|
DOI Official Pronounces ESA "Broken" Liberty Matters News Service 11/21/03
Mr. Manson was a speaker at a conference marking the thirtieth anniversary of the Endangered Species Act, last month in Santa Barbara. Manson questioned the wisdom of trying to protect all species: "A, we can't protect everything, and B, we have to carefully examine whether we should try to protect everything and at what cost?" Former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt also spoke to the gathering and had harsh criticism for Manson's denunciation of the Act. "There is nothing wrong with the Endangered Species Act. It works," he said. "They [the Bush administration] want it to fail." Babbitt did agree with Manson that the critical-habitat provision of the law is unnecessary and said that statute could be eliminated with "no real-world consequences." Manson also wondered if it serves the interest of humanity to spend $100 million to save some species that "nature can't take care of." The Act's purpose, according to Mr. Manson, "is not to create a perpetual hospice for threatened or endangered species. It's our responsibility to get them to the point of recovery." Craig Manson is a former California Superior Court Judge and served six years as general counsel for the California Department of Fish and Game. RELATED STORY: Species Protection Act 'Broken' A top Interior official says the law should be revised to give economic and other interests equal footing with endangered animals and plants. By Julie Cart, Times Staff Writer SANTA BARBARA — A senior official of the U.S. Interior Department,
in a wide-ranging critique of the Endangered Species Act, said Thursday
that the needs of an expanding population, agriculture interests and
burgeoning development in the West should be given equal consideration
with endangered plants and animals. Attending an endangered species
conference in Santa Barbara, Assistant Secretary of Interior Craig
Manson criticized the critical-habitat provision of the law, which
limits development in areas favored by threatened species, saying
such designations aren't necessary for the perpetuation of many plants
and animals. Manson oversees the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
agency responsible for enforcing the Endangered Species Act. In an
interview before his speech here, Manson said the 30-year-old environmental
law is "broken" and should no longer be used to give endangered
plants and animals priority over human needs. "The problem is
the act was not written with a great deal of flexibility," he
said, adding that the interests of developers and private property
owners in some cases should prevail over endangered species. "There
are so many things we did not anticipate 30 years ago. It was almost
written in a public policy vacuum, without any consideration of the
potential impacts of the act on larger and different issues. We didn't
anticipate the potential conflicts. We have to recognize that, A,
we can't protect everything, and, B, we have to carefully examine
whether we should try to protect everything, and at what cost?"
But former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, who also was a speaker
Thursday, was sharply critical of the Bush administration's stewardship
of endangered and threatened species. "There is nothing wrong
with the Endangered Species Act. It works," said Babbitt, who
served during the Clinton administration. "The problem is this
administration is not enforcing it and it doesn't want it to work.
They want it to fail." Babbitt said the act can be highly flexible,
citing a compromise involving the San Francisco Bay delta. There,
state and federal officials came up with a plan for diverting water
to San Joaquin Valley farmers and Southern California city dwellers
that left enough to sustain native fish in the delta. Babbitt said
the agreement is a model of how the act can foster positive change.
But Babbitt agreed with Manson on critical habitat, saying the statute
could be struck down today with "no real-world consequences,"
noting that habitat provisions lie elsewhere in the act. The Bush
administration has placed fewer plants and animals on the endangered
species list than any other in the act's 30-year history. Bush has
listed 20 species since taking office. President Clinton listed 211
during his first three years in office. Conservationists note that
none of the listings made during Bush's tenure were done voluntarily
by the Fish and Wildlife Service. All came as a result of lawsuits
or petitions from private groups. This week, the Senate passed a bill
that would exempt military bases from some sections of the act, including
the critical-habitat provision. Manson said he supports the bill.
Manson, a former California Superior Court judge, served six years
as general counsel for the California Department of Fish and Game.
In a recent interview with The Times, Manson questioned the wisdom
of extreme efforts to stave off extinction of all species. "If
we decide we are going to spend $100 million to save a species we've
imperiled, why are we doing that? Are we doing that because it serves
human interests to do that? Are we doing that for the exercise of
saving something that nature can't take care of … regardless of our
efforts? If we are saying that the loss of species in and of itself
is inherently bad — I don't think we know enough about how the world
works to say that." The act's purpose, he said, "is not
to create a perpetual hospice for threatened or endanged species.
It's our responsibility to get them to the point of recovery."
Conservation groups are highly critical of Manson's stance toward
critical habitat, citing the Fish and Wildlife Service's own statistics
that show endangered species with critical habitat designation are
twice as likely to be improving as species without. "The reason
groups like mine pursue protection with critical habitat is that the
science is absolutely clear that species with critical habitat are
doing better," said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the
Center for Biological Diversity |