Liberty
Matters News Service
September 16, 2005
Rumors of Pombo ESA Bill Linger
Over 200 organizations and landowners delivered a letter to Congressman Richard Pombo (R-CA) and several members of the Natural Resources Committee this week, opposing his efforts to strengthen the Endangered Species Act. The letter was based upon a draft bill leaked last July, which included a 50% trigger for compensation, invasive species protection, and expanded authority of the Secretary of Interior. Property rights advocates raised considerable opposition to the draft, which ultimately forced Pombo to abandon plans to file the bill before the August recess. Now, the rumor mill in DC is working overtime, some indicating the new draft of the draft bill is much better for property rights and others indicating the opposite. The draft is being so tightly held by Pombo's staff, that only a handful of Republican staffers were given a one-hour window to quickly review the draft, but not allowed to take copies. Latest report is that Pombo will file his bill next week, possibly with a Democrat co-sponsor, and there could be a hearing as early as September 21st on the bill. So, we wait to see whether Pombo will protect property rights in his new version. If the bill is an improvement over the original draft, signers of the Property Rights First! letter can take credit for pushing the debate back towards property rights. If the opposite is true, then Congress has been appropriately advised.
Property Rights First Letter to
Congress
It Depends on Whose Oyster is Gored
Robert Rheault is an ardent environmentalist, he says, but he is having second thoughts about the Endangered Species Act these days. Mr. Reault is an oyster farmer on the East Coast and he fears he may be out of business if the American oyster is listed as endangered. Mr. Reault writes in the Providence Journal that up until his livelihood was threatened he would have advised his Sen. Lincoln Chaffee (R-RI), chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Water, to resist changing the ESA. "Listing the oyster as endangered will run counter to scientific evidence and common sense. It will also destroy an entire industry, killing thousands of jobs and creating economic hardship, he writes. U. S. shellfish farmers produce over a half-billion oysters each year, nearly twice the wild harvest. "Unfortunately, the way the ESA is written, any listing will have to encompass the species throughout its range, from Maine to Texas," he writes. "I would submit that any species being produced in such numbers is not threatened or endangered - it's a crop," he continued. Because the Act is now threatening his livelihood, Mr. Reault recognizes the need to make changes, but he fears changes will not come in time "to save the oyster industry from this frivolous petition." Changes to the Act are now being considered, but we fear those changes will not soften its destructive impact on people and livelihoods.
Robert Theault: Endangered Species
Act vs. Oysters?
School Officials tell PETA "Hit the Road"
The principal of the Williams Middle School in Florence, South Carolina, and the district superintendent told representatives of PETA they meant it when they said PETA was not welcome on campus. When PETA people attempted to enter school property, in spite of being informed the district policy didn't allow outside organizations to distribute propaganda, they were escorted away by school officials and the police. A PETA spokesman was shocked at such treatment. "Usually the administrators are happy that we're there. The parents are happy because they know that we're bringing a good message of compassion and health to the kids." The principal disputed that argument saying, "We take great pride in our health program and teaching children about healthy choices for food, so we don't need PETA to that for us."
School Tells PETA's Propaganda Machine to Move On
Environmentalist's Lawsuits Led to Flooding
Much of the blame for the horrendous floods that covered New Orleans in Katrina's wake can be laid directly at the feet of radical environmental groups. In the late 1970s the Army Corps of Engineers proposed building fortifications at two strategic locations that would have withstood the fury of a Category 5 hurricane. A May 28, 2005 (three months before Katrina) article in the New Orleans Times-Picayune said, "Under the original plan, floodgate-type structures would have been built at the Rigolets and Chef Menteur passes to block storm surges from moving from the Gulf into Lake Ponchartain." "Those plans," reported the Times, "were abandoned after environmental advocates successfully sued to stop the projects as too damaging to the wetlands and the lake's eco-system." In 1977, a state environmental group, Save Our Wetlands (SOWL) sued to halt the project, claiming it would have a negative impact on Lake Pontchartrain. In December of that year, U. S. District Judge Charles Schwartz Jr. issued an injunction ordering the Corps to submit another environmental impact statement. "It is the opinion of the Court," Judge Schwartz wrote, 'that plaintiffs herein have demonstrated that they, and in fact all persons in this area, will be irreparably harmed if the barrier project, based upon the August 1974 Federal Environmental Impact Statement, is allowed to continue." Today, New Orleans stands in mute testament to the environmental madness that has gripped this nation for so long.