ESA reform measures call for peer review, science
Issue Date: August 4, 2004
By Kate Campbell
Assistant Editor
With calls for reforming the Endangered Species Act getting louder, the House Resources Committee has passed legislation aimed at insuring sound science and peer review are used in designating endangered species and overhauling methods used to designate critical habitat.
The bills-House Resolution 2933, the Critical Habitat Reform Act, sponsored by Rep. Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater, and H.R. 1662, the Sound Science for ESA Planning Act, sponsored by Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore.-will now move to the full House of Representatives for consideration.
"Clearly, we're pleased that this legislation is moving forward and that there seems to be good across-the-board support for making necessary changes to the ESA," said California Farm Bureau Federation President Bill Pauli. "The ESA is not working the way it was intended and we're not having the recovery of species that we need. We're not getting adequate peer review and scientific discipline for decisions needed to really help species recover.
"The big-picture concern continues to be how we can make the ESA work better for both species and people," Pauli said. "We're pleased the legislation is moving forward and that a growing number of people at all levels are recognizing improvements to the ESA are urgently needed."
Signed into law 30 years ago by former President Nixon, the ESA was intended to conserve and recover species identified as threatened or endangered to healthy population levels. The mechanics of the ESA have not been updated since then, nor has there been a thorough and thoughtful review of its effectiveness.
Pauli pointed out that after 30 years, only 12 of the more than 1,300 listed species have been deemed recovered, a success rate of less than 1 percent. More than a dozen species were listed due to data errors and subsequently removed from the list.
In the guise of saving species, he said millions of acres of public and private land in California and throughout the United States have been designated as critical habitat, which erodes property rights and costs private citizens millions of dollars. And, publicly funded agencies, such as the Fish and Wildlife Service, have been tied in knots by what many consider frivolous litigation, squandering public resources and taxpayer dollars without saving any living creatures.
House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, said, "Unintended consequences have rendered the ESA a failed managed-care program that checks species in, but never checks them out. These bills will modernize the law to improve our results for recovery, and in that regard, there is certainly nowhere to go but up.
"Some have asserted that these bills would somehow gut or weaken the Endangered Species Act," Pombo said. "To them I ask, how could we possibly make this law any weaker than its unintended consequences already have?"
Pombo said, "A few environmental groups may have a financial stake in the status quo, but clearly, species recovery is what's at stake if we do not modernize this law for the 21st century. We must put the rhetoric aside, come together, and address these problems. The bipartisan support for these bills today is an indication that we are beginning to do just that."
H.R. 2933 passed out of committee on a 28-14 vote, with six Democrats joining almost all Republicans in backing the legislation. H.R. 1662 was approved on a 26-15 vote, with four Democrats supporting the measure.
The Cardoza measure adjusts the arbitrary and now-untenable deadline under which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is required to designate critical habitat, giving the agency more time to collect useable data. Cardoza said the legislation will give the agency some breathing room and reduce the overwhelming volume of frivolous lawsuits filed under the ESA, litigation that forces biologists out of the field and into the courthouse, soaking up scarce professional time and tax dollars.
Cardoza said it also "corrects the dysfunctional critical habitat designation process, linking it to the species recovery planning process, and integrating the data accumulated in that process. The result will be a greater focus on species recovery under the act and improvement of the abysmal 0.01 percent success rate."
Due primarily to budget shortfalls, the Fish and Wildlife Service has been unable to comply with mandated deadlines imposed by the act for completing critical habitat designations. In response, environmental groups have repeatedly sued the service for failure to meet deadlines. These lawsuits have then subjected the service to an increasing series of court orders and court-approved settlement agreements, putting money in the pockets of environmental groups.
Compliance with these court actions now consumes nearly the entire listing program budget. About 300 species currently are awaiting scientific evaluation before a decision is made about adding them to the endangered species list, as well. The service currently has little ability to prioritize its activities or to direct scarce public resources to actions most urgently needed to conserve species.
H.R. 2933 also gives state and local governments as well as landowners more input and participation in the designation, Cardoza said. The bill directs the service to expand its current analysis of critical habitat to include data from landowners and local governments, such as current land-use maps, as well as direct, indirect and cumulative costs and benefits to such a designation.
The Walden legislation would strengthen the scientific foundation of species recovery efforts by integrating a peer-review tool into ESA decision-making processes. Unlike laws such as the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and a host of laws that affect the Food and Drug Administration, as well as the departments of Education, Labor and Commerce, the ESA currently has no provision for peer review.
Walden said the absence of peer review explains the "overwhelming record of inaccurate data-and data errors-under the ESA. Peer review is a standard scientific safeguard, but has somehow never been integrated into Washington's solution for recovering endangered species.
"I am proud that H.R. 1662 is moving forward and appreciate the support shown by my colleagues," said Walden. "By modernizing the 30-year-old ESA to include field-testing and peer review, we can ensure that sweeping policy decisions are based on sound science, representing the best interests of species, people and communities."
After the Resource Committee's vote, Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, said, "The ESA is not sacrosanct. It's a law that has been around for 30 years and has yet to make significant gains toward recovering species. The bills marked up by the committee make common sense changes to the act by requiring science-based, peer-reviewed listing decisions and establishing a clearer mechanism for designating critical habitat. This is how we can begin recovering species, which is the primary purpose of the act.
"My own San Joaquin Valley district is being confronted with ESA decisions that include fairy shrimp and the California tiger salamander, among others, and the local and economic impacts are widespread. Farmers, landowners, small businesses and others cannot continue to endure the uncertainty this act has caused. That's why these reasonable, balanced bills are so important."
Rep. Barbara Cubin, R-Wyo., said, "Too many citizens are shut out of their public and private lands because of the unfair application of the ESA. From the Klamath Falls debacle and the lynx hoax to the Preble's jumping mouse, the shoddy science collected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may cause many folks to lose some of the use of their lands.
"It's not unreasonable to expect that the law require a sound scientific basis before restrictions can be placed on thousands of acres of public or private land," she said.
But, while praising the votes by his committee, Pombo said he's uncertain how the bills will fare in the future. The bills face tough opposition in the Senate and House Republican leaders may not have time to schedule votes this fall, he said.
"As far as it becoming law, it's a long shot this year," Pombo said.
Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item. Top