Monday, July 6, 2009

Environment

Changes to Endangered Species Act Called Bad Science

Conservationists concerned about proposed Endangered Species Act changes

Posted August 28, 2008

By Andrea Thompson, LiveScience

Changes that the Bush administration is proposing to make to Endangered Species Act regulations just aren't sound science, various scientists and conservation groups say.

They're concerned that the loss of scientific oversight resulting from the changes will leave some species vulnerable to federal projects that could damage habitats.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA), signed into law by President Nixon on Dec. 28, 1973, does more than just provide for the creation of the Endangered Species List. The act also requires that "recovery plans" be drawn up and implemented to protect and ultimately restore the populations of endangered species, and it charges the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service with detailing and enforcing these plans.

The ESA "is one of our bedrock environmental laws," said Melissa Waage, a campaign manager with the Natural Resources Defense Council, a non-profit advocacy group.

But the act also charges other federal agencies with "a special duty," as Michael Bean, an environmental lawyer with the Environmental Defense Fund puts it, not to jeopardize these plans by authorizing, funding or carrying out activities that would further endanger any listed species. It is this duty that the proposed changes would affect.

"These changes will affect any federal project that affects any endangered species," Bean told LiveScience. "It puts every endangered species at particular risk."

Conservation tool

In the 35 years since its inception, the ESA "has allowed for many important successful conservation efforts," said George Amato, a conservation biologist with the American Museum of Natural History in New York.

The proposed changes are "of grave, grave concern to conservationists," Amato said, adding that it wasn't just extreme environmental groups voicing their opposition, but "very, very mainstream efforts."

Some of the act's major successes at recovering populations of endangered animals include the bald eagle, grizzly bear, gray wolf, and American alligator. (Species covered under the act don't just include familiar charismatic birds and mammals, but also invertebrates and plants.)

Of the species that have been placed on the list, 99 percent are still with us, Waage said.

Several prominent creatures on the Endangered Species List are also on a Red List of Threatened Species put out by the International Union for Conservation of Nature that monitors endangered species all over the world. These species face an extremely high risk of extinction in the immediate future, the IUCN states.

Amato, who works on many international conservation efforts, said that the ESA is "the single most important tool in conserving endangered species," at least in the United States, and that it is held up as a model of the role that governments can play in conservation efforts all over the world.

Bean agrees with this sentiment and said that, in his opinion, the greatest accomplishment of the Endangered Species Act has been "in changing the behavior of other federal agencies" in relation to how their projects affect threatened wildlife.

It is precisely this accomplishment that the proposed changes threaten, conservationists say.

Bean also said the Fish and Wildlife scientists he has spoken with said they had no opportunity to weigh in on the changes, which were proposed by those in the service's senior political levels.

Oversight

Since the 1970s, the Fish and Wildlife Service has had regulations in place that govern how other federal agencies consult with them on proposed projects, such as building a dam or highway, but also including any privately-funded projects that would require a federal permit, Bean said.

When a federal agency, for example the National Park Service or the Army Corps of Engineers, proposes a project, they must first determine if any endangered species are present in the area. If so, they must carry out a biological assessment to determine what, if any, impact the project may have on the species.

advertisement

Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
Make USNews.com your home page.