Florida Everglades
  Most of the Everglades and Big Cypress National Preserve are under advisories for limited or no fish consumption because of high levels of mercury pollution. In large portions of the endangered Florida panther’s range, chronic exposure to mercury results in mortality and possibly lowered reproductive success. With so few Florida panthers living in southern Florida, every factor that results in decreased populations will jeopardize the continued existence of the panther in Florida.

Northern Rockies
  In 2004 Montana became the first state in the northern Rocky Mountain region to issue a statewide fish advisory in reaction to growing evidence about the effects of mercury. Mercury emitted by power plants can travel long distances and begin accumulating in fish even near headwaters in the Rockies. Fish advisories have been issued for 29 Montana lakes due to mercury, including brown trout at Hebgen Lake near West Yellowstone.

Great Lakes
  The Great Lakes watershed has accumulated a heavy dose of mercury. Studies of Isle Royale and Voyageurs National Parks have monitored the mercury levels of water and soils in the parks. Most of the mercury in the upper part of the soil is probably a result of atmospheric deposition from off-island sources, as there are no known significant mercury sources in Isle Royale to account for the widespread distribution of mercury in soils, and it is well known that atmospheric deposition is an important contributor of mercury in the region.

Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountains National Parks
  Both parks show signs of mercury contamination, and monitoring by the Park Service is ongoing. Preliminary results suggest that Great Smoky Mountains National Park will be in the top 10% of parks monitored for mercury deposition nationwide. Recent research shows significant bioaccumulation of methyl mercury in salamanders in Shenandoah National Park. Peregrine falcons and forest songbirds in the entire eastern region are impacted by mercury. In recent decades, the number of wood thrushes has declined 45 percent, and researchers now suspect that accumulation of mercury in forest ecosystems could be part of the cause.

Mammoth Cave National Park
  Scientists have found increased mercury levels among bats in the park, which could pose a significant threat to the endangered Indiana bat. Researchers believe the mercury contamination is likely the result of emissions from coal-fired power plants. Bats were found to have mercury levels at nearly 10 parts per million -- a level at which hazardous effects have been detected in people. The EPA recommended limit for mercury in people is 1 part per million.

Acadia National Park
  The park’s Mount Desert Island is often immersed in clouds and coastal fog that can be loaded with pollutants, including mercury. Acadia has some of the highest rates of mercury deposition and accumulation in the Northeast. The highest concentration of mercury ever documented in a Maine fish was at Hodgdon Pond on the western side of the island. The entire state of Maine is under a fish consumption advisory.

New EPA Mercury Rules: Too Little, Too Late
  The Clean Air Act requires power plants to reduce their mercury pollution by 90 percent by 2008. But EPA rules finalized in 2005 allow significantly more mercury pollution and delay reductions until after 2026. Forty-five U.S. Senators, EPA’s Inspector General, the General Accountability Office, EPA's Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee, and the Congressional Research Service have all identified serious flaws with the rule. A record 680,000 citizens commented on the rule, the vast majority seeking stronger protections. EPA’s mercury rules for power plants are flawed because they: illegally exempt power plant mercury emissions from the toxic pollution requirements of the Clean Air Act, even though mercury is a potent neurotoxin, and even though every other major industrial emitter of mercury is subject to those requirements; fail to reduce mercury to a level sufficient to protect people, wildlife and wild places; and delay mercury reductions decades longer than is necessary and required by law.

• 45 U.S. Senators urged former EPA Administrator Leavitt to "withdraw the entire proposed [mercury] rule package" because the proposed rule "permits far more mercury pollution, and for years longer, than the Clean Air Act allows." (August 2004)
• The US Government Accountability Office issued a highly critical report identifying several major shortcomings in EPA's cost-benefit analysis of mercury control options "limiting the transparency and usefulness of the analysis." Around this same time, press reports revealed that EPA suppressed studies by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis and EPA's own water office that show tremendous benefits from reducing mercury pollution from power plants (March 2005)
• EPA received a record 680,000 public comments on the proposed mercury rule, including comments from thousands of sportsmen's groups, medical and public health groups, health professionals, environmental scientists, faith organizations, and environmental groups, calling for stronger protections. (June 2004)
• The EPA Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee sent two letters to the EPA administrator strongly recommending that EPA “set a utility rule on mercury emissions that achieves much greater protections for children in a shorter timeframe." (August, November 2004)
• The EPA Inspector General issued a highly critical report on the mercury proposal, finding that EPA staff was told to ignore legal requirements in arriving at a predetermined outcome favored by industry. (February 2005)
• Congressional Research Service reported that "full compliance with the [mercury rule's] 70% reduction might be delayed until 2030," and that EPA's claims that the technology to reduce mercury emissions will not be available until after 2010 "is widely disputed." CRS also found that, having already proposed tougher mercury standards and taken comment on them in 2004, EPA “could proceed to promulgation without significant delay.” (April, July 2005)