Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act has protected hundreds of species from extinction, as well as contributed to population increases and the recovery of species like the peregrine falcon. But now, the Bush administration has proposed weakening the Endangered Species Act by allowing any federal agency to decide for itself whether or not protected species would be threatened by agency projects such as roads, dams, or mines.
Many federal agencies do not have the scientific expertise needed to protect species. For decades, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) scientists have provided critical analysis of the consequences of federal projects for endangered species. The changes cut FWS scientists out of the process.
Furthermore, there is often a clear conflict of interest between the projects federal agencies want to carry out and the species they may harm in doing so.
A Closed Process
According to press reports, these new regulations were drafted behind closed doors with little or no input from endangered species biologists. Furthermore, the public has been given only 30 days to comment on the changes before they are finalized. The Associated Press has reported that the proposed regulations were not even shown to expert federal scientists, but instead were written by attorneys in the Departments of Commerce and the Interior.
One of the founding principles of our nation is a clear system of checks and balances designed to protect our citizens and natural resources from abuses of power. If these rule changes are put into effect, the higher level of accountability required by the Endangered Species Act will be diminished, and many protected species may follow along with it.
A Familiar Pattern
The proposal contains elements similar to those in failed legislation from 2005-2006 that more than 5,000 biologists successfully defeated with the 2006 Biologists Letter to the Senate Concerning Science and the Endangered Species Act. We see this as an attempt to achieve through regulation what could not be won through legislation.
Also, in 2003, the National Fire Plan was modified to allow the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to self-consult about the potential environmental effects of logging, rather than obtaining Endangered Species Act-mandated approval. However, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducted a review of this self-consultation practice, it found that the agencies had violated the Endangered Species Act in no less than 62 percent of their projects. A federal court eventually overturned these changes; it is expected that the federal government will face additional lawsuits if the new Interior Department rules are finalized in their current state.
