Environmental lobby to use polar bear to cut energy production
Winningreen Issue Alert A012408
Environmental lobby to use polar bear to force Fish and Wildlife Service to cut energy production
By Tom Randall
Date: January 24, 2008
Issue: People all over the country are about to feel the draconian crunch of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) more severely than people in the West — who are acutely aware of the terrible ways ESA can disrupt lives — have ever experienced. For those who are unfamiliar with ESA and how the environmental lobby uses it, here’s the likely scenario:
When the polar bear is listed as an endangered species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the agency will be required to designate a critical habitat for the animals. This is done without knowing precisely what is causing a species to be endangered, let alone whether habitat preservation is an issue. The environmental lobby then sues FWS to take extreme measures to preserve that habitat, and the courts, as in the past, will invariably side with the environmental lobby. In this case, environmental groups will sue to “protect” that area of the Arctic in which ice is melting. They will further stipulate that man-made carbon dioxide is melting that ice and the FWS bureaucrats who know nothing about climate change or energy will be ordered to set and enforce reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, which would ultimately involve cutting energy production.
That’s silly you say? No court would order such actions? Ask timber workers in the West whose industry was all but eliminated by critical habitat designation for the spotted owl — whose numbers were later found to be declining, not because of logging but due to invasion of its habitat by the more aggressive barred owl. Ask those who used to farm in Oregon’s Klamath Valley who lost their irrigation water to protect fish that were later found to not be harmed by using the water for irrigation. Ask the ranchers in Idaho’s Owyhee County who finally threw in the towel after their grazing allotments were so severely restricted they couldn’t continue. Ask the countless others who have had their lives disrupted, sometimes destroyed by environmentalists wielding their most powerful tool, the Endangered Species Act.
Comment 1: You might also ask former U.S. House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo. After waging a successful battle to update and modernize the hopelessly outdated ESA in the U.S. House, his bill to replace mindless habitat designations with actual recovery plans never made it to the Senate but led to his defeat in the next election. He was defeated by a virtual unknown after environmentalists poured over $5 million into a smear campaign against him and sent in a massive well-organized ground army from around the country to work for his defeat. We saw it first-hand.
Comment 2: “…questioning of Administration [Hearing] witnesses by Democratic members [of the House] clearly indicated the overriding goal was to use the Endangered Species Act as a tool to stop energy production in any and all states.” — Rep. Don Young (R-AK)
Comment 3: “Under questioning, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Director Dale Hall confirmed that if a coal-fired power plant in Arizona were seeking a Federal permit, and if the polar bear is listed under the ESA, the Fish and Wildlife Service would have to consult on the permit.” — Rep. Don Young (R-AK)
Comment 4: Since the ESA’s passage 35 years ago less than a dozen of the over 1300 species listed as threatened or endangered have been de-listed — none due to actions taken under the Act.
Contact: Tom Randall
Winningreen LLC
3712 N. Broadway – PMB 279
Chicago, IL 60613
Phone: 773-857-5086
e-mail: trandall@winningreen.com