Grist for Environmentalists' Mill: GOP May Push
Industry-Backed ESA Bill
Environmentalists who accuse Republicans of conspiring with
big industry to protect corporate profits at the expense of the environment
may soon have evidence to back up that claim. The Senate may soon vote on
the Endangered Species Recovery Act (S. 1180), an industry-backed Endangered
Species Act reauthorization bill sponsored by Senator Dirk Kempthorne that
would help neither rare species nor small property owners. The bill would:
- Perpetuate Incentives for Habitat Destruction. Rare species
are at risk because property owners view them as liabilities rather than
assets. The Endangered Species Recovery Act (ESRA) would do nothing to
change this as it fails to require compensation of property owners whose
land is regulated out from under them. Under the ESA, federal authorities
have sweeping powers to regulate land they deem suitable habitat for rare
species. Because such regulation can mean huge uncompensated property value
losses, land owners have the incentive to make their land inhospitable
to species. Destruction of species and habitat can result.
- Place Restrictions on Public Right to Know. The ESRA
would exempt biological information collected by the government from Freedom
of Information Act requirements, allowing federal officials to conceal
this data from the public and preventing the public from challenging the
data's validity.
- Give Big Industry Unfair Advantages Over Small Landowners.
Timber giants like Georgia Pacific and International Paper are pushing
for the ESRA because they stand to gain from it financially. The bill would
codify Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), extra-legal arrangements large
timber companies have negotiated with federal officials that are currently
vulnerable to legal challenge. Although HCPs require timber companies to
restrict their land use to federally-approved activities, they also permit
them to engage in commercial activities that might otherwise be prohibited
under the ESA. The costs of negotiating an HCP is so high that only the
largest timber companies can afford them, giving these firms a distinct
advantage over small firms.
- Divert Resources Away From Imperiled Species. The ESRA
would extend government protection to species not listed, diverting limited
public and private resources away from listed species, by including unlisted
species in recovery plans, multiple species conservation plans and other
plans.
- Do Little to Ensure Scientifically-Based Decision-Making.
The ESRA would do little to improve the science on which species listings
are based. It would, for example, allow publication of ESA listing proposals
before the proposals have been peer-reviewed. The bill also would offer
insufficient safeguards against conflicts of interest by scientific peer
reviewers.
Issue Date: February 8, 1998
Talking Points on the Economy: Environment #37, published by The National
Center for Public Policy Research, 501 Capitol Ct NE, Washington,
D.C. 20002 Tel. (202) 543-4110, Fax (202)543-5975, [email protected],
http://www.nationalcenter.org.

The National Center for Public Policy Research
501 Capitol Court, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
202/543-4110
Fax (202) 543-5975
E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: www.nationalcenter.org
>>>Return to the Talking Points
on the Environment Cards Index
>>>Return to the Science and
the Environment Issue Databank Index
Return to National Center
Home Page