local ecologies, support for cultural traditions, agricultural policy reform, climate adaptation planning, economic development, social inclusion, quality of life in the built environment, and the politics of land development. This article presents the philosophical underpinnings of Slow Food and the associated membership requirements of Cittaslow by using the example of Sonoma Valley, California, the first certified Cittaslow in the US (2009). The article then describes Sonoma Valley's Cittaslow Pollinator Stewardship Collaborative to show how the nascent organization has begun its work by facilitating the participation of environmental professionals in community life. In its first year, Cittaslow Sonoma Valley has used a combination of pleasure and responsibility to increase both the visibility of environmental concerns and the opportunities for diverse residents to act locally and globally on issues integrating environmental and economic support. Because it offers a different approach to environmental responsibility, the Slow Movement may be of particular interest to environmental professionals who are concerned about societal response to the complexity and uncertainty of global environmental change.

Environmental Practice 14:130–142 (2012)

Amtrak, which is the national provider of intercity rail transportation, moved over 30 million passengers in fiscal year 2011. Amtrak signed a consent decree with the United States EPA for Clean Water Act violations in New England in 2001. From a required Environmental Management System implemented under the consent decree, Amtrak developed a fledgling sustainability program. The program has moved carefully over the past 11 years, cautiously handling resources available for environmental management. Programs have been implemented to calculate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, trial alternative fuels, and support customers wishing to reduce their impact on the environment. Ethical concerns have been addressed in the areas of environmental messaging and additionality of new program areas. These concerns have led to working guidelines focused on addressing ethical matters.

Environmental Practice 14:190–194 (2012)

In response to growing concerns about the impact of shale gas development, Pennsylvania's Act 13 of 2012 established an unconventional gas well fee and required the state's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to report on the number of such wells. In this article, we analyze the extent to which the DEP complied with its reporting requirements under Act 13. Using publicly available data, we find that the DEP likely omitted between 15,300 and 25,100 unconventional gas wells from its Act 13 report. Left uncorrected, we estimate that Pennsylvania's state, county, and municipal governments could forfeit fees of $205–$303 million in 2012 and up to $0.75–$1.85 billion cumulatively over the expected life of these wells. Rather than an isolated incident, evidence suggests that information management is a systemic and recurring problem within the DEP and its predecessor agencies. We propose the implementation of a relational database and geographic information system as a way for the DEP to fulfill its Act 13 obligations.

Environmental Practice 14:262–277 (2012)

More than half a century ago, Dr. M. King Hubbert's theory of peak oil predicted that US oil production would peak around 1970. His prediction was dead on. Today, many peak oil theorists predict that world oil production is very close to peaking, after which we will witness a steady decline in global oil production. The global socioeconomic implications are chilling. But there may be much more to this story than has been openly and publicly vented.

Environmental Practice 14:195–205 (2012)