The first listed species to make headlines after the Endangered Species Act was passed in 1973 was the snail darter, a three-inch fish that stood in the way of a massive dam on the Little Tennessee River. When the Supreme Court sided with the darter, Congress changed the rules. The dam was built, the river stopped flowing, and the snail darter went extinct on the Little Tennessee, though it survived in other waterways. A young Al Gore voted for the dam; freshman congressman Newt Gingrich voted for the fish. --Joe Roman, Listed: Dispatches from America's Endangered Species Act
The 1978 amendments to the listing process [post U.S. Supreme Court decision on the darter] clearly show the act's transformation from prohibitive to permissive. Congress amended-or, perhaps more accurately, burdened-the listing process by substantially expanding the procedural requirements to list a species: it imposed additional notice provisions, required local hearings, and mandated the designation of critical habitat as part of the listing determination. While increasing the complexity of the listing procedures, the amendments also placed a two-year time limit on the process: listings that had not been completed within two years were to be withdrawn. The effect of these legislative changes was dramatic: less than 5 percent of the more than two thousand species that had been formally proposed for listing in November 1978 were listed; and on December 10, 1979, the USFWS withdrew proposals to list 1,876 species (USFWS 1979). source p. 9. [parens mine.]
In the last 40 years, there has probably been no bill more beloved--and, eventually, more hated--than the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Passed in 1972 by a unanimous U.S. Senate vote and 12 votes short of unanimity in the house, the bill was the culmination of 73 years of work to address species extinction and loss of wildlife. (see diary
here for a brief historical perspective.)
About 1500 (this number changes as species are delisted or additional species are added) species are currently on the list.
The good news is, we have not lost many species on the list, though we have lost approximately 40 species combined either waiting for listing (some candidate species remain unlisted for over a decade) and action or were listed but action really came too late for the species given the very low numbers of individuals existing by the time listing and recovery planning was completed. Furthermore, the fact that more species are stabilizing is very, very good.
The really good news is that some populations have rebounded under the act and been delisted.
The bad news is that efforts are constantly underway to underfund, defund or promote policy and/or legislation which thwarts progress. For any given species, this might mean the difference of living or dying, ultimately, as a viable species. If the species is not viable, extinction is imminent.
The really bad news is that while legislative political support for the ESA pretty much falls along party lines these days; a fact which isn't good for the act or species caught in the crosshairs of political whim. Unfortunately, President Obama (his administration) has not stayed above that fray.
The ESA is Often Politically, Not Science, Driven
The Fight to Rescind President Bush's "Midnight Rules"
For endangered species, 2009 and the new president, President Obama, provided some hope. Prior to President Bush leaving office, Bush appointees approved new rules devastating to the ESA, polar bears, and language
Photo credit: USGS
which effectively prohibited any assessment of climate change on species. It also
allowed federal agencies to determine on their own (basically self-regulation by agencies), and without consultation with the USFWS, whether their approved projects (e.g. mines, dams, oil drilling or pipelines etc.) would harm endangered species.
The Center for Biological Diversity described it this way:
Just before leaving office, the Bush administration dealt a parting punch to endangered species across the nation, issuing two regulations intended to (1) remove the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as an independent, scientific watchdog over potentially destructive federal projects like timber sales, mines, and dams; (2) exempt all greenhouse gas-emitting projects, including coal-fired power plants and federal fuel efficiency standards, from Endangered Species Act review; and (3) specifically ban federal agencies from protecting the imperiled polar bear from greenhouse gas emissions and oil and gas development. here.
Other groups were also quick to respond:
“These rules are the parting shots of an Administration that has consistently ignored or undermined the protections of our nation’s threatened and endangered species,” said Jason Patlis, WWF vice president for US government relations. “WWF strongly opposes these midnight rule changes and urges the incoming Administration to take prompt steps to undo them when it assumes office next month.” source
“Wildlife and marine biologists form the pillars of scientific integrity that support the Endangered Species Act,” Kostyack said. “Knocking them out of the decision-making process will erode the foundation of this bedrock law and make it significantly harder to protect endangered species. source
Environmentalists and commercial fishermen are fighting to protect the Endangered Species Act regulations from last-minute changes by the Bush administration that will dramatically weaken and limit the use of the landmark wildlife protection law, according to legal experts and scientists. The Bush plan has been roundly panned for eliminating science from federal agency decision making and ignoring objections from hundreds of thousands of concerned citizens across the country. In an effort to maintain protection for wildlife, a coalition of groups filed suit today to halt the last-minute rules. source.
Ultimately, four suits were filed to stop the attack on the ESA including one by New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.
Meanwhile, groups and other interested parties began to lobby President-elect Obama to use any means possible to suspend and eventually rescind the rules, which he promised to do. On March 3, 2009--within his first 100 days in office--President Obama kept his word and suspended the Bush ESA rules.
Environmental groups praised Obama for his quick action.
To address the matter long term, the new congress passed the omnibus appropriations bill--which the president signed--giving then Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar up until May 9 to formally rescind the two Bush era laws. While Salazar utilized his authority to undo the overall ESA attack, he did not, at that time, utilize his power to undo the Bush rules that essentially prohibited climate change from being considered in protection for the Polar Bear.
On May 8, however, the other shoe dropped and Salazar infuriated groups by formally refusing to lift the climate change restrictions and all hell broke loose.
Salazar ignored strong criticism of the rule and requests to revoke it from more than 1,300 scientists, more than 50 prominent legal experts, dozens of lawmakers, more than 130 conservation organizations and hundreds of thousands of members of the public.
The rule severely undermines protection for the polar bear by exempting all activities that occur outside of the polar bears range from review. The polar bear, however, is endangered precisely because of activities occurring outside the Arctic, namely emission of greenhouse gases and resulting warming that is leading to the rapid disappearance of summer sea ice.
“As part of comprehensive efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions, we should take measures to ensure that we’re not unduly harming polar bears and other species threatened by climate change,” said Greenwald. “With its sea-ice habitat rapidly disappearing, the polar bear needs the full protection of the Endangered Species Act.”
The special rule also reduces the protections the bear would otherwise receive in Alaska from oil industry activities in its habitat.
“Salazar’s decision today is a gift to Big Oil and an affirmation of the pro-industry/ anti-environmental policies of the Bush administration,” said Greenwald. “This is not the change Obama promised.” source
For environmentalists, the decision means another disappointment from Salazar, a Coloradan with a ranching background whose environmental credentials were hotly debated when he was nominated for the post. Salazar upset wildlife defenders in March by upholding another Bush decision to take gray wolves off the endangered list in much of the northern Rocky Mountains and upper Midwest. source
“We’re very disappointed that Secretary Salazar decided not to cut through the red tape and restore protections for polar bears immediately,” said Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive vice president of Defenders of Wildlife and a former director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “The polar bear’s Arctic sea ice habitat is melting away, the Arctic seals which polar bears hunt for food are becoming increasingly scarce, and the cause is clearly global warming. In spite of this, Secretary Salazar is leaving in place a rule that says activities that cause global warming and therefore harm polar bears will never be considered violations of the Endangered Species Act under any circumstances. That made no sense under the Bush administration and it certainly makes no sense for the Obama administration.” source
As one writer put it, the
bloom was off the rose.
This is the first in a series looking at politics and the Endangered Species Act.