The Senate is considering legislation that would weaken one of the most successful conservation laws in this nation's history. For over 30 years the Act has prevented the extinction of nearly all of the species it protects, including our national symbol, the bald eagle. Many countries around the globe have been inspired by the Act's success and have implemented similar programs of their own.
When the Endangered Species Act was enacted, Congress recognized that the species of fish, wildlife, and plants it sought to protect were of "aesthetic, ecological, historical, and scientific value" to the nation and her people.
I am glad I looked up the Act, as it states far more succinctly than I could the benefits of this far-sighted legislation. I only know that on a gut level I want my children and their children to inherit a world with all the rich ecological diversity that nature has bestowed upon us. The comparison has been made that eliminating a species is like ripping pages out of books not yet read. It is this unquantifiable spiritual loss I have always focused on - the animal or plant that might inspire a future artist or writer, or a piece of nature my children might not get to experience. This is a sacred trust. We must do our best to be stewards of what we have been given, to preserve it for future generations.
I know lots of Citizen Hunters will need more to compel them to take action and save the Endangered Species Act than my visceral feelings on the matter, so here are a few more reasons.
Extinction does occur naturally, but there does not seem to be anything natural about the current rate of extinction. And I'm sure we all can remember from 9th grade biology class about how complex and delicately intertwined our eco-systems are, and how species don't live in a vacuum. The extinction of one species can set off a chain reaction, the results of which are not fully known. Human action untempered by concern for conservation can have devastating effects. A bird or animal that eats insects keeps the population in check, and if that bird or animal becomes endangered - you get the point.
The tangible counterpart to my concern that future generations will miss out on part of our rich heritage is that those suffering from deadly diseases could very well be robbed of a cure. Every time a plant or animal species dies off we lose another potential tool. Almost 25% of all prescriptions written in the U.S. come from nature, not to mention the natural compounds scientists mimic and duplicate. It was a fungus that led to penicillin, and scientists believe that only about 2% of plants that could have medicinal purposes have been explored.
Please Take Action by Calling your Senators Today and urging them to protect the Endangered Species Act.
It saddens me to know that there are special interests groups and elected officials that have sacrificed our God-given responsibility to protect the planet and its creatures. "But we have dominion!!!" they would say as they line their pockets and pay off their friends with our children's inheritance. They must remember that dominion and soveriegn authority does not mean the ability to wantonly destroy what belongs to all of us, but to preserve and protect as a just soveriegn would do with that which he/she is charged to .
As a partner to Flavia's points:
What to expect if the Endangered Species Act is weakened as proposed:
Corporate responsibilty will be reduced to zero. They will not have to take into account the impact of thier projects on the most critical of habitats. The regulatory agencies will have 90 days to respond to any discovered danger. We will be racing against the clock to save what is ours.
The Secretary of the Interior, more than likely a political appointee (anyone remember Brownie) and not a scientist, will have the power to determine what constitutes "best science". The authority to determine "best science" is vitally important as that will determine what environmentally impacting projects are exempt from oversight. With corruption and cronyism rampant, it is not unrealsitic to assume that "best science" will be politically expedient science.
We will end up paying companies for any profits they lose due to implementing environmental protections. So if "Company A" chooses to build a plant in an ecologically important site, the taxpayer is compelled to pay for their own protection. If this sounds like something out of the Godfather movies, it's because it is the same principle at work. The public pays for our own protection to a private company that pockets that money and their profits.
These are just a few things to expect if the Endangered Species Act, a very successful bi-partisan program, is weakened as is proposed. We cannot afford to politicize another agency. We can not afford to lose our children's inheritance.
This is just another example of why we need change this November. I am sometimes astounded by the lack of vision by many of the Republicans in Washington and throughout the country. As an outdoor enthusiast, it saddens me to think that the outdoor pleasures we enjoy today will not be here in a hundred years (or less) if we let the short-sighted Republicans have their way. Why is it that if you care about nature and the environment to many Republicans, you are (in the words of Rush Limbaugh) "an environmentalist whacko?" As far as I'm concerned, if you don't care about the environment, you are the one that needs the psychiatric help.
There's nothing wrong with a visceral reaction to this. That's the natural reaction we should all feel when Republicans, Democrats, or anyone else tries to loosen the restrictions in the Endangered Species Act or any of the other environmental regulations passed over the last thirty years.
As I look at the pictures on my office wall of a glaciated Mount Rainier, and I think of all the wildlife I saw when I climbed that mountain, I certainly do have a visceral reaction when I think of those who don't care about the wildlife or the environment.
Posted by: Steve at June 23, 2006 05:17 PMThe GOP has lost its way on the environment. Republicans should spend more time reading Teddy Roosevelt biographies like Bush did over the holidays and less time cozying up to corporate polluters and big oil interests. I hope some of TR's enthusiasm for strong federal environmental protection made an impression on Dubya. This responsibility simply cannot be abdicated to corporate polluters.
Posted by: JSM at June 26, 2006 07:49 PM