State lawmakers pursuing changes to
endangered species' habitats
Thursday, April 29, 2004
By ERICA
WERNER
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON -- Two lawmakers, a
Republican and a Democrat from neighboring California farm districts, are
angering environmentalists by trying to change the way habitats for endangered
plants and animals are designated.
House Resources Committee Chairman
Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, a longtime foe of the Endangered Species Act, has
scheduled a hearing Wednesday on a bill by Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced, to
give the Interior Department more leeway in designating habitats critical to
the survival of endangered or threatened species.
Now, critical habitat
is supposed to be designated when a species is listed as endangered or
threatened, though that often is delayed. Cardoza's bill would prevent the
government from designating habitat until a species recovery plan is developed,
and only then if it's "practicable, economically feasible and
determinable."
Because there is no mandatory timeline for a developing a
recovery plan, environmentalists contend the bill would, in effect,
indefinitely postpone the designation of critical habitats. Any development is
generally precluded in an area determined to be a critical habitat.
"It
hardly matters what you do for species if you don't take care of their habitat,
and yet this chairman is single-handedly leading a crusade to eviscerate the
habitat protection standards of the Endangered Species Act," said Jamie
Rappaport Clark, executive director of Defenders of Wildlife and head of the
Fish and Wildlife Service during President Clinton's second term.
Pombo
issued a position paper Tuesday calling the Endangered Species Act's critical
habitat provisions "perverse," contending they put the needs of bark beetles
and fish over humans.
Cardoza said his Critical Habitat Reform Act would
"strike a balance" between the goal of preserving species and the property
rights of farmers, ranchers and homeowners.
"What's happening is this
act is being used to stop any development, any progress through lawsuits, and
that's not working for endangered species or the public at large," he
said.
Pombo's seven-page position paper argues that the Endangered
Species Act has provoked nuisance lawsuits by environmental groups out for
financial gain, and pitted the government against farmers and homeowners. It
says the law gives landowners an incentive to destroy species habitat in order
to rid themselves of the burden of having to deal with the act's onerous
regulations.
The paper also contends that the act has failed because few
species have recovered from being endangered or threatened. Environmentalists
say the law is meant as a safety net to keep endangered species from going
extinct, and it's unrealistic to expect a species that is near extinction to
recover quickly.
Over 1,200 plants and animals are now listed as
threatened or endangered. The Fish and Wildlife Service says 39 have been taken
off the list over the years -- 15 because they recovered and the others because
they went extinct or for technical reasons.
Cardoza's bill is H.R.
2933.
------
On the Net:
Congress:
http://thomas.loc.gov
House
Resources Committee: http://www.house.gov/resources/
Endangered
Species Act: http://endangered.fws.gov/
** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
further information please refer to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
| |