Posted on 12/03/2004 6:50:34 PM PST by NormsRevenge
SAN DIEGO (AP) - Several Western governors called Friday for a reform of the federal Endangered Species Act that would promote conservation while giving states a greater say in how their lands are managed.
"What I believe is we want to recover the species," said Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, a Republican. "Let's not use the act as a way to try to manage private and public properties. Let's use the act to help us learn how to recover the species."
The 18 states that make up the Western Governors Association, which opened its winter meeting in San Diego Friday, say they are uniquely affected by the 30-year-old law. Nearly 70 percent of the nation's endangered species are located in the West, according to the association.
Owens, the association's chairman, supported efforts by House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., to change the law. Pombo, who is a keynote speaker at panels Saturday, hoped to line up support for his legislative effort reform the act, which remains at the top of his agenda again when Congress reconvenes next month.
Pombo wants to require scientific peer review for any major decision under the act, including listing species. The congressman also wants critical habitat to be designated for species to be done more efficiently and with better scientific data.
"These governors will be very important to his goal and their goal of improving and modernizing the act," said Brian Kennedy, a Pombo spokesman.
Republican Govs. Linda Lingle of Hawaii, Mike Rounds of South Dakota, Kenny Guinn of Nevada and Judy Martz of Montana also joined the call for reform of the act at a news conference at the opening of the two-day session in San Diego. California's Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, was due to attend the session Friday night.
Gov. Bill Richardson, D-New Mexico, however, said a major overhaul of the Endangered Species Act wasn't needed. He said Pombo was setting the bar too high by calling for "stronger science" instead of "sound science."
"I think you need sound science," Richardson said. "I don't think what we want to do is create a scientific definition that increases the possibility of extinction."
David Hogan, of the Tucson, Ariz.-based Center for Biological Diversity, an endangered species and habitat protection advocacy group, said most of the Western governors, with a few exceptions, want to gut the act.
"What's clear from this meeting and other legislative proposals is that many lawmakers are mounting a campaign to really eviscerate our nation's strongest wildlife protection law solely to benefit their cronies in the timber industry, mining industry and others," he said.
On Friday, the governors' association praised a recommendation by Interior Department biologists against adding the sage grouse to the endangered species list, a determination that could wind up benefiting natural gas and oil producers but add to environmentalists' concerns.
Having lived in rural NM for a while, I'm hyper sensitive to the eastern block controlling what western states can do with their land. They are essentially forcing them to 2nd tier economic status, and reducing their growth potential. It's the only way the NE states can protect any of their population and jobs anymore. The western states need to fight back. Remind the likes of Kennedy that 75% of Boston is landfill, so stop telling Idaho or Wyoming or any other state what to do with their land.
E.S.A. must die !!!!!!!
Oh Boy...Light at the end of the tunnel. Can this be true?
BTW, the Center for Biological Diversity was formerly the Southwest Center for Biologic Diversity. They make their money suing agencies for violations of environmental laws then reclaiming their legal expenses.
Who is House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif.? Or rather where is he from?
"I think you need sound science," Richardson said. "I don't think what we want to do is create a scientific definition that increases the possibility of extinction."
Typical Richardson response. He's cleaned house at the state oil conservation division and put restrictions on new oil and gas development claiming in will endanger the environment and threaten fragile species. In spite of that (and because of the hike in oil and gas prices), NM will have a state government revenue surplus this year. No doubt fat King Bill will tout that in coming years as he tries his luck at running for President. Unlike Bill Clinton, who was an unorganized lout, Richardson (and Hillary) rules with an iron hand, rewards cronies and political donors, and steps hard on anyone (Replublican OR Democrat) who gets in his way. Look out for him in four years.
The Tracy/Stockton area.
The best solution for the ESA is to simply kill it, put an end to it, repeal it, de-fund it, and reallocate every Gov. Org. worker associated with it to other branches of Govt.
Then burn the offices where anything was ever written in support of it!
Anything less will only promote more phony "studies" , more relocated birds nest and Lynx hairs in support of additional "wilderness study area's" and "habitat".
The ESA must die!
This is what the Endangered Species Act (Northwest Forest Plan) did to one of my communities from the period 1990-2000:
The overall population declined 22%. The number of residents aged 0-4 and 20-29 dropped by over 50%, while age 5-19 and 30-44 dropped 45%. Age 45-64 grew 86%. There was a 41.8% drop in school enrollment. Median household income declined from $31,236 to $20,924 (drop of 33%.) The number of households earning less than $10,000 grew by 24%. Unemployment climbed from 16.18% to 19.60% in 2000. Manufacturing jobs (lumber mill) which had accounted for almost one third of the jobs dropped to 4%.
Currently, 15.9% of the adult population of the county lives below the federal poverty line and 27.2% of the children.
In addition, the Forests are choked with unharvested trees which has suppressed and stunted their growth and has created massive fuel hazards.
The federal definition of a species should include the whole shebang, not "ESUs" - evolutionary significant units. Current population and historic population trend data should be required before a listing can be made. (We have no idea how many coho there are or there were or how many are needed to reach recovery.) Economic impact of the whole process of listing (not just the impact of establishment of critical habitat) should be considered.
By the way, critical habitat only affects discretionery acts of the federal government. It is a big deal on a federal Project like the BoR Klamath Project, it is nothing to private landowners who have no federal nexus.
Land and water owners should be encouraged to create suitable habitat through positive finacial incentives not regulatory threats. It is time that we stop forcing an inidvidual to bear the burden of protecting endangered species for the benefit of the public.
The federal and State governments should not use ESA as an excuse to engage in resource planning and management on private lands. General planning is a county function and the landowner, not the government, manages property under a system of private ownership. Recovery plans are VOLUNTARY.
Federal "take" should exclude habitat modification and stick to trap and kill. CA State "take" needs to eliminate the term "fully mitigate." It is being interpreted to mean that for every fish killed, a new fish must be added through new habitat. (Use just "mitigate.")
The practice of binding County land use jurisdiction into the process through County enforced habitat conservation plans should be prohibited. This is expanding/enlarging State and federal jurisdiction and authority by impressing County government into the Act's service. Personaly, I think it is unconstitutional.
I firmly believe that voluntary, incentive based, bottom up efforts make more strides in recovering species than the federal paradigm of regulatory, punitive, top down, heavy bureaucratic and litigious approach. (Most of the money currently goes toward analysis paralysis, litigation and staggering bureaucracies rather than on the ground projects and field science.)
Sorry --- this is a sore spot. I have worked with ESA and CESA professionally for more than a decade. Personally, I think they should both be gutted and redrawn.
BTTT!!!!!!
The only difference between the ESA and Hitler's land grabs is that the ESA doesn't have the swastika as its logo.
It has been wrested far beyond its original purpose. It has also become the root of the most powerful and rabid environmental lobby with tendrils that reach to every state house in this nation, to both halls of congress, and the White House itself.
As a result, billions of our dollars have become wrapped up in an industry that has become over-burdensome, corrupt, and far too powerful. Those tendrils now boast numerous non-governmental organizations that attempt to use provisions of the ESA to implement United Nations-based, and other socialistic initiatives that are the source of endless infringement and encroachment on American citizen’s property and water rights.
Such a condition is un-American to the bone and cannot be allowed to continue. Until the ESA is addressed, the threat of another Klamath Crisis, virtually anywhere in this nation will loom ever present.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.