Endangered species? No.
March 23rd, 2008
What do you expect from Republicans?
With little-noticed procedural and policy moves over several years, Bush administration officials have made it substantially more difficult to designate domestic animals and plants for protection under the Endangered Species Act.
[…]
The documents show that personnel were barred from using information in agency files that might support new listings, and that senior officials repeatedly dismissed the views of scientific advisers as President Bush’s appointees either rejected putting imperiled plants and animals on the list or sought to remove this federal protection.
And…
In another policy reversal, Interior’s solicitor declared in a memo dated March 16, 2007, that when officials consider whether a significant portion of a species’ range is in peril, that “phrase refers to the range in which a species currently exists, not to the historical range of the species where it once existed.” The memo added that the Interior secretary “has broad discretion” in defining what is “significant.”
Given that some species’ ranges have shrunk to less than 1% of their historic range — sometimes now limited to just a few acres — that pretty much makes it unlikely that ANYTHING will be listed.
Boy, we need a Democrat in office…
Related posts: The Feds successfully bribe tribes to back off Columbia river complaints, "Animal rights" versus biodiversity, Sea lion killing authorized



Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed