Environmental Activists Show Their True Color: Red, Not Green
The clock is ticking on a decision to join litigation that would ban offshore wind to save the whales.
In a strange twist, the largest, most well-funded environmental advocacy groups have thus far declined to join a growing effort to protect an endangered whale species. This has left grassroots conservationists flummoxed. There is still time for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Sierra Club, and others to jump in, but the clock is ticking on pending litigation.
On August 9, Save Long Beach Island (LBI), an organization based in New Jersey and founded in 2021 for purpose of fighting offshore wind, announced its intention to file a lawsuit against U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC). Save LBI is calling on the department to have its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) revisit a 16-month-old petition to designate a critical habitat along the East Coast for the benefit of the North Atlantic right whale. The petition also asks NOAA to exclude wind complexes from the migratory critical habitat Save LBI seeks to establish.
Wind or Whales?
NOAA denied the petition on July 22 after Save LBI filed suit to compel the agency to follow the Endangered Species Act's (ESA) 90-day review standard for acting on petitions. 'The new legal notification from Save LBI is modest in scope in that it simply asks NOAA to reconsider its prior decision to turn down the petition. However, it does come with a sense of urgency since NOAA figures show the whale species is down to a sparse population of about 380 with just an estimated 70 females that are reproductively active.
As part of its petition, Save LBI also asked the Department of Interior to conduct an analysis of underwater noise from offshore wind to determine what kind of impact those projects might have on the whales' migration.
Bob Stern, the president of Save LBI, has followed up on previous correspondence addressed to the NRDC, Sierra Club, and more than a dozen other groups in July 2025.
Neither the NRDC nor the Sierra Club have responded to any of Save LBI's correspondence. Stern told Restoration News that Save LBI received "very little response" from other long established environmental outfits with one notable exception. Stern says the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental advocacy group based in Arizona, did provide Save LBI with a favorable response indicating it would support the petition.
Abandoning Their Pro-Whale History
The NRDC and Sierra Club, along with many other environmental activist groups, have a history of opposing military exercises they view as harmful to whales and other marine life. But as Save LBI points out, both groups support offshore wind despite a growing body of evidence that shows the projects harm whales. Save LBI has released detailed studies that showthe construction and potential implementation of offshore wind have already caused whale fatalities migrating up and down the East Coast.
Stern explained to Restoration News why time is a factor for the NRDC and the Sierra Club if they want to protect whales from offshore wind.
"Regarding our lawsuit on the NARW [North Atlantic right whale] migration corridor petition, the filing of our intent to sue starts a 60-day clock by which NOAA has to either agree to reconsider the petition or continue to deny it," Stern said. "If they continue to deny it, which is the likely course, then we will go back to the Court to ask a judge to compel them to consider it, how long that will take I cannot tell. If they agree to consider then they have a year to do a rule-making and based on that make a decision."
Restoration News sent media inquiries to NRDC and the Sierra Club asking their media representatives if the advocacy groups would join in the litigation to protect the right whale, and whether they would make a decision on Save LBI's litigation during the 60-day time frame Stern referenced. Neither group responded.
Save LBI has about 10,000 core members and 100,000 online supporters including homeowners, business owners, and other residents who have united in opposing offshore wind, which they view as harmful to whales and other marine life. The most recent tax filings show Save LBI has just over a million dollars in assets. By comparison, the NRDC sits on almost $660 million in assets and more than 3 million members, while the Sierra Club has $152 million in assets and more than 3.8 million members.
In his latest letter to the NRDC, Sierra Club, and others, Stern makes the point that Save LBI's efforts to protect whales is consistent with the stated missions of the largest environmental advocacy groups.
Stern wrote:
If your organization has already considered this issue and determined that participation would not be appropriate, we would appreciate understanding your reasoning. Your organization has consistently articulated a mission of defending whales and their habitats; silence on this issue, which goes to the heart of that mission as we understand it, is puzzling to us.
Suspected Foreign Agents Sue U.S. Navy
The NRDC was involved in a high-profile lawsuit against the U.S. Navy that went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008. In Winter v NRDC, the environmental activist group argued that naval sonar exercises were harmful to whales and other marine mammals. But the high court in a 5-4 decision ruled against the NRDC and said that the plaintiffs needed to demonstrate an irreparable harm to marine life was likely and not just possible. In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts determined that Navy's need to conduct realistic training with active sonar far outweighed the specious concerns raised by the NRDC. That's because, as the chief justice explained, the Navy must have the ability to respond to the growing threat of enemy submarines.
Despite setbacks in court, the largest environmental groups remain united in opposition to certain military exercises for the ostensible purpose of protecting sea life. For instance, the Sierra Club, says on its website that "some forms of ocean military testing produce powerful noises capable of harming and killing marine mammals and adversely disrupting behavior." In April, the Sierra Club joined with other green groups in litigation against the Trump administration to restore ESA protections for the Rice's Whale and other species in the Gulf of Mexico. The administration says an exemption to the ESA was needed to allow oil and gas drilling to proceed in the region for national security reasons. But the Sierra Club and its co-litigants are making the case that the national security concerns are not valid and that the oil and gas activities could harm Rice's Whale along with other species.
So why are the NRDC and the Sierra Club running silent when it comes to protecting whales up and down the East Coast? As I argue in my book Climate Porn: How and Why Anti-Population Zealots Fabricate Science, while Targeting American Capitalism, Freedom, and Independence the largest, most well-funded environmental groups have been usurped by the climate movement, which often supports measures that are harmful to the environment.
This would help explain why groups like the NRDC and Sierra Club prioritize offshore wind over vulnerable whale populations. Both groups have also been the focus of congressional probes into potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The restrictions green groups seek to impose on U.S. military testing could redound to benefit of Russia and China and raise questions about the sincerity of their environmental efforts.
Stern, an engineer who previously managed environmental reviews for the U.S Department of Energy, wants the NRDC, the Sierra Club, and others to produce evidence (if they have it) showing that the long-term climate benefits of offshore wind "outweigh and justify" near-term risks to the right whale. He also makes the point that Save LBI's own assessments show the climate benefits of offshore wind would be "minute" and accrue over the span of several centuries. At the same time, the conservation group's offshore wind studies show the damage to the environment and the whales would be immediate and severe. Even so, Save LBI invites the NRDC and Sierra Club to produce competing evidence.
Stern wrote:
If you have scientific evidence, modeling, or peer-reviewed analyses that demonstrate that operation noise from full-scale wind complexes will not pose a significant behavioral or physiological risk to North Atlantic right whales, we would welcome the opportunity to see it. Conversely, if our concerns are valid and these complexes are built and operating at scale, any resulting harm to this critically endangered species may be irreversible. Given the right whale's precarious status, we believe we are at a pivotal juncture: decisions made now could determine whether these species survive.
Save LBI's conservation efforts on behalf of whales may be for all the marbles. Environmental advocacy groups that have been in operation for decades now appear poised to advance offshore wind projects that put whales not just in danger put on a path to extinction.
Beyond Hypocrisy
Bonner Cohen, a senior fellow with the National Center for Public Policy Research, told Restoration News that he expects the big green groups to drop the mask and show their true colors.
The deafening silence from NRDC and the Sierra Club on the threat to endangered Atlantic right whales posed by offshore wind turbines reflects these organizations' real commitment to protecting wildlife. Their sympathies clearly lie with propping up what we hope are the remnants of America's misbegotten transition to green energy, and not with the ocean-borne creatures getting in the way. The word 'hypocrisy' doesn't begin to capture what's going on here. There are funds to be raised from deep-pocketed anti-fossil-fuel interests—foreign and domestic. Keeping the climate narrative alive—no matter the cost to marine life or to ocean-front communities—is what this game is all about.
If NOAA decides once again to reject Save LBI's petition, the New Jersey conservationists will most certainly file suit to reverse that decision. They may have also have an ace in the hole in the form of President Donald Trump. In the press release announcing its intention to sue the Commerce Department, Stern says his group is "perplexed" by the department's position because the petition to ban offshore wind is in line with Trump's own stated objectives.
Save LBI has written to the president asking him to intervene. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick may want to call his office.
MORE COVERAGE FROM RESTORATION NEWS
Environmentalist In Chief: Could Trump Use National Security Measures to Block Offshore Wind Projects?
Hand In The Cookie Jar: EXCLUSIVE: NOAA Caught Manipulating Temperature Data to Advance the Global Warming Narrative
Big Environment, Big Problems: Big Green Steps on Wisconsin Communities to Impose Unwanted Wind and Solar
They'll Never Stop: Virginia's Return to RGGI: Another Ratepayer Rip-Off in the Making
The Return Of Common Sense: FROM THE MAG: Climate Idiocy Peaked in 2025. 2026 is the Year of American Energy.
We need your help to save America—chip in today.
Restoration News, a project of Restoration of America, is your trusted investigative news source for the America First movement. As a rapidly growing conservative news site, we focus on delivering accurate and insightful exposés on political news, immigration news, leftist lies, and other pressing issues affecting everyday Americans. Our uncompromising commitment to a hard-hitting, fact-based, America First, and faithful perspective ensures that you receive news that aligns with your values.
Every dollar gets us closer to winning the war on woke
