Talk:Riverkeeper

message: Whoever keeps editing this page, and who took out the John Cronin reference - perhaps you should set up a separate linked page to discuss Boyle's specific contributions, in order to keep this page more focused on the organization.  That might fit the encyclopedia format better.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hotchocolatier (talk • contribs) .
Hi, 
I have compiled some additional research on Riverkeeper and hope to contribute to this page by more specifically describing Riverkeeper's antecedent, the Hudson River Fishermen's Association, the Storm King Doctrine, the use of the Refuse Act of 1899 as a tool for citizen empowerment,John Cronin's first exploits as the Riverkeeper in discovering Exxon's involvement in pollutant discharges and water uptake from the Hudson into ships headed for their refinery in Aruba, the overall importance of this organization to contemporary American environmentalism and their current work.  I will hopefully be contributing this information shortly.  Let me know if there are any questions regarding its addition prior to my edits. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueplanet1 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: This article needs various updates. Some of the information is outdated or incorrect. For instance, currently there are over 300 "keeper" organizations globally, while this article uses 150 as a rough estimate. Additionally, some of the information such as the "formation" is incorrect, as the organization was founded in 1983. While Riverkeeper's predecessor organization the Hudson River Fisherman's Association (HRFA) was founded in 1966, it's misleading to use this as the start of Riverkeeper. Possibly,this could be resolved by creating an HRFA sub-section under the origins section with its own history. Moreover, the rest of the article lacks content organization and reads more like a story, as opposed to an encyclopedia article. This is not surprising considering most of the article cites the book The Riverkeepers: Two Activists Fight to Reclaim Our Environment as a Basic Human Right. In addition to breaking up the article's content by creating well-defined sub-sections, diversifying the sources by including more secondary sources would alleviate some of said issues. Lboconnell (talk) 04:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content organization and outdated information 

message: The three most recent edits to this article as of this posting (19:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the  tag. It's not so much the wording as the fact that so much of the article relies on either Riverkeeper's own website or the book by Cronin and Kennedy; at some points it might as well be Riverkeeper's website. It needs to be balanced by the use of independent third-party reliable sources. Daniel Case (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits from Riverkeeper IP 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Riverkeeper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006000354/http://waterkeeper.org/ht/d/sp/i/188/pid/188 to http://www.waterkeeper.org/ht/d/sp/i/188/pid/188
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Note, stating my Conflict of Interest here. Need help editing content on this page, please recommend proper protocols.
Note, stating my Conflict of Interest here. 
Current President and Hudson Riverkeeper: Tracy Brown. In the second paragraph and right side box, Paul Gallay should be changed to Tracy Brown.
Rotonetts (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the update.  Atsme 💬 📧 23:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Already done  Happy Editing--IAmChaos 05:14, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for making that change. There is still an edit at the end of the second paragraph. Paul Gallay should be changed to Tracy Brown.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rotonetts (talk • contribs) 20:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  - just updated it. Atsme 💬 📧 21:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request edit 

message: Conflict declaration i am an unpaid riverkeeper volunteer.
* In 2000, eight of the 22 members of Riverkeeper's board resigned after Kennedy insisted on rehiring William Wegner, a scientist whom the organization's then-president, Boyle, had fired as soon as he had learned Wegner had been hired six months earlier. In 1995, Wegner had been convicted of smuggling rare bird eggs from Australia and had also pled guilty to tax evasion. Boyle and the board members who resigned believed it was not right for an environmental organization to hire someone convicted of environmental crimes, especially since critics would not hesitate to publicize that fact to gain a publicity advantage. Treasurer John Fry, who also resigned, felt it would hurt the organization's fundraising. Boyle was also further displeased that Kennedy had made an employment decision, since that was solely his responsibility within the organization.[8] Kennedy, who had hired Wegner to work for him personally after Boyle had fired him, said Wegner had done "terrific work" for Riverkeeper and no one, even those who had resigned over the hiring, disputed that. "We all make mistakes in our lives," he told The New York Times. "Where would any of us be if we didn't get a second chance?"[8] As of 2017 Wegner remains employed by Riverkeeper.[9]
Opposition to nuclear power
Riverkeepers has advocated for the closure of the Indian Point nuclear power plant.[4] Riverkeepers argued that the power plant killed fish by taking in river water for cooling[4] and that the power plant could cause "apocalyptic damage" if attacked by terrorists.[10]
Opposition to hydropower
In 2022, Riverkeepers called on New York to reject a $3 billion clean energy plan that would have supplied New York City with hydropower and lessened New York's reliance on fossil fuels. Riverkeepers opposed the hydropower plan, saying "This is not emission-free power." Riverkeepers' position was in stark contrast with many other environmental and clean-energy advocates who argued that the plan was needed to shift the region towards greener energy. Riverkeepers argued that construction of hydropower dams have adverse environment effects, but the hydropower station that New York was set to use had already been constructed which meant that most of the upfront environmental impact had already occurred.[5] (include citations):
* This does not belong in the history section, for history please see this link from the Hudson river museum webpage 
"In 1962, Consolidated Edison announced plans for a new hydroelectric power station, plans which had local fisherman and conservationists up in arms. The company hoped to carve a facility out of Storm King Mountain, a site renowned for its scenic beauty. Locals were, understandably, a little horrified by this scheme. The proposed power plant would obviously mar the landscape — and it probably wouldn’t do the river’s fish population much good either. Bob Boyle suspected that Con Ed’s “water-intake equipment would kill small fish,” decimating the population of his beloved striped bass. In 1965, Boyle joined a number of conservation groups (including Scenic Hudson, one of New York’s most enduring non-for-profit organizations) in a “lawsuit against a proposed Consolidated Edison power plant.” It was not an easy fight, but, after many years of legal battle, the conservationists’ efforts bore fruit.
The lawsuit, entitled Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, resulted in “the first federal court ruling affirming the right of citizens to mount challenges on the basis of potential harm to aesthetic, recreational or conservational values as well as tangible economic injury.” It was, in every respect, a game changer and the true beginning of the modern environmental movement. And what was the crucial keystone of Scenic Hudson’s case? Scientific studies on the Hudson’s striped bass population, which would have, as Boyle predicted, been decimated by Con Ed’s plant.
After the Battle of Storm King had been won, Boyle did not choose to sit back and bask in his victory. No, he knew that work still had to be done. The river remained a polluted mess. By preventing the creation of Con Ed’s power plant, Boyle had only fulfilled the physician’s doctrine: “First, do no harm.” The Hudson still needed a thorough cleaning and a dedicated protector, a watchdog to scare the polluters away. To that end, Boyle began to conceive of a plan. He imagined a sort of ‘river keeper,’ a naturalist/conservationist “out on the river the length of the year.” This riverkeeper would keep watch on the river, sniffing out polluters and bringing them to task. What’s more, the riverkeeper would not act alone. They would have an entire organization behind them — an organization with real teeth. Boyle already had already founded just such an organization, the Hudson River Fishermen’s Association, in 1966. 
Picture
Effluent pipe from Penn Central, 1968. Courtesy Bob Hoebermann.
In 1983, the Fishermen’s Association evolved into ‘Riverkeeper,’ a non-for-profit environmental organization dedicated to the protection of the Hudson. But what about the organization’s aforementioned teeth? Well, Boyle had discovered, years earlier, a pair of 19th century laws (the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and the New York Harbor Act of 1888) which banned the “release of pollutants in the nation’s (and the state’s) waterways.” Furthermore, the two Acts allowed “citizens to sue polluters and collect a bounty.”
Luckily, the laws still held in the modern era. Bob Boyle and the Fishermen’s Association tested out their legal strategy against the Penn Central Railroad, and were able to stop a “pipe spewing oil from the Croton Rail Yard” and collect “$2,000 in fines, the first bounty awarded under the 19th-century law.” The bounty money was then repurposed to underwrite suits against other polluters. Riverkeeper wisely kept this legal strategy. All in all, it was an admirably self-sustaining system.
Eventually, Riverkeeper evolved past the Hudson River. It became a model for others around the world, a part of the “Waterkeeper alliance.” Today, the Waterkeeper organization “unites more than 300 Waterkeeper Organizations and Affiliates that are on the front lines of the global water crisis, patrolling and protecting more than 2.5 million square miles of rivers, lakes and coastal waterways on six continents.”14 The individual waterkeepers work with local communities, enforce environmental laws, track down polluters and educate children about the environment. They are watchful protectors, just as Bob Boyle intended.
Picture
Robert Boyle at the launching of the first Riverkeeper boat, 1983, at the Hudson River Maritime Museum in Kingston, NY. Courtesy Betsy Garthwaite.
Although his main contribution to the environmental movement was undoubtedly Riverkeeper, Boyle never gave up and grew tired of his favorite river. He certainly never gave up fishing for his beloved striped bass. After all, Boyle is the man who once wrote: “There may be more stripers in the Hudson than there are people in New York State. I often find this a cheering thought.” Boyle was, in life and in print, down-to-earth, passionate, and adventurous — with a wryly sardonic sense of humor. He lived a life rich in meaning, a life he could be proud of. Case in point: Boyle once predicted that the Hudson would become “either ‘clean and wholesome’ or ‘bereft of the larger forms of life.’” Before he died on May 19th, 2017, Robert H. Boyle could be sure of two things:"    https://www.hrmm.org/history-blog/robert-boyle-hero-of-the-hudson:
There has to be more history than this
Better connections to the Fishermans organization please. Relationship to the Clearwater, more facts. There is too big a jump from the beginning to the current century. Avram Primack (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please state the changes you wish to make using a 'change X to Y' format. MBihun (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Riverkeeper History 

message: Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia. I did a gradschool assignment on Riverkeeper and would like to add some content to the page. The page is currently very focused on one incident in 2000 with Wegner. I would like to include more history and more about what Riverkeeper does. I would love some guidance on how to not get my edits undone. Any help is welcome. Many thanks! MariliaGabrielaCosta (talk) 18:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving the page