(NEWSCOM)
Are they really going to gut the Endangered Species Act?
By Eoin O'Carroll | 08.12.08
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service announced Monday that they are proposing major changes to the Endangered Species Act, a move that critics say will dramatically weaken federal protection of threatened plants and animals.
The announcement came after the Associated Press obtained a draft proposal of the rule changes [PDF], which seek to bypass the review process for construction projects, such as highways, dams, and mines. Currently, under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, federal agencies must consult with scientists at the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service to determine whether a project is likely to affect any of the 1,353 animal and plant species listed as endangered or threatened.
The draft rules, which do not need to be approved by Congress but are subject to a 30-day public-comment period, would let each agency decide for itself whether a project would harm listed species.
Additionally, the proposed rules would prohibit federal agencies from assessing the greenhouse gas emissions from construction projects.
The AP details the scope of the proposed changes.
If approved, the changes would represent the biggest overhaul of the Endangered Species Act since 1988. They would accomplish through regulations what conservative Republicans have been unable to achieve in Congress: ending some environmental reviews that developers and other federal agencies blame for delays and cost increases on many projects.
The changes would apply to any project a federal agency would fund, build, or authorize. Government wildlife experts currently perform tens of thousands of such reviews each year.
After the AP broke the story, the Department of the Interior released a statement describing the proposed changes as “narrow.” The department argued that agencies now have sufficient expertise to judge for themselves whether a listed species or its habitat would be harmed by a construction project.
“The purpose of these changes is to reduce ambiguity, improve consistency, and narrow interpretive differences, even within the Services. They are a positive step forward,” said Dale Hall, Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. “In 1986, our existing rules made sense. At that time very few Federal action agencies had any in-depth expertise with section 7 and listed species, but that is not the case today. We are not being good stewards of our resources when we pursue consultation in situations where the potential effects to a species are either unlikely, incapable of being meaningfully evaluated, wholly beneficial, or pose only a remote risk of causing jeopardy to the species or its habitat.”
Despite the government’s attempts to depict these changes as less than sweeping, condemnation from environmental groups came swiftly.
“Clearly, that’s a case of asking the fox to guard the chicken coop,” said Bob Irvin of Defenders of Wildlife to the Washington Post. “What the Bush administration is telling those agencies is they don’t have to think about those impacts anymore.”
“This is the fox guarding the hen house, said environmental lawyer Eric Glitzenstein to MSNBC. “The interests of agencies will outweigh species protection interests.”
“It’s a cliche,” writes Andrew Wetzler on the National Resources Defense Council’s blog, “but today’s proposal is as clear a case of letting the fox guard the henhouse as you’re ever likely to see.”
Similar denunciations came from the National Wildlife Federation, the Environmental Defense Fund, and Earthjustice.
Sen. Barbara Boxer told the AP that she thought the proposed changes were illegal. “This proposed regulation is another in a continuing stream of proposals to repeal our landmark environmental laws through the back door,” said the California Democrat and chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee. “If this proposed regulation had been in place, it would have undermined our ability to protect the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the gray whale.”
She may have a point about the changes not being legal. As MSNBC reports, the White House has tried this kind of thing before:
In 2003, the administration imposed similar rules that would have allowed agencies to approve new pesticides and projects to reduce wildfire risks without asking the opinion of government scientists about whether threatened or endangered species and habitats might be affected. The pesticide rule was later overturned in court. The Interior Department, along with the Forest Service, is currently being sued over the rule governing wildfire prevention.
In 2005, the House passed a bill that would have made similar changes to the Endangered Species Act, but the bill died in the Senate.
Apparently, this proposal grew out of fears about environmentalists using the Endangered Species Act as a “back door” to regulate greenhouse gases. In May, after much lobbying by wildlife groups, the polar bear was listed as threatened by the Interior Department. It was the first species to be listed due to the threat from global warming, as repeated scientific studies revealed that rising temperatures are causing the Arctic sea ice vital to the bears’ survival to vanish.
In that May announcement, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne stressed that the listing would not hold individual greenhouse gas emitters responsible for destroying the bears’ habitat, and that the Endangered Species Act was not an appropriate vehicle for setting climate policy.
Monday’s statement reiterated those points:
<< Save the climate: Eat a kangaroo | MainThe proposed rule is consistent with the [Fish and Wildlife Service’s] current understanding that it is not possible to draw a direct causal link between greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and distant observations of impacts affecting species. As a result, it is inappropriate to consult on a remote agency action involving the contribution of emissions to global warming because it is not possible to link the emissions to impacts on specific listed species such as polar bears.
Comments
2. 1metal1 | 08.12.08
Change is great but not at the expense of wildlife protection. This is just another attempt by this administration to rape wildlife for the sake of making money. Rule of thumb: If George Bush has anything to do with it, watch it like hawk. It’s seldom good for the average man and it’s never good for the environment.
3. Daniel Emerson | 08.12.08
This is a deeply troubling move by this administration. They seem intent on dictating their own agenda and sidestepping Congress, the constitution, and the will of the people. It is time get rid of the lot of them.
4. chartguy | 08.12.08
Including greenhouse gas emissions in studies would be a huge mistake.
While Al Gore may be sure, scientists are not.
6. yourkidding | 08.12.08
Barak Obama isn’t pushing this action. Bush is making his final rape of the country and it’s laws before he’s put to pasture [where all the manure is] to ponder his existence as the worst president this country has ever had. Nixon’s selfcenterness didn’t teach us much did it?
7. Mike Robinson | 08.12.08
I can’t figure out why the word Liberal is a bad thing in America. The American Heritage dictionary gives these meanings.
#1 Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
#2 Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Just plain weird…
This makes me think that the Repubbers are doing this so they can open up drilling for oil all over the country.
And yes, most of the time change is good. Especially if it is sensible, proactive, progressive change that is not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas.
In other words… liberal.
8. JJ | 08.12.08
Not sure what “change is good” has to do with this.
Sure, if all change were good, we could start a war with Mexico for a change. Maybe we could remove all Republicans from public office and replace them with dogs and cats. That would be a change.
9. Martin | 08.12.08
Seems that oversight and making decsions about the Earth’s future and its in habitants,whether in the forest or in a city should be carefully thought out.
I have a difficult time with allowing a small group of people to make decisions which impact all whether direct or indirect without clear communication and oversight to be close to the door step and open door of Tryany.It seems we keep moving closer and closer to the one bad apple ruling the whole barrel,even though we keep crying out everywhere for it to stop it just keeps coming at us like a steam roller without breaks or a mind with sense operating it.Seems to me if the inhabitants of the Earth are dispensible for profit,then noone is safe,for I have yet to meet a person seeking profit who did not compromise all principles to gain it.Such a sad,sad,time in the history of mankind.So much knowledge and so many idiots trying to make decisions for everyone at the same time.
10. JustTheFacts | 08.12.08
Hardmanb, what are you talking abou? This is the Bush Administration pushing this through and has nothing to do with Barak Obama.
Keep your conservative agenda out of the environment. Our protected animals and plants need our help, not your political inane comments.
loser!
11. Rick | 08.12.08
Bush, his handlers and henchmen seem to be working overtime to secure his place as the worst US president in history. What IS the word for the act of killing a planet in the name of profit? It’s not genocide - it must be something worse - I don’t know the word.
… and John McCain is sitting in the wings ready to continue this recklessness … truly frightning
12. Eoin | 08.12.08
People, please keep it civil. I’m not going to let you turn my blog into a forum for personal attacks on each other (attacks on me are fine).
Ken, I’m glad you liked the shot of the eagle – it took me ages to find the right one. I got this photo, along with most of the images I use on my blog, from Newscom, a photo service that the Monitor subscribes to. I wish I had more information on who the photographer is, but I don’t.
13. Softmanb | 08.12.08
I shudder to think what this administration is going to try to get away with on the final day in power, especially if Obama is the incoming president.
14. Walker Thompson | 08.12.08
America… WAKE UP! This is just horrible. Is it possible that we actually have some self control here? Do we have to mine, burn, slash EVERYTHING???
15. McKaren | 08.12.08
No matter how many times the Right says global warming isn’t real, they are still Wrong. Scientists HAVE come to a consensus on this. The only question is, do the interests of Big Oil outweigh the interests of everyone else on this planet?
16. Kerry | 08.12.08
Unreasonable use of the ESA has resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country. Change is good. Its about time the pendulum returns towards the center.
17. Just Jeff | 08.12.08
This would be great for those who try and build hospitals and can’t because of a sand fly, or those farmers who can’t grow our food because of an endangered rat. Many other situations like these occur on a daily basis. Now maybe we can build hospitals and grow our own food instead of importing it. We have to make sure that only the scientists from un-balanced environmental groups are the ones that make these discisions. They know whats best for us. Right! Maybe these agencies with their superior intelegence and help from the un-balanced environmentalists will list more creatures. That would be sad.
18. Scott Federline | 08.12.08
It really amazes me how ignorant this country is becoming and how much the average american is either stupid or just complacent. The rest of the modern world embraces its natural resources, species, and understands the reality of global warming. Yet, it seems to me that both John McCain and Obama we will make very limited efforts to either reverse the damage that the Bush administration has caused or understand the dire consequences for our future resources and environment.
19. Stryke | 08.12.08
Yet another in an unending series of nefarious last-ditch maneuvers to wreak as much damage as possible in favor of administration cohorts before being run out of office.
Hey, here’s a popular myth: “A government of the people, by the people, for the people.”
20. Realist | 08.12.08
It’s unfortunate that so many people seem to have such strong opinions on an issue that they have likely spent very little time examining in any detail. On the surface the current Endangered Species Act certainly seems like a good thing, doesn’t it? Dig a bit deeper and you’ll find that it is outdated and often serves as nothing more than a convenient vehicle for radical groups that in truth don’t really care that much about the endangered species but instead are more concerned with their policitical agendas. We can protect truly endangered species in a much more cost effective manner while still allowing for reasonable and responsible development.
Before you react to my comments by calling names please take the time to research the issue, and by that I mean go beyond the sound bytes from the current news cycle.
21. Pfunk | 08.12.08
As someone who works with ESA regulations regarding floodplain development, this could be very useful. The time and money it takes to verify ESA compliance seems completely unwarranted when placing some dirt over 100 feet away from the creek bank. This legislation could help a lot of people. Unfortunately, any policy will eventually be exploited, oh well, Se La Vi.
22. Ken Bagwell | 08.12.08
This is all about the environmentalists overeaching. They can just mention ‘global warming’ and stop just about any project. Some of us don’t want to give that kind of power to washington. But I guess Obama is going to make our energy crisis go away without any compromises whatsoever. Just turn down your thermostats and make due. Get used to the high energy costs until we can do everything with wind and solar. We are going to avert the third term of “W”, and get the second term of Jimmy Carter.
23. Michael Gregory | 08.12.08
I concur with your statement Scott F. As the rest of the world progresses, the USA regresses. Look at our economy, politics, environmental policies, and where we are in the world. Furthermore, I bet 20 years from now we will no longer be strongest nation do to this… Pathetic I might say
24. Greg Bayes | 08.12.08
The whole act needs to be revised…it borders on being ludicrous. An example: I was denied a permit to build a garage addition to my house in Santa Cruz California because of the possibility of encroaching on the nest of the Three Toed Salamander. Nobody had seen one but they had been seen in the areas adjacent in the past and were considered a threatened species. ..assinine
25. Ed Sullivan | 08.12.08
Realist - you make a strong point, but keep in mind that without the Endangered Species Act we would have lost a lot of our treasured natural habitats. Not sure if you have kids, but I would like for mine to see the same beauty as we have growing up.
Thirty years from now I bet your will choke on your position.
26. JoeKain | 08.12.08
YOu know, when I first read this all of my instant opinions were spoken for in the current posts. So ill say good for others pointing all this horrible **** the Leg. and Ex. branches are doing. Ill add that everyone in this country has a voice and I think everyone has a little time now and then to take a look at the issues that “WE” must fix and let our voices be heard. I think the totalitarian state that we live in today needs to check itself on all the B/S its pulling and realize that if they try censore, control, rename, create loopholes, or whatever else you wanna call it to our freedoms that make up our countries historical foundation, then to say it lightly, they are cruising for a bruising! Democracy literally means “people rule” remember???
27. Marc from San Diego | 08.12.08
It seems that greed and profit have taken over this country. It is appalling that the Bush Administration keeps harming not only this country but the world and it’s people and wildlife for their rich friends/backers. It is hard to understand their contempt for scientists and environmentalists. The US needs to wake up and stop the madness of money over everything else. The moral decay during Bush’s reign is startling and unnerving.
28. stevenkaminski | 08.12.08
And so it begins…
The neo-con agenda of deception and newspeak again graces our doorstep. What the bush administration calls ambiguity, the rest of the world calls intelligent stewardship.
29. Senior Analyst | 08.12.08
If there needs to be a change in the Endangered Species Act then so be it. But dissolving it all together would be a catastrophy. Bush’s position and blatent stand about endangered species, our resources, and the environment are unspeakable. He has two beautiful daughters and it amazes me how a father can disregard his own children by the actions he has taken in the Whitehouse. May God bless his soul.
30. Jack | 08.12.08
We demonize Russia, but we are far far worse. Off the chart worse! Any Christian knows killing is wrong, how can anyone in their right mind stick up for our Administration?
31. Altman | 08.12.08
Actually, replacing a 3rd term of George “W” with a 2nd term of Jimmy Carter would be an improvement. Carter introduced the mileage (CAFE) standards, which actually improved mileage for the first time in history, which lasted until Reagan took over, of course. This lowered gas prices, helped the American consumer, and helped the environment. Had we stayed on that course, the Big 3 automakers would have learned decades ago how to compete with the Japanese to make fuel efficient cars, and they wouldn’t be closing plants and laying off workers at a breakneck pace now.
Carter also mandated that business stop burning oil to generate electricity, again reducing our dependence on foreign oil. In fact, those changes stuck, and because of the fact that the non-transportation sector is now far less oil dependent, the price shocks of the last year have hurt us _far_ less than they would have in the pre-Carter era.
32. macumazahn | 08.12.08
Point: bald eagles are not in any way endangered. In the lower 48, I’ve seen ‘em everywhere from Maine to Florida. I understand that they’re common in Alaska and Canada. (The polar bear population is at just about its highest level in recorded history.)
Damn’ straight we need another look. Preferably a non-political one. Try looking at the numbers.
33. blueintexas | 08.12.08
Changing the rules to bypass the Endangered Species Act? They’ve got to be kidding…or maybe they’re not. Since this is the same administration that didn’t believe Hurricane Katrina represented a threat, they might be serious. Let’s just say that this is either a lame joke or a really, REALLY bad idea, representing a landmark in the history of bad ideas, and the Department of the Interior should be ashamed of itself.
Incidentally, Chartguy, what “scientists” are you talking about? 99% have been in agreement for years.(Where do you think Al Gore heard about global warning in the first place?)
34. Kat | 08.12.08
Another eagle shot. Eagles are already off the endangered species list. http://www.fleshandstone.net/commentary/harrieteagle.html
Gray wolves just won a temporary reprieve.
In his SfGate.com blog, Thin Green Line, Cameron Scott asked, with a hint of hope: “Weird Science On The Wane?
“A federal judge granted environmental groups led by the NRDC issued a temporary injunction against the Fish and Wildlife’s plan to delist gray wolves as an endangered species. The ruling basically called bulls—t on the science the Bush administration relied on to justify the move. A key passage of the ruling [PDF] reads:
(1) the Fish & Wildlife Service acted arbitrarily in delisting the wolf despite a lack of evidence of genetic exchange between subpopulations;
and (2) it acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it approved Wyoming’s 2007 plan despite the State’s failure to commit to managing for 15 breeding pairs….”
35. Trevor | 08.12.08
And we see the outrage from the Left whenever this administration asserts that animals are NOT more important than humans.
36. MetalHead4Obama | 08.12.08
This stinks of the Bush Administration trying to backdoor in policies that they haven’t been able to push through legitimately. Kind of like the Iraq War. There has been no other administration in the history of our country that has ignored the Constitution and our status in the world community more than W’s. We only have ONE planet and it seems that Bush and his neocon criminal buddies want to rape it for all the money they can get. The U.S.A. should have signed the Kyoto Accord with the rest of the world. I honestly have no idea how anyone can continue to support the Repugnicans. One could only hope that Obama wins the election and repeals some of the damaging “laws” that Bush put into place.
37. Bane | 08.12.08
So typical of the Bush administration. Put the people working to dismantle public health care in charge of providing providing health care. Put the country’s top lobbyists for polluters in charge of environmental regulations. Put the union busters in charge of labor law. Again and again, even in its death throes, the Bush administration tries to thwart due process and turn over the decision making power to the partisan hacks that the laws are designed to protect us from.
It’s disgusting, it’s an abuse of power, and it has to stop. Obama 08 all the way.
38. Orwell | 08.12.08
“Maybe we could remove all Republicans from public office and replace them with dogs and cats. That would be a change.” — JJ | 08.12.08
That would be the best change of all.
39. Luke | 08.12.08
O.K, I sit here reading all these comments, no one here will probably read this, but I think I for one should get off my ***, stop trying to give the impression I am doing something by just writing a comment, and find some way to stop these psychos from killing every species on earth except for humans.
Anyone?
And macumazahn, just because you see a few animals doesn’t mean that they aren’t endangered. Compare their growth and numbers and compare the areas where they used to live to where they do now, and now compare all that to the data of ****-sapian’s growth. Well, there you have it.
40. Eoin | 08.12.08
I chose the shot of the American bald eagle because it is widely regarded as a success story of the Endangered Species Act in particular, and of American wildlife conservation in general. In the 1950s, the bird was on the brink of extinction, but thanks to conservation efforts, the population rebounded. The bald eagle was delisted on June 28, 2007.
41. bob s. | 08.12.08
Just Jeff wrote…
” Just Jeff | 08.12.08
This would be great for those who try and build hospitals and can’t because of a sand fly, or those farmers who can’t grow our food because of an endangered rat. Many other situations like these occur on a daily basis. Now maybe we can build hospitals and grow our own food instead of importing it. ”
Are you on crack? We are the largest food exporter on the planet. Also, how about some sources on the sand fly hospital tragedy…
42. MetalHead4Obama | 08.12.08
Good point, Bane. If W and his cronies had been in power during the Nuremburg (SP?) trials, he would have the let the Nazi’s decide their own punishment, or run the trials themselves! Bush doesn’t think he’s a president, answerable to the people; he thinks he’s a king and answerable only to himself.
43. robert martin | 08.12.08
Here’s a good chance for McCain to distance himself from Bush policies. He should step up and say something about this now, but I’m sure he will wait to be asked. When he is asked. lrt’s see what kind of reply he has.
44. MetalHead4Obama | 08.12.08
Eoin,
The success of the bald eagle conservation efforts are due to the ESA act as it is. The changing of this act by the Bush administration is criminal and downright immoral.
But then again, when has Bush ever cared about morals or legality?
Leave the ESA alone and let’s try to become more aware of our role in protecting the planet.
45. tdub | 08.12.08
It is fairly amazing how the global warming denialists continue to say that it does not exist. If they would take the time to do their research, the overwhelming majority of science supports the existence, including their OWN Bush administration. Instead we get right wing talking points about “Al Gore”, etc… Come on, folks, science is NOT a political agenda and while it involves a degree of sacrifice by all to reign in environmental damage, quit thinking of your short life span and your profits and think about future generations, if you at all care about them. Do you? Really? Do you? Be truthful now.
46. Robert | 08.12.08
After reading the book Government Pirates: The Assault on Private Property Rights, I think it needs to be gutted. The act needs to provide both compensation for the loss of property value and incentives for landowners to conserve habitat. People want to force their ideas of environmentalism on others but don’t want to pay for it.
47. Wild Biol. | 08.12.08
As a wildlife biologist working with threatened and endangered species in the Federal realm, trust me this is a no-win either way. We waste so much time and treasure on species that are listed but in reality are not endangered, and conversely, led by incompetents in USFWS followed by USFS, BLM, etc., we cannot see the forest for the trees on things that are endangered. I blame the idiocy of the conservation biology movement that just wants to preserve. If we returned to traditional wildlife management, and posit the notion that we might have to manage populations, manage habitats, i.e. return disturbances such as fire/flooding or use forestry to mimic stand-replacement, then we’d win half the battle or more. But right now, one typically cannot work to improve endangered species habitat for fear of being in technical violation. Will this change matter? Not really. I’ve yet to see a T&E stop anything anyway, but at least this way the taxpayers won’t get soaked for a redundant double finding of “may effect, likely to adversely effect” finding followed by the issuance of a take permit.
48. Shortsighted | 08.12.08
This is all pure buffoonery. Species need protection? Please. Have you ever seen a tiger? Unlike you environmentalist sissies, I think it can take care of itself, thank you. We need more stuccoed condominium complexes, and these g’damned butterflies and flowers are in the way. Lose a few species, who gives a s*#t. Drill offshore, for God’s sake!! Do it in the name of efficiency. Do it in the mane of the GDP!! Do it because I need my TiVO, and my kid needs his Playstation. Do it because the Cheesecake Factory needs electricity to make those delicious pies. Do it because I’m so stupid that I bought a Ford Expedition two years ago, and now it costs me &150 to fill up every 5 days!! And if anyone gets in the way, just do what Hannity does and call them elitist and “liberal”…whatever that means anymore.
Onward Christian Soldiers!!!
But wait…”As for you, my flock…Is it not enough for you to feed on good pasture? Must you also trample the rest of your pasture with your feet? Is it not enough for you to drink clear water? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet?” Ezekiel 34: 17, 18
49. Tom | 08.12.08
I love the bald eagle, but lets start killing the Canadian Goose!!! They are nothing but a messy grouse liberal thing!!!
50. eric | 08.12.08
I believe the whole matter is smoke and mirrors this gutting of the act is another work around ploy for the neo cons to be able to push through the nafta superhighway project with less review to futher the north american union agenda……….watch and see
52. E.A. | 08.12.08
At the core of this issue is annual world population growth of 77 MILLION people, with 3 million of it ending up in the U.S. via immigration plus native births. Nature doesn’t stand a chance of avoiding constant people-pressure, with endless growing “needs” for housing, roads, water, additional farmland, energy and all the rest.
The common perception is still that population growth is inevitable and unavoidable, but that’s only true because of widespread ignorance. Human death-rates have been artificially lowered by hygiene and technology for many decades. There’s nothing wrong with people living longer from an individual’s point of view, but collectively it causes great harm to nature if not balanced with lower birth-rates. Nature didn’t evolve to expect constant growth of one species at the expense of most others, and nature is keeping us alive, not money.
Combine the above with the widely held belief that Genesis 1:28 (go forth and congest the planet) is a legitimate scientific position, and you’ve got bad news for wildlife. 50% of people polled still believe in some version of supernatural Creation, which compels them to ignore the evidence of human carrying-capacity overload.
Too many people who call themselves “conservatives” are only interested in conserving their ability to sell off wilderness and hoard money from resource takings. Lack of respect for nature is insidious and widespread. It’s not just Bush & Company. Our whole economy is based on the continual cannibalization of nature to maintain so-called “GDP growth.” Average people are NOT becoming better off; there are just more of them sharing a shrinking resource pool. The end of cheap oil is rapidly revealing growthist illusions.
On this finite planet, human population growth invariably occurs at the expense of other animals’ habitat. That’s why global birth control is the best long-term ally of endangered species - and our own survival.
53. me | 08.12.08
> The announcement came after the Associated Press
> obtained a draft proposal of the rule changes
What ELSE are they trying to sneak through in the closing days?
54. jeff in NC | 08.12.08
There is consensus on global warming?
Yes, this is consensus:
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=23387
http://www.petitionproject.org/
The consensus is that man-made global warming is a scheme cooked up by Al Gore in his mansion. You do know that he owns the company that sells “carbon credits” right?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54528
The actions being taken by the Bush administration are evidence that our environment is healthy and robust, not an attempt to destroy it. You people are silly.
Want to know about energy conservation?
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/02/26/al-gores-own-inconvenient-trut.php
Peace.
55. Orwell | 08.12.08
It’s okay E.A., my evangelical friends tell me Jesus is due back soon. One of them says when gas hits $6/gal, so our duty is to get it there as fast as possible.
56. Ben | 08.12.08
It is just amazing how polarized our country has become. I see it in comments all over the internet and it was most evident in the last election. There is a total lack of discussion and only extreme viewpoints and regurgitated talking points make it into the discussion. No one knows what they are talking about anymore. It is just a sad state of affairs. I pray for our future because this is truly a battle to behold.
57. FadingFast | 08.12.08
On the CO2 regulation issue, I have to agree with the administration’s position. Even if it’s given that global warming is real and that production of co2 and other gases by human activities is a significant cause of warming, the effects are not local, but global. They would have no more effect on a particular species or habitat than the same activity elsewhere; and no more effect than on all other species including us. Regulation of greenhouse gases is a separate issue which should be addressed separately.
58. myown2sense | 08.12.08
Typical, typical… boys, y’all make sure to vote for good ‘ol McBush… ya d**b f*&ks!
59. melvin | 08.12.08
The Endangered Species Act has been abused by environmentalists to stop anything and everything dead in it’s tracks with excessive litigation, rules, hoops that Americans have to jump through to do anything with public or private land.
Majority of the time the once a entity gets approval from the government the environmentalists file more lawsuits and basically utilizing the, “Moving goal post mentality.”
If anything it is the activists who are to blame by misusing this law through judicial activism and making the simplistic of actions into years and years of expensive time consuming frivolous environmental lawsuits.
60. aether | 08.12.08
First off-shore drilling, and now this.
It would be easy so say this is a Bush issue - and I will NEVER make an attempt to defend anything done by that administration - or an American issue, but it is really a human issue.
Humans have become such a disappointing, self-absorbed lot. After travelling extensively the last few years and witnessing the wholesale destruction of natural resources and irreplacable cultural sites that have been around for 5,000 - 10,000 years, I’d say that life, at least complicated animal life, on this planet is nearly through.
I can see no human capacity or will for real individual or collective conservation, except in a few rare cases, other than stale rhetoric. And technology will not save us because we have no emotional capacity to think beyond now and self.
Very sad.
61. Egads | 08.12.08
Well, at least this Administration is consistent. The modus operandi will apparently remain ‘Pee on what you can’t steal’ all the way to the next Inauguration. I’m assuming the VP will quickly move to consolidate private control of all those rivers originating in Wyoming as soon as his President, Congress and Supreme Court move aside inconvenient legislative and constitutional obstacles…
62. The Other Mike S | 08.12.08
Look, if all of you ‘progressive, concerned liberals’ want to run your cars on methane produced by eating your pork and beans, go ahead. The rest of us want to see this country to continue to grow and prosper. We’re not willing to let our way of life devolve into some sort of 16th century Ren Faire.
Oh, and regarding the weeper lamenting about the polar bears, here’s a question. There are now supposed to be 25,000. What was the old number?
Fact, not fiction please…
63. John | 08.12.08
I say ask a Indian. We have destroyed our earth long enough. We have the knowledge to where we should not have to destroy our earth. Big business should be put in jail every time they buy a politician.They are Destroying our earth for profit. They should be made to vote for change just like a average American. Stop voting laws in twenty at a time. Thirteen good laws Seven bad. Vote them one at a time. The world would be better off.
64. brady | 08.12.08
Um, does anyone have a clue what Jack is talking about?
—————–
(separate train of thought)
—————–
People are stupid. Plain and simple. Yes, we need an environmental protection act to keep stupid people from dumping battery acid into our reservoirs. No, we don’t need an EPA to tell us that we are building a house on a hill that has rattlesnakes and the snakes might get hurt in construction efforts.
Guess how many oil companies really want to risk spilling a single drop of their precious oil ANYWHERE other than in your tank? I’ll give you a hint: it’s the same as the number of oil companies that want to pay to clean up said oil spill.
Please realize that this is merely a gesture by the Bush administration. When you make a deal, you bid unrealistically in your favor, so when you compromise, you get closer to what you want. It’s how life works. Sorry for those of you who think Bush is the worst thing that ever happened to this country. I hate to burst your bubble, but could you please tally up the number of terrorist attacks on American Soil since the war started? It’s darn near the grand total of previously calculated oil companies. And no matter how stupid some people are, I value a single stupid person’s life over a thousand sand flies any day (I think the fly story’s from “Government Pirates,” but I’m not sure). And I’d rather have a president who kills a few Three Toed Salamanders than a president who stands by and allows innocent people to be murdered left and right without justice.
***Oh, and please, use correct party names or abbreviations. You look stupid and lose credibility when you say things like “RepubliCONs” and “DUMocrats.”
Also, be advised that the United States is not a democracy, contrary to what your third grade teacher said. It’s a Republic. I.E. “…to the REPUBLIC for which it stands…”
65. einstien | 08.12.08
Perhaps all the good 2 shoes can admit that the global warming is a scam?? consensus you say?? well in my book 31,000 scientists who signed a petition stating it was rubbish wins hands down there not your radical green paid lackeys ,if your going to sprout off at least get some facts right you morons ,replace republicans with dogs ,no one wants to take your postitions idiots ,animal rights are only used to control industry ,polar bears ? you idiots know they have grown in numbers to 45,000 and in fact they will never be extinct they have found evidence they lived 1000s of years before when 1st thought, and in much hotter climate and also are in fact brown bears that have adapted to live in the ice and snow ,stop the bullsh.t and hypocracy and get a life !And obama ? who in their right mind would elect a muslim in usa ???you have to be joking !
66. J.R. | 08.12.08
E.A. (and all the other polarizers) you’ll never win any points with Christians (or any other group) by condescending their beliefs. Find their point of view and find your perspective within it. Example: If you want to help Christians move to your side of the argument, remind them that their Creator made this place a paradise, put mankind in charge, and will hold mankind responsible for the destruction of this once-was-paradise. Running their beliefs down will only cause them to reject you and not even listen to the wisdom you wish to share.
About the impact of the changes, if you READ, the change is simply pushing enforcement down to a lower level which should help lower agencies manage locally more efficiently.
Example: you don’t need to protect bald eagles in Florida or crocodiles in Wyoming. It should help cut out unnecessary oversight. It didn’t change the list of what animals are protected or the mandate to do so, just cuts out the list of junk you have to process that doesn’t apply to the local situation.
But of course, only “the government” can care about the environment and a lower agency could not possibly have brains and be equally concerned about their environment. Grief…
Question: is “the government” the only omni-protective savior? What about your neighbor??? Yes, our planet is “finite”, but if you believe government in infinite in its ability to rule mankind, you’re a real fool. The best solution — govern (rule) yourself and be an example to others in a way that others WANT to follow you.
About birth control — you can’t force that on others. Also, be careful in practicing it yourself since, if you are the wise one and you don’t pass on your wisdom, you leave the planet to the fools. Practice physical birth control, but reproduce yourself by winning others to follow you through kindness and a worthy example.
67. Egads | 08.12.08
Hey, The Other Mike S
Some of us don’t want to see this country join the parade of once-great societies that ended up stewing in their own effluvia:
The Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Phoenician civilizations
The Olmecs
The Anasazi
The Maya
The Rapanui
Angkor Wat
Goldwater Conservatives
etc., etc., etc.
68. Save the Humans | 08.12.08
Some day, when our descendants chisel the history of our nation on to the walls of a cave, they’ll note that we were kind to animals.
69. sad | 08.12.08
This is the Bush administration’s final rape of the environment on their way out the door. They have no sense of responsibility for anything but the money in the pockets of their friends. There has never in history been such a substandard, ignorant, inept, and selfish group of people in charge of the United States government and we can only hope this is the last we will see of these evil people in government.
You have to wonder about whether these people have any limits at all. You have to wonder if they have even a small amount of compassion for their children and grandchildren whose money will not protect them from the pollution, disease, and violence left behind by this generation of heartless fools.
Let’s all just remember that the members of the Bush administration, including the men at the top, can be prosecuted for crimes even after they leave office. And they will be.
70. chuck | 08.12.08
Once again the president honoring a big money corporation that gave him the job when he campaigned in the beginning. Im sure we will see more **** coming out of him before he leaves. Its a shame that he allows Oil and now this to again ruin this country and the average american. We will soon have no forests or bears or eagles etc. And for you above,,, you are the problem in this country, open your eyes, We dont need oil the supply is there, its your stupid president who owns oil thats causing this. And how many times have your driven thru Yosemity park where there once was no road!!! Now its full of garbage and cigarrette butts and other **** from idiots like you who dont give it a ****!!! Yes mankind ruins everything eventually. Due to stupid people as yourself!
71. Shortsighted | 08.12.08
I’m with “The Other Mike S”:
You “progessive” nitwits need to get out of your Sci-Fi lives and take a good look at the cold, hard facts:
1. We are losing forestland at a rate of 375 km2 each day. This is more than the total area of New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Delaware combined
2. At the world’s current rates, 5-10% of tropical forest species will become extinct every decade.
3. In the next 30 years, as many as one-fifth of all species alive today will become extinct.
4. According to the Oil & Gas Journal (a reliable primary source for worldwide reserves), at 2003 consumption levels, the remaining oil reserves represent 44.6 years of oil (from U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Annual 2002).
Also, in case you hadn’t noticed, gas is really, really expensive. And we need to make it cheap again, or we’ll end up at some Renaissance Faire. Because the thing that distinguishes our “advanced” societies from those medieval fools–the thing that makes our morality more “intelligent”–is our ability to find natural resources, extract them at any cost, and burn ‘em in an internal combustion engine…like the one in my Chevy Yukon!
While you treehuggin morons are playing with your “endangered” salamanders, The Other Mike and I will be cruisin’ (at 12-18 mpg) over to Dave ‘n Buster’s to show all of you anti-free-marketers just how far we’ve come!
72. Althea Day | 08.12.08
The Endangered Species Act was not stringent enough, never has been. Man is not the only species on this planet, and is lying to himself if he believes he is not interdependent with other species. “No man is an island.” - Donne
73. E.A. | 08.12.08
“Realist,” what you call “reasonable and responsible development” amounts to an endlessly growing human population, consuming more land, water and resources. There has barely been a year since the founding of the United States when more untouched nature existed than the year before. People don’t seem to understand the creeping, insidious nature of overpopulation.
The word “balance” is completely misused, since nature loses ground each day. If 1,000 homes are planned for a subdivision and “environmental extremists” bargain the number down to 500, there is a still a net increase of 500 homes and all the attendant roads, water usage and infrastructure. True balance would mean that every acre developed by Man was countered with homes torn down (for good) elsewhere. That’s not even close to happening.
The term “sustainable growth” is an oxymoron on a finite planet. Economic growth chases population growth and both of them are chasing non-human life to death. We have to get over the idea that it’s Man’s destiny to keep usurping land and slurping up water.
74. Bill F | 08.12.08
Global warming is NOT a scam, it is NOT a hoax, it is REAL. It is not, however, unusual, as this sort of thing has happened before a number of times in Earth’s long history (4.5 billion years and counting), usually followed by an ice age, which the anthropologists and geologists all say we’re long overdue for. So you say there’s 45,000 polar bears? Fine…but don’t try to sell me some bull**** line about how they aren’t endangered; last I checked, their numbers WEREN’T growing. And then there’s the wolf; 5,000 living in the wilderness now, and some group of hunting lobbyists convinced the Bush Administration to take them off the Endangered Species list…so they could hunt them again! Possibly to extinction…AGAIN! My God, are you people BLIND?! Go right ahead and drive your Hummers over the cliff of your own extinction, you lemmings. You’ll figure it out only too late, when the Hopi prophecy comes true: “When the last fish is dead, when the last river is poisoned, when the last tree is gone, then, and only then, will Man realise that he cannot eat money.”
Oh, but I’m sure it’s OK, because Jesus is coming back, right? Except all you fools who’ve believed every prophecy stating a specific time and date for His return seem to have forgotten where, in the Gospels, He says: “You will not know the day nor the hour of My return.” Somehow, though, I don’t think you’re all going with him, as you seem to believe…I honestly don’t think the Son of God would have any respect for creatures who stood by and allowed for the wanton and thoughtless destruction of His creatures, plant and animal alike, over whom we were supposed to maintain responsible stewardship (WHICH DOES NOT MEAN HUNTING THEM TO EXTINCTION!!!).
75. E.A. | 08.12.08
J.R.,
I don’t see myself as polarizing, rather telling the truth about the root motives of anti-environmentalists. Someone has to cut through the rhetoric. Rush Limbaugh is a classic case, fully admitting his Creationist beliefs in the environment chapter of his first book. Millions use this erzatz science expert as their quick source of facts.
Much of the “wise use” crowd thinks Man is owed endless bounty by a supernatural power, so long as they don’t sin too much. They think oil falls squarely into that category, therefore Global Warming science is a conspiracy against their rights. Any time science questions their habits it’s automatically “junk science.” Getting them to admit their Creationist ideology is tricky, since they don’t want to seem scientifically backward.
The “Creation Care” movement (if you can call it a movement) is a good sign, but gluttony prevails among people of faith who should know it’s a sin. Was it written somewhere that 300HP is essential for daily commuting?
76. FadingFast | 08.12.08
There are huge newly discovered petroleum reserves in the Dakotas and eastern Montana that are only beginning to be exploited. We don’t need to increase drilling off shore or or in protected ecosystems now. Better we drive down the price of oil with a strong dollar (which none of our over spending politicians or candidates mention) and save those sensitive areas as our last strategic reserve when we can no longer get foreign oil at any price. Who knows how long it will really take to replace foreign oil with renerable energy?
77. Shortsighted | 08.12.08
I’m with #63 brady. I also “value a single stupid person’s life over a thousand sand flies any day.” And I too would “rather have a president who kills a few Three Toed Salamanders than a president who stands by and allows innocent people to be murdered left and right without justice.” Friggin’ poetry. You non-conservatives don’t make any sense. Oil? Bush? War? Environmental destruction? C’mon, its not like those things are connected. At least not in this Republic.
Look, like brady said, “Guess how many oil companies really want to risk spilling a single drop of their precious oil ANYWHERE other than in your tank?” I’ll tell you how many…just about as many as meant to spill it in the first place. Beacuse that’s what this argument is about: whether or not oil companies intentionally to spill oil. (For all you environmentalist idiots, the answer is “no.” Gawd.)
And don’t even think of bringing up “accidents” you Pinko Commie scum. We all know that the American oil companies have that whole concept under contol now. http://www.startribune.com/nation/25880194.html?location_refer=Nation:highlightModules:4
So hey, brady: what say you and I go on up to your house on the hill, where we can look down on all these “stupid people” and stomp some rattlers? I’m there, bro.
78. jon | 08.12.08
Now that the Bush Administration, has been doing these unethical backdoor moves
(like signing statements, torture, illegal wiretapping, bypassing Congressional review, the politicization of bi-partisan branches of Govt, not funding the Iraq invasion, ignoring Congressional subpoenas, etc… ad nauseum), it opens the door for future corrupt Mob-like Presidents, to do the same.
Isn’t it amazing, how in 8 short years, Bush has done more to destroy the Constitution, than all previous Presidents combined. All previous Presidents, knew that there were lines ya just don’t cross. Not these guys.
Our Nation has been ruled by the Mob, the Constitution is toast, and it’s looking like the Media will not allow Senator Obama to win. They refuse to scrutinize Senator McCain.
What is the point of enacting Laws, if the President & his Mob ignore them?
79. TBone | 08.12.08
So what’s more important, the future survival of our country, or the well-being of an animal? Extinctions have happened at many points in Earth’s history, independent of any human influence, it’s nothing new. It’s part of the natural order of things. But if we let our economy be shut down by environmental policy, you can bet that poverty and hunger will lead to far more desperate and damaging environmental abuse than building a new mine at the expense of an endangered species ever could.
80. Brian | 08.12.08
Once again the asleep Americans fight amongst themselves in their little pre-made groups all while thinking their’s an actual difference between Dems and Repubs.
Obama is NO different then Bush or Mccain! Obama is a CFR member!
Please do the research people. Your government was hijacked long ago.
You have NO choice. You have been fooled!
There is absolutely NO opposing view in America. CNN and FOX do a good job of making you think you have choices. But the truth is the Mainstream Media is just a propaganda machine owned by a very small group.
Can’t you see the hidden agenda behind everything the government does? Don’t you see all the rights that were completely stripped from Americans since 9/11?
9/11 was undoubtedly an inside job.
Does anyone seriously believe fires burning for an hour can pulverize concrete to dust and cut steel making both towers fail and follow the path of greatest resistance at free fall speed ?
Come on guys.. We are talking about the biggest crime scene in the history of the U.S.!!! NO criminal investigation, All the steel quickly shipped off to China, Insider trading in the days before, WTC7 , which no airplane hit, falls the same way later in the day, NORAD stands down, War games of the exact situation going on at the exact same time.
You couldn’t make this stuff up.
Seriously guys do a little research.
Don’t be scared of the Truth.
There’s just way too many unanswered questions and coincidences surrounding 9/11.
It was the “new pearl harbor” that the neocons so badly wanted.
I suggest you google any of the words.. Globalization 9/11, CFR, PNAC, NWO
Also check out http://www.patriotsquestion911.org
81. E.A. | 08.12.08
Note that when any other species behaves like Man, we call it a PLAGUE. Take off your anthropocentric blinders and look at the net impact of Man. You’ll see that other species are slowly running for their lives and being backed into habitat corners.
If that plague analogy offends economic growth addicts, so be it. They need to be offended. Balance is long overdue on this finite rock. Nature doesn’t owe a living to endless numbers of people at any cost, especially the greediest, smallest-minded ones.
Imagine life in California for one day if the cougar population of approx. 6,000 was swapped with the human population of 38 MILLION. There would be sheer terror! And the human population is slated to grow to 60 MILLION by 2040. What kind of sick “progress” is that, and how will wildlife possibly stay intact? It’s a crime to make excuses for mindless human overcrowding, while pushing loopholes to further reduce other species’ chances.
A plague is literally how other species see us. And there’s little they can do about it, especially with nature-snubbing “conservatives” calling the shots and firing plenty as well. The irony is that conservatism should be about conservation, not mindless consumption. When did that all go askew? What happened to “waste not, want not” and other conservative mottos?
82. Why Thank You | 08.12.08
You say PLAGUE like it’s a bad thing, but I prefer to take it as a compliment. All it means is that we’re an usually successful species. As for the diminishing populations of other species, ever hear of natural selection?
84. B | 08.12.08
I haven’t been following this too closely - so correct me if I’m wrong - wouldn’t this be a step required for exploiting oil reserves in areas where endangered species inhabit, notably the arctic?
This is the method of operation of all Carlyle Group associates and similar equity outfits - the result of the widening gap between the rich and poor - people so rich that they can infiltrate governments across the globe - change national policy so it suits the equity firm’s needs then exit - disgraced or not - to reap a massive windfall of profits. Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand was a Carlyle alumni who is now living in exile in London after being (finally) buried by the mountain of corruption he procured in Thailand as Prime Minister. This guy - just like Bush changed the laws with such shameless and disgraceful disregard for the country’s future and could care less of the outcome because he and his thugs have walked away rich beyond comprehension —- EVEN after all his assets are seized here in Thailand.
More and more people are waking up to this reality. Hopefully America’s oil plans become more clear as this Russian/Georgia conflict unfolds. It was never about terrorists; it was about nationalists and contra-American oil interests impeding pipelines and oilfield exploitation by American oil companies (tied together by equity companies).
Henry Ford’s ethanol economy has been purposefully shelved for over 100 years to fleece the American public - you could have said it was a matter of economics up until cheap oil’s demise in the 70’s or you could say that the whole Middle East just needs to be invaded, subjugated, and exploited in true imperialist style - either way afterwards insisting on a petroleum based economy was then a matter of greed, ignorance, and sheer poor leadership except in Brazil where they have now solved their energy problems.
I’m sorry I really could write a book on this - bottom line, wildlife, human life - it doesn’t matter to them. Americans need to get together and start solving their own problems, stop depending on the government because it is clearly not interested in us or our future, and slowly start cutting them off from their tax revenues, their access to our sons and daughters to use as canon fodder for their greed, and turn things around. I’m tired of watching all that’s good about America evaporate before my eyes - I can’t be the only one.
85. Tiredofwhiners | 08.12.08
So which of you wishes to be left out of the future? You all talk as if the explosion of the world population won’t take its toll on all species anyhow. You can’t save ****! Take a reality check. As with most over priviledged, underchallenged American citizens, things have been so good for so long that the reality of your existence seems to escape you. I wonder which African species are under such vigilant supervision? Probably the ones they want to eat the most. The privileges you gain through the economic might of this country are what enables you to carry on as you do. Once all of you liberals have succeded in destroying the economics of the country, it will only be a matter of time before one of our many enemies will own your souls and then the only bugs and lizards you will care about are the ones you want to eat. Get real.
86. WayneSMT | 08.12.08
Hey, This is funny. Article talks about the endangered species act. And then, I dunno for how many posts, all you guys wanna do is throw out rehashed, refried and revised soundbites of worn out ideological dogmas.
Clinging to your ideals while your reality crumbles around you is always a recommended method to deal with any multifaceted attack of deception.
Gutting the endangered species act? You find that surprising? The powers that be my friend have not demonstrated by thought, word or deed for many generations, that they have even a modicum of respect for any species, let alone endangered ones, let alone their own, which, right now, should probably be at the top of the endangered species list.
Don’t worry about the endangered species, lemme tell ya what is gonna happen. Suburbia, as we know it, is gonna disappear. There is gonna be alot of bedroom communities, all over, that are simply gonna be absorbed back into nature. Our lack of cheap energy, that not only drives our cars, but also drives our economy and our lives, in so many ways, is gonna prevent us from doing many things, like draining wetlands for development, building a home 37 miles off of a forest service road cause the views are great, printing 50,000 real estate brochures for new homes on heavy glossy stock in 4 color, running into town 22 miles one way for a quick pack of smokes and a movie. Use your imagination to add to the list of stuff that won’t be happening anytime soon. You don’t have to worry about nature taking care of itself. We, that is us humans, are just as much apart of this little spinning biosphere that we call earth as the endangered species that we are listing on a piece of paper. Here is something to think about.
The discovery of oil in 1823 in Pennsylvania allowed the human race to expand not only exponentially, but more importantly, unnaturally, and for over sixty years has been misrepresented to all of us that our growth and the levels of population that we had reached were sustainable.
Our population levels are not sustainable. Every caloric unit of energy you consume as food takes 9 caloric units of fossil fuel to get to you. From seed or embryo to plate. Simple math, Our bodies, at least in the U.S. are running a negative coefficient of performance as a whole. Some people are eating all natural and organic and growing their own food. But as a whole, on the average, we are in much deeper trouble then most people realize. Without affordable energy- Kinda look at your body as a little electric motor, we are gonna compress time so that each revolution of the shaft equates to about 3 years. Given our current methods of food production and distribution, to include the tremendous lack of honey bees for pollination, the little motor of most of our bodies is gonna spin maybe, maybe two full rotations, and then stop. Our population will be sustainable in about 3 to 6 years on this planet and all of our little environmental worries will be a distant foggy memory of a much different time, so different, that generations from now, they will still be arguing, just like you are today, over what really happened and for many, just like the holocaust, they simply will not believe that it even happened. There simply will not be enough people left to pass on a coherent oral history of events to bring about the necessary dynamics that would ensure that the remainder of the population would incorporate it into their history as fact. Goes right back to that stupid little, “If a tree fell in the forest thing”. If no one is around to witness an event, or in this case that remembers an event, did it really happen?
Where are we headed? Don’t know. It is kinda an undiscovered country. Find someone who lived through the Great Depression and ask them. You can usually find them in senior centers after their kids removed them from their homes, remodeled them, then refinanced them to build a house 37 miles off of a forest service road cause of the views.
87. LyJo | 08.12.08
“If future generations are to remember us more with gratitude than sorrow, we must achieve more than just the miracles of technology. We must also leave them a glimpse of the world as it was created, not just as it looked when we got through with it.”
Lyndon B. Johnson
88. B | 08.12.08
T-Bone and the likes … Every empire that depends on expansion to survive eventually hits a brick wall. America is not special and is no different. You can already see, even with its blatant disregard for all life, human and otherwise, it is still struggling. The economic expansion you are in favor of is unsustainable, irresponsible, and quite frankly antiquated.
I propose a new idea. Sustainable development, personal manufacturing, and energy independence. If you don’t know what these things are you should at least look them up - it can’t hurt. Especially personal manufacturing. There are groups of people, from CNC hobbyists, to MIT professors tackling this - its probably where the PC was when Gates and Jobs came on the scene. It basically will allow people to create any object as easily as you now create pictures and documents with computers and printers.
Funny that when MIT professor Neil Gershenfeld went to the US government looking for support for his project he was turned down because government policy prevented aid to projects that would allow ordinary people to become producers. Check out his TED talk http://www.ted.com and search for his name “Neil Gershenfeld.” Some of his ideas are quirky but the concepts are sound.
Tell me it wouldn’t be cool to build your own car - your own design, with an engine with Porche specs that could run on ethanol you grew and processed with your own homebuilt refinery. That is real freedom; the only limit is your imagination. The consumerism you have convinced yourself to enjoy is nothing more than modern day serfdom.
89. Tiredofwhiners | 08.12.08
Many of the ideas put forth in this discussion have merit, unfortunately we live in a world of governments, not just our own and we alone cannot control the end result. Lead with vision certainly, weaken ourselves by implementing untimely ideaolgy? not if we want to survive. We are one planet, unfortunately not one people, and like it or not, peoples of the world do not agree nor respect each other and no amount of wishing it so will change that. implemation of the endangered species act overreached, and so now there is backlash against it. Had it been implemented with common sense as a guide, we would most likely not be discussing its demise today. As a country we must survive to lead and when elitist attitudes disenfranchise the middle class of this country we are on a path of distruction.
90. Craig Bollinger | 08.12.08
Species have been going extinct since the beginning of time. I’m guess that many of you posting here believe these early extinctions were due to some sort of Jurassic industrial revolution that is inexplicably left out of historical text books.
That said, of course we should protect the environment, conserve land and protect wildlife; and the truth is we do. The United States has the strictest environmental regulations on the planet, yet it has become socially popular here and abroad to villify the United States. I guess it gives everyone something to talk about and helps us all feel better about the additive impacts of our own individual consumption.
91. JD | 08.12.08
All beings tremble before violence.
All fear death.
All love life.
See yourself in others.
Then whom can you hurt?
What harm can you do?
-Dhammapada 129-130
92. Tiredofwhiners | 08.13.08
A perfect example in the NY Times today of the ESA run amok….
So, while the US is protecting whales our enemies are free to do whatever they want to gain technical advantage to overcome our defense systems making us obsolete in the future anyway, so why all the worry? The ESA may save the whales, but ultimately will endanger US citizens as a species.
[Eoin’s Note: I edited this post. The commenter had originally pasted an Associated Press article in full, in what I believe was an infringement on the AP’s copyright. I replaced it with a hyperlink.]
93. JD | 08.13.08
Why don’t they train in waters that aren’t migration (e.g. Southern California) areas for whales? When I was in the Navy we didn’t go 50 feet off Miami Beach to fire our guns, we went to sea and did that. There are plenty of areas they can train and play with their SONAR.
And do you really lose sleep fearing “the enemy is coming!”? You have a much bigger chance of being mugged, raped and killed by an American than some “enemy” that our subs can detect.
94. Summer Rhodes | 08.13.08
How appropriate that you would use an eagle for this article — one of the species with thinning egg shells due to DDT. That it is our national bird is another message about the current administration as well.
95. Solanum | 08.13.08
To all of you nature worshiping druids out there- Wake Up! Do most of you left-leaning sycophants even know what in the world you’re talking about? I doubt it. You would rather ensure a painful process that costs us all time and valuable resources that has a questionable impact while expanding governmental intrusions into all of our lives than to look around and actually see what works. Want a little anecdotal evidence? Here you go.
The federal government enacted ESA years ago, and for many of those years local environmentalists were worried about the populations of bald eagles and other birds of prey. So much so that they created a refuge on a piece of land of truly monstrous proportions. What did that do for them? Nothing. Nada. Zip. Any guesses on what actually brought the populations back? Not Uncle Sam, not even Barack Obama. Nope. It was in fact development by area farmers that led to a larger food supply and oddly enough more places for the birds to nest OUTSIDE of their little refuge. Hmmm. Some of the very people you moronic mouth-breathing Marxist idiots like to vilify for their “environmental impact” did more in the space of a decade than the combined efforts of state and federal government, including that piece of Charmin that the ESA was written upon.
Don’t cry to me that that piece of environmental trash might be straightened out into something a little less onerous. I’ve watched it in action compared to the power of the people with a little common sense, and I know what works.
96. WayneSMT | 08.13.08
Yup, **** all us liberals. Ya, know the thing that ****** ya off is that we were right. Ya dumb *******, just cause you don’t belive something, don’t make it any less true. ****, Jimmy Carter, told you straight to your face, and instead of listening you ran him out of office. Well all I can say is you reap what you sow, and when you plant ice, just like Robert Hunter said, you get wind.
97. WayneSMT | 08.13.08
and you know what. I would rather be considered a liberal then a fascist, any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
98. Noz | 08.13.08
I cannot believe that we have come to a point where we just sit around and let these things happen.
It’s like sitting at a table and watching your neighbors debate about whether they should stick you with a needle filled with hepatitis…and you just sit there and listen.
We are truly pathetic….not only as a people of this nation, but as human beings in general. Truly truly pathetic.
99. MJ | 08.13.08
What is actually needed is a complete revisiting of the Endangered Species Act and its progeny in state laws. Specifically, the path to litigation and attendant injunctive relief must be severely curtailed. For too long now a vocal and well funded minority has used environmental litigation as a means to reshape society towards socialism and minority rule. Granted, the excruciating procedural hurdles facing developers has provided well paid employment for many folks who would otherwise be searching for work with little or no actual productive skills, our society as a whole has suffered. Here in Southern California, the fact that a small minority group and one judge has been able to severely curtail the fresh water supply for millions — in fact a majority of California citizens, and hamper development on the basis of a garbage fish that will be extinct sooner or later is criminal.
100. WayneSMT | 08.13.08
Noz, ain’t that the truth. In 2000 years. Mankind. Has Learned. Exactly. ****. Now that is truly sad.
101. RY | 08.13.08
Why don’t these libmongers go to some other country and control how they treat endangered species. Half the time third world countries are eating endangered species. Calling all lib’s, calling all lib’s! GET OVER THERE RIGHT AWAY! They’re about to eat a tiger!
102. Gil Gamesh | 08.13.08
“Conservative” Republican view of things: destroying a symbol of America (like the flag) is a capital offense. Destroying the actual country is permissible.
Calling such people “conservative” is a misnomer. They’re doing anything but conserving our natural state, the real source of our wealth.
103. Prometheus | 08.13.08
What’s it going to take to get through to these so-called “elites” that continue to irreverently drive our planet and its people into destruction? It seems like the Bush Administration won’t listen to peaceful protests or any kind of civilized diplomacy… People like him only think from their lowest mind, the reptilian brain, which only responds to fear and pleasure. The only way to reach these kinds of people is through violence, it would seem. But we’re all too afraid to take that kind of stand, because we’re afraid of losing our lives through death or incarceration. We’re afraid of losing our lives and our freedom, but little do most of us realize; we already have!
We need to wake up and realize that no presidential candidate they can show us is going to represent us or get us out of this mess. We need to realize that this country is supposed to be by the people and for the people, not the corporate elite! We need to make change on our own. We need to organize. We need to realize that we aren’t so different from one another. We need to see past the illusions of “liberal” and “conservative”, “black” and “white”, “Christian” and “atheist” and realize that we’re all seeking happiness, comfort, and a dignified life!
We need to come together and think of systems that can be used to beat these ones that are obviously FAILING us and destroying the planet! Don’t you folks who support this kind of thing realize that this is everyone’s home, and it’s worth respecting? If someone lived in my home and simply trashed it, family member or not, they would be kicked out unless they reformed! So when are we going to give these irreverent, self-interested, conscienceless scoundrels the ultimatum of cleaning up their act or leaving this world?
105. dave | 08.13.08
When does the 30 day comment period begin? What is the easiest way to find out when these proposed changes will be published in the Federal Register? To whom does one write comments when the comment period begins?
106. MotorCity | 08.13.08
The article does not mention that it is the Bush administration which is pushing these changes to environmental laws.
107. MotorCity | 08.13.08
I should have said the article “fails” to mention that it is indeed the Bush administration which is pushing for these changes.
108. win | 08.13.08
There is a link to the proposed rule changes.
If the enviornment is really the concern of the posters, rather then just playing politics, please read them and comment on them specifically.
At least part of the changes are based on a GAO recommendation and make sense at least on the surface.
109. Asly | 08.13.08
Doesn’t anybody hear find it disturbing that we look at losing things such as habitats and forestry as a good thing. As a way to grow and prosper. I may be wrong, but don’t we need the things that are in these habitats to actually live. Like trees, plants, and animals. I’m pretty sure we need these things to live. Maybe when we get done raping the land of all of NON-renewable resources we will just adapt to not having trees, plants, and animals. I guess when we have destroyed all of nature we will just be left with oil and coal. I guess we can adapt rather quikly like people think the polar bears can and we will just eat coal and breath oil to survive. Sounds good to me.
People are stupid. Especially here in the USA. I’m so afraid for future generations that I’m on the brink of never having children. I really don’t want them to come into a world where all natural beauty is gone because of their selfish ancestors. Where they will only know the colors of oil black and money green. Have mercy on the USA. With George Bush, AKA: Worst President Ever running the country we are going to need all the help we can get.
111. Pfunk | 08.13.08
It is obvious that most people who have posted have little to no experience dealing with the ESA. Yes, the world is not perfect, and preserving the environment and critical habitat is imperative, but there is still a lot of fine tuning required in bureaucratic systems, including the ESA. Read the ESA, become familiar with the compliance procedures, and then read the details about the proposed changes before you come to the conclusion that the world is ending.
112. Byron | 08.13.08
This administration simply cares NOTHING for democracy, they are fascist to the core. Not only that they are completely insane. The U.S. environmental laws that have protected wildlife are hard won by over 40 years of effort by conservationists to put the issues before the American people and the people’s use of the ballot box to progressively make those changes.
Want to know the ilk of people advising this administration? Check out this article:
113. Christopher Dunagan | 08.13.08
The timing of this leaked proposal was truly mind-boggling. I write a blog about water issues in the Northwest.
One day I described an eight-year struggle and two lawsuits by environmental groups, a battle that had finally gotten the federal government to recognize the risks of pesticides on salmon. The determination by the National Marine Fisheries Service was that three common pesticides pose of risk of extinction for endangered salmon. The very next day I got a leaked copy of this proposed rule that, if in effect, could have taken the environmental groups out of the picture before they even got started.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s original decision was that the pesticides would have little or no effect on salmon. That original finding was essentially discredited by the federal agency in charge of protecting marine fish.
I don’t know whether this proposal will “gut” the ESA, but it could starve it to death.
114. Ted Haubrich | 08.13.08
The ESA is why our national symbol is not extict today. A nation that killed off its own symbol would have looked pretty stupid. We need to celebrate and strengthen the Endandgred Species Act not gut it of any power.
I am an environmentalist because I like people, if a nation can’t take care of its animals, it sure as heck can’t take care of its people.
1. Hardmanb | 08.12.08
Barak Obama should not be allowed to push this change on the existing environmental rules.
Liberals have been campaigning for “Change”, but are now being hypocritical in opposing change.
Change is good…right?