[discuss-dan] moratorium on all endangered species listings until September 2001

["getmelissa@uswest.net" <getmelissa@uswest.net>]

Well, go ahead and add this one to your list of 'things to do'.  Does it
EVER stop?

-melissa

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [graffis-l] Green groups bare teeth at ESA moratorium
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 10:13:10 -0400 (AST)
From: "Mark Graffis" <ab758@virgin.vip.vi>

   
    Wednesday, November 29, 2000By [5]Margot Higgins
   
   
   Conservation groups are roaring mad over the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
   Service's decision to put a moratorium on all endangered species
   listings until September 2001.
   
   The groups have long claimed that politics, not science, determines
   whether or not a species is protected under the Endangered Species
   Act, and the FWS' decision smacks of the same motivation, they say.
   
   "The moratorium is indicative that we have reached a crisis
   situation," said Heather Weiner of the [6]Earthjustice Legal Defense
   Fund. "This decision is completely irresponsible and will do nothing
   but harm the very species and habitat (the FWS) is supposed to be
   protecting."
   
   The moratorium will delay protection for more than 300 species that
   are proposed for listing or are already considered candidates for
   listing. At the front of the line for ESA protection are the
   Chiracahua leopard frog, the Aleutian Otter, the Pacific fisher and
   the island fox. Without ESA designation, the species are vulnerable
to
   continued habitat destruction, poaching and trafficking of their
parts
   and products.
   
   The FWS blames litigation over critical habitat designation launched
   by environmentalists for eating away at its listing budget. Having
   missed the deadline for designating critical habitat for about 90
   percent of the 1,200 species listed under the Endangered Species Act,
   the FWS faces court-ordered designations for nearly 300 species.
   
   "Complying with all of those court orders and set agreements is going
   to consume all of the Service's listing budget until 2001," said FWS
   spokesman Chris Tollefson. "Any funding we may have available will be
   allocated for emergency listings only. We will make sure we take care
   of any species in immediate danger."
   
   But conservation groups claim the financial problem stems from the
   fact that FWS requests for congressional funding are too low and have
   dropped in recent years.
   
   This year's request of $7.2 million for fiscal year 2001 is less than
   last year's $7.5 million request and almost $3 million less than the
   1992 request under the Bush administration.
   
   Moreover, the groups point out, the Clinton administration
   specifically asked Congress to limit its endangered species funding.
   
   According to a 1990 report by the Interior Department's Inspector
   General, $144 million was needed to list all species thought to be
   endangered at the time. Since then, the endangered species roster has
   grown and the FWS has not asked Congress for even a tenth of the
   necessary funds to address the backlog.
   
   "Whenever the agency has asked for more funding, it has gone up,"
   notes Keiran Suckling, director of the Center for Biological
   Diversity. "The FWS is more concerned with creating controversy than
   protecting endangered species. You cannot name a single controversial
   species that has been listed without a petition or a lawsuit."
   
   The northern goshawk, for example, lives in every old-growth forest
in
   the western United States. "Listing the goshawk as an endangered
   species would threaten the entire western timber industry," Suckling
   said. "This could cause a level of political crisis that would dwarf
   the spotted owl, and the FWS has twice denied listing petitions."
   
   While Suckling and Weiner allow that the Clinton administration has
   done good things for clean air, clean water and national monument
   designation, they say it has been at the expense of wildlife.
   
   "The public has a different perception of clean air and clean water
   because it impacts human health," Weiner said. "With endangered
   species, it seems more esoteric and it is harder to transform public
   opinion."
   
   Nevertheless, Weiner notes, a recent poll conducted by the University
   of Arizona found that 84 percent of Americans believe ESA should
   remain the same or be strengthened.
   
   1. http://www.enn.com/index.asp

  13. http://endangered.fws.gov/r/np980305.html
  14. http://endangered.fws.gov/
  15. http://www.fws.gov/
  16. http://www.sw-center.org/swcbd/
  17. http://www.peer.org/publications/wp_war.html
  18. http://www.stopextinction.org/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/1/_/_/_/975611036/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
discuss-dan-unsubscribe@egroups.com