Senators must protect endangered species
As fall arrives, American bald eagles will return to the Willamette Valley in greater numbers than previous years. It is not just the season that is bringing our national bird back; The Endangered Species Act (ESA) – the most important law fostering the return of the bald eagle and other animals – has greatly affected the bald eagle population.
To date, the ESA has helped species large and small. From the gray whale and grizzly bear in the oceans and forests to the Willamette daisy and Fender’s blue butterfly in our own backyards, the ESA has helped keep these species around for us to enjoy.
A recent scientific study in the journal BioScience found that species protected under the ESA are more likely to increase in numbers. The study also found that species living for two or more years in land designated a “critical habitat” appeared more likely to improve in status.
Now, more than ever, we need the protection of the Endangered Species Act. Species are going extinct at a rate we haven’t seen since the last ice age, yet some members of Congress feel the need to undermine this hugely successful law for a narrow group of property-rights activists.
Representative Richard Pombo, R-Calif., supported by Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., introduced and passed a bill sure to tear holes in the safety net provided by the Endangered Species Act if it passes through the Senate and becomes a law. Under the guise of increasing the populations of threatened or endangered species, the bill is in fact a thinly-veiled attempt to satisfy special interests. According to a recent poll conducted by the University of Arizona, 84 percent of Americans support current or stronger endangered species protections. Unfortunately, Congress is not listening to the majority. The logging, mining, cattle and oil industries, which have lobbyists in Washington, D.C., have influenced legislators to destroy the ESA.
House bill 3824 has been dubbed the Wildlife Extinction Bill and has been attacked from both sides of the political spectrum. The Wildlife Extinction Bill is bad news for threatened species, taxpayers and science.
The bill forces us to choose between rampant habitat destruction and big payoffs to developers. Pombo’s bill would force wildlife agencies to choose between abandoning enforcement of the ESA or writing large checks to pay developers to comply with the law.
This bill eliminates scientific review. It forces wildlife agencies to accept the developer’s characterization of a project’s impacts. It denies scientists the ability to request additional information from the developer.
The Wildlife Extinction Bill politicizes scientific decisions. The only thing worse than money in politics is politics in science. The Endangered Species Act requires that all decisions be made on basis of the best-available scientific information – what constitutes the best science is left up to the scientific community. Pombo’s bill allows the secretary of the interior to define what science is sound.
Finally, the Wildlife Extinction Bill weakens recovery efforts. The ESA requires that recovery plans be implemented and that species be protected until they are fully recovered. Pombo’s bill allows agencies to ignore recovery plans, and it requires protections to be removed within individual states even though the species, as a whole, is tumbling toward extinction.
Fortunately the bill isn’t law yet; it must still pass in the Senate. It’s time to ask our senators to stand up for endangered species.
Jonathan C. Evans
Law Student
Inbox
Daily Emerald
October 6, 2005
0
More to Discover