Back Door Legislation

The Bush Administration has just announced a plan to drastically change the Endangered Species Act. The main change would be that federal agencies would not be required to carry out an independent scientific review of a project they are proposing. While I am all about overhauling an old piece of legislation (the Act has not been significantly changed since 1986), I am extremely wary of placing the welfare of our endangered species in the hands of economists and developers.

The Response of the administration to these concerns is pitiful:

But Dale Hall, who directs the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the move would not apply to major federal projects and would give his agency more time to focus on the most critically endangered species rather than conducting reviews of projects that pose little threat.

"We have to have the ability to put our efforts where they're needed," Hall said, adding that individual agencies will have to take responsibility if their projects do harm a protected species. "This really says to the agencies, 'This law belongs to all of us. You're responsible to defend it.' "

Even minor federal projects affect our environment and threaten our wildlife. Every project needs to be carefully thought out from multiple angles with each party's wellbeing being considered. I understand the need to focus resources directly where they are needed, but every species should be considered and not just the most critically endangered.

The second quoted paragraph tends to insinuate that the agencies will be forced to defend their actions after a problem arises. Shouldn't the goal be to prevent problems from arising in the first place? Instilling the fear of having egg on bureaucrats' faces should not be the method our government takes to preserve our wildlife for future generations.

I don't know about you, but I hope to take my children and grandchildren hiking in Colorado. Hopefully we'll be able to see more than urban development and smokestacks when we go.