ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT amendment defeated in Senate
Republican attacks on the Endangered Species Act still continue, but “on Thursday, the Senate defeated a move by Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski to require the new administration go through a lengthy process to reverse the Bush-era rules.”
During August of last year, the Bush Administration began eleventh-hour changes to the ESA. The Administration sought to gut the Section 7 consultation requirement, which requires independent review of projects by federal scientists from either the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service (depending on the species) in order to determine whether an endangered species will be harmed. The consultation process also determines the mitigation measures that should be implemented in order to minimize takes of or harm to endangered species.
Allowing independent review makes sense, because permitting corporations and developers to determine what’s best for endangered species would severely weaken the Act and certainly result in more lawsuits.
During this time, the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Bush Administration also restricted the public comment period. According to Grist, “Normally, the Fish and Wildlife Service has a 90-day comment period for a rule change like this, [but] when the draft of this rule change was first released, it was cut to 60, [and] now it’s down to 30.”
The Bush Administration also disallowed electronic submission of public comments in an effort to limit the number of comments. As a result, conservation organizations allowed the public to submit electronic comments through their websites, and these comments were subsequently printed and delivered to the Interior Department.
Considering the number of comments that were submitted to the Interior Department and the amount of time they had to review these comments: “6,250 comments would have to be reviewed every hour, [so] that means that each member of the team would be reviewing at least seven comments each minute.” Certainly, the whole process was a sham, since the government is required to review all public comments, and quite often the public will submit better-quality ideas than what the government has proposed (especially projects that require NEPA review and comment). From Environment & Energy Daily:
One of the amendments that the Senate defeated yesterday was a proposal by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that would have hampered the Obama administration’s ability to toss out two endangered species regulations that the Bush administration put in place in its waning days.
The amendment failed, 42-52, as it managed to pick up the support of three Democratic senators — Mark Begich of Alaska, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.
Language in the omnibus bill would give the Obama administration significant leeway to reverse two controversial endangered species rules — one that scaled back longstanding safeguards for endangered species and another that limited protections for the polar bear. The bill would allow the White House to withdraw the ESA rules within 60 days without having to go through any public comment period or legal challenge.
The Bush administration proposed the polar bear rule in May and rolled out the larger ESA changes in August. The administration finalized both rules in December, just in time for them to enter into force before President Obama took office. The timing leaves little recourse for the new administration to change the rules without starting over with the federal regulatory process.
The rider, however, would clear the way for the Interior or Commerce departments to throw out the Bush-era changes without going through the normal lengthy regulatory process. Some Republicans are concerned the rider could open the door to using the polar bear’s ESA listing to force the federal government to address greenhouse gas emissions and have vehemently objected to the language (E&E Daily, March 3).
Murkowski’s amendment proposed that if the Obama administration does decide to pull the rules it would be subject to the standard 60-day comment period.
















Recent Comments