WASHINGTON , Aug. 11, 2008
Endangered Species Act Rendered Toothless?
Habitats Threatened By Global Warming May No Longer Factor In To Which Animals Are Protected
-
Photo
In this Jan. 30, 2005, file photo, a bald eagle soars over a farm in Sheffield Mills, N.S., Canada. Parts of the Endangered Species Act may soon be extinct. The Bush administration wants federal agencies to decide for themselves whether construction projects such as highways, dams and mines might harm endangered animals and plants. (AP PHOTO)
-
Play CBS Video
Video
The Future Of The Bald Eagle
The American bald eagle, a pinnacle symbol of this nation, has been removed from the list of endangered species. But, as Russ Mitchell reports, some people in New England feel it is too soon.
-
Video
Polar Bears Endangered
"CBS News RAW": Amid predictions that two thirds of the polar bear population could disappear by the end of this century, the Arctic dweller has been declared an endangered species. NO AUDIO
-
Video
The Cutest Endangered Species?
"CBS News Raw": The first known footage of the Mongolian long-ear jerboa, a kangaroo-like rodent with super long ears that is extremely endangered and has received little conservation attention.
-
Interactive
Global Warming
The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
The Bush administration wants federal agencies to decide for themselves whether highways, dams, mines and other construction projects might harm endangered animals and plants. New regulations, which don't require the approval of Congress, would reduce the mandatory, independent reviews government scientists have been performing for 35 years, according to a draft first obtained by The Associated Press.
Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said late Monday the changes were needed to ensure that the Endangered Species Act would not be used as a "back door" to regulate the gases blamed for global warming. In May, the polar bear became the first species declared as threatened because of climate change. Warming temperatures are expected to melt the sea ice the bear depends on for survival.
The draft rules would bar federal agencies from assessing the emissions from projects that contribute to global warming and its effect on species and habitats.
"We need to focus our efforts where they will do the most good," Kempthorne said in a news conference organized quickly after AP reported details of the proposal. "It is important to use our time and resources to protect the most vulnerable species. It is not possible to draw a link between greenhouse gas emissions and distant observations of impacts on species."
If approved, the changes would represent the biggest overhaul of endangered species regulations since 1986. They would accomplish through rules what conservative Republicans have been unable to achieve in Congress: ending some environmental reviews that developers and other federal agencies blame for delays and cost increases on many projects.
The chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, which oversees the Interior Department, said he was "deeply troubled" by the changes.
"This proposed rule ... gives federal agencies an unacceptable degree of discretion to decide whether or not to comply with the Endangered Species Act," said Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va. "Eleventh-hour rulemakings rarely if ever lead to good government."
The new regulations follow a pattern by the Bush administration not to seek input from its scientists. The regulations were drafted by attorneys at both the Interior and Commerce Departments. Scientists with both agencies were first briefed on the proposal last week during a conference call, according to an official who asked not to be identified.
Last month, in similar fashion, the Environmental Protection Agency surprised its scientific experts when it decided it did not want to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
The rule changes unveiled Monday would apply to any project a federal agency would fund, build or authorize that the agency itself determines is unlikely to harm endangered wildlife and their habitat. Government wildlife experts currently participate in tens of thousands of such reviews each year.
The revisions also would limit which effects can be considered harmful and set a 60-day deadline for wildlife experts to evaluate a project when they are asked to become involved. If no decision is made within 60 days, the project can move ahead.
"If adopted, these changes would seriously weaken the safety net of habitat protections that we have relied upon to protect and recover endangered fish, wildlife and plants for the past 35 years," said John Kostyack, executive director of the National Wildlife Federation's Wildlife Conservation and Global Warming initiative.
Under current law, federal agencies must consult with experts at the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service to determine whether a project is likely to jeopardize any endangered species or to damage habitat, even if no harm seems likely. This initial review usually results in accommodations that better protect the 1,353 animals and plants in the U.S. listed as threatened or endangered and determines whether a more formal analysis is warranted.
The Interior Department said such consultations are no longer necessary because federal agencies have developed expertise to review their own construction and development projects, according to the 30-page draft obtained by the AP.
"We believe federal action agencies will err on the side of caution in making these determinations," the proposal said.
The director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Dale Hall, said the changes would help focus expertise on "where we know we don't have a negative effect on the species but where the agency is vulnerable if we don't complete a consultation."
Responding to questions about the process, Hall said, "We will not do anything that leaves the public out of this process."
The new rules were expected to be formally proposed immediately, officials said. They would be subject to a 30-day public comment period before being finalized by the Interior Department. That would give the administration enough time to impose the rules before November's presidential election. A new administration could freeze any pending regulations or reverse them, a process that could take months. Congress could also overturn the rules through legislation, but that could take even longer.
The proposal was drafted largely by attorneys in the general counsel's offices of the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Interior Department, according to an official with the National Marine Fisheries Service, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan hadn't yet been circulated publicly. The two agencies' experts were not consulted until last week, the official said.
Between 1998 and 2002, the Fish and Wildlife Service conducted 300,000 consultations. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which evaluates projects affecting marine species, conducts about 1,300 reviews each year.
The reviews have helped safeguard protected species such as bald eagles, Florida panthers and whooping cranes. A federal government handbook from 1998 described the consultations as "some of the most valuable and powerful tools to conserve listed species."
In recent years, however, some federal agencies and private developers have complained that the process results in delays and increased construction costs.
"We have always had concerns with respect to the need for streamlining and making it a more efficient process," said Joe Nelson, a lawyer for the National Endangered Species Act Reform Coalition, a trade group for home builders and the paper and farming industry.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the proposed changes illegal.
"This proposed regulation is another in a continuing stream of proposals to repeal our landmark environmental laws through the back door," she said. "If this proposed regulation had been in place, it would have undermined our ability to protect the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the gray whale."
The Bush administration and Congress have attempted with mixed success to change the law.
In 2003, the administration imposed similar rules that would have allowed agencies to approve new pesticides and projects to reduce wildfire risks without asking the opinion of government scientists about whether threatened or endangered species and habitats might be affected. The pesticide rule was later overturned in court. The Interior Department, along with the Forest Service, is currently being sued over the rule governing wildfire prevention.
In 2005, the House passed a bill that would have made similar changes to the Endangered Species Act, but the bill died in the Senate.
The sponsor of that bill, then-House Natural Resources chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., told the AP Monday that allowing agencies to judge for themselves the effects of a project will not harm species or habitat.
"There is no way they can rubber stamp everything because they will end up in court for every decision," he said.
But internal reviews by the National Marine Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service concluded that about half the unilateral evaluations by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management that determined wildfire prevention projects were unlikely to harm protected species were not legally or scientifically valid.
Those had been permitted under the 2003 rule changes.
"This is the fox guarding the hen house. The interests of agencies will outweigh species protection interests," said Eric Glitzenstein, the attorney representing environmental groups in the lawsuit over the wildfire prevention regulations. "What they are talking about doing is eviscerating the Endangered Species Act."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 61 CommentsWorst president ever.
Without measurement (science), there can be no balance of priorities. Only recklessness.
Thankfully this president chose not to be a doctor (his daddy probably could have gotten that degree too).
Bush would cure a headache by decapitation.
Could the Republicans -possibly- have chosen anyone as stupid to serve as president?
Hmm.... Maybe someone who graduated at the bottom .6% of his class is stupid enough to do their bidding...
Good thing I didn''t vote for him... I''d suffer an aneurysm from embarrassment and shame.
So... any of you neocons willing to step up for your hero on this one??
Great line.
The great anti-intellectual will be gone soon. But not soon enough.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ritewingman
Ooops... missed one! A terd, I mean!
It''''s about time someone stood up to the radical agenda of the enviro-maniacs. If it were up to them and their twisted ideology, we would all be living in huts growing our own food (organic of course).
Of course Pelosi and her crowd are still cowed by the heavies at the Sierra Club, et al. They are using their mythology of global warming to take control of more and more of our lives.
Now someone is pushing back.
GO BUSH!!
Posted by ritewingman
I take it you agree with Bush and don''t have much time fir "book lirnin"? Anyone who disagrees with Bush is a radical. Har de har.
It''''s about time someone stood up to the radical agenda of the enviro-maniacs. If it were up to them and their twisted ideology, we would all be living in huts growing our own food (organic of course).
Of course Pelosi and her crowd are still cowed by the heavies at the Sierra Club, et al. They are using their mythology of global warming to take control of more and more of our lives.
Now someone is pushing back.
GO BUSH!!
Posted by ritewingman
what ritewingman fails to recognize is science doesn''t lie. it''s tested, peer-reviewed, and our only tool against chaos.
Only Bush has politicized science. The only reason he needs to take such a desperate measure, is because he can''t make his arguments on the merits.
------------------------------
Congress is going to have to pass another law to prevent Bush and pals from screwingup the ecology.
Time to get Bush out of office.... NOW
We can not afford another 6 months of this crapola
what ritewingman fails to recognize is science doesn''''t lie. it''''s tested, peer-reviewed, and our only tool against chaos.
Only Bush has politicized science. The only reason he needs to take such a desperate measure, is because he can''''t make his arguments on the merits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by smurfcrusher
Sorry Al Gore Politisized Science when he made up Global Warming!!!!
You have all been fooled
Maybe if he fills the pockets of enough corporations, the rest of us won''t realize our water is undrinkable, air unbreathable?
Oh yes - if the scientists have no say, the pollution can''t harm us. Idiot.
The effect of this action is to eliminate the influence of SCIENTISTS in determining environmental protections, leaving it up to political sycophants instead. That is absolutely NOT a good thing!
Bush is evil incarnate.
Bush on Medvedev: I looked into his eyes and saw a ''smart guy''
Bush on Scientists: I looked into their eyes and saw the shifty craft of habitual liers! Better off without ''em!
Its time to realize that Bush''s ''body-reading'' skills are the source of the problem.
Humans cause global warming, US admits
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2023835.stm
"The admission will be a blow to US industry
The US Government has acknowledged for the first time that man-made pollution is largely to blame for global warming."
...Apparently, it won''t be a blow to industry... because Bush wouldn''t let a little thing like "rality" get in the way of profits - *** the consequences.
So all you Bush yes-men need not invoke Al Gore for your weak denials that global warming exists - convince your buddy King George who has already admitted it years ago.
Bush on Medvedev: I looked into his eyes and saw a ''''smart guy''''
Bush on Scientists: I looked into their eyes and saw the shifty craft of habitual liers! Better off without ''''em!
Bush looked at the environment - and saw a sitting duck.
Wow - I feel safer already. Thanks to Bush - NO ONE will have a "back door" to stop global warming. Phew - I was worried that our country might not sell out to big oil for once but good ''ol Bush is making sure that no one impedes big business. God forbid that president actually shows some evidence of a soul.
*********************************
Fortunately, that can be reversed as soon as we get a new president. Bush can hurry and try to do as much more damage as possible until Jan. 20, and then the next president can start trying to undo the damage. Worst president in the history of the United States.
Bush''s new rules come from the recent understanding that not only is global warming happening, but its happening so fast that future extinctions are likely to be PRIMARILY due to this cause, and he doesn''t want government scientists to find out enough to sound the alarm for the rest of us.
And how the
H
E
L
L
are they going to decide? Horoscopes? Voodoo?
I CAN NOT believe this voodoo
B
U
L
L
S
H
I
T
Worst president ever.
Amen. Worst EVER. Didn''t think it was possible. What are the ODDS of that happening? Worst EVER, in our 200+ year history.
Just unlucky, I guess. :(
The next generations will be paying for it, that''s for sure.
Apparently he''s no longer concerned about his legacy. Lowest ratings ever means it''s more profitable to pillage the environment and abuse his power while he can.
Well, time flies.
This president is proof positive that stupidity is NOT an asset.
Please keep that in mind, at the polls...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by smurfcrusher at 11:43 PM : Aug 11, 2008
+ report abuse
Shrub cannot do this and bypass Congressional Oversight. Look for Lawsuits and Court Blockage of this Crapp till after Smog Boy leaves in January.
Poppy: "I should have shot that load in Barb''s Face"..
The WORST PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF THE NATION!
Smog Boy is pretty good. Wasn''t there a Godzilla movie where he fought the Smog Monster?
it was a long time ago but I recall toxic waste was its weapon.
That''s pretty fitting for this president... sewage plants in the works named after him.
Posted by ubrew12 at 10:48 PM : Aug 11, 2008
Humans AREN''T on the endangered species list. How could this make him anti-human?
You guys are so ignorant to the facts, SO lead with by the MSM, you''ll come up with any off the wall reason to attack the president. Come on people, step into REALITY!!!
Federal agencies that are so totally inept they can''t do their mandated jobs, and we''re supposed to let them decide? No way.
No Bush. No Obama. It''s time to bring back peasants with pitchforks and clean out that wretched city in DC.
Posted by g1000 at 07:48 AM : Aug 12, 2008
Toothless?
Gutless?
Are you hindered? PRESIDENT Bush has stood up to the gutless, MSM controlled congress for the past 8 years. He has stood firm in his convictions in the face of pacifism and has proven to be a very staunch CinC. I applaud the guy a job well done!!
Fortunately, Pombo, slick wearer of lizard-skin cowboy boots who spoke with a tongue as forked as a reptile''s, is now on the ashheap of history. The voters trashed him.
For 8 years, the Bush-Cheney regime has made prostitites of government agencies.
If you want more whoring, vote McCain. Another pea in the pod.
Federal agenicies deciding for themselves ..... ROFLMAO! FEMA could not handle their job and the South still suffers from Katrina! The EPA cow-towed and bowed to political pressure and redacted scientific data from the report to Congress on global warming. The Department of Transportation allowed 2 companies to continue in business and now many are dead! The Federal Reserve Bank, The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission could not adequately oversee the major lenders in the country and look at that mess!
ROFLMAO! Repubs are so greedy! All they do is scream less taxes and more corporate welfare!
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 61 Comments