25 Years of the Endangered Species Act
12/28/98
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: How Well Has It Worked?
Source: The Associated Press, ABC News and Starwave Corporation
Status: Copyright 1999, contact source for permission to reprint
Date: December 28, 1998
Byline: H. Josef Hebert
W A S H I N G T O N - It's been called the noblest and most powerful
of environmental laws, and also the most despised and feared.
When the Endangered Species Act became law 25 years ago, few
lawmakers imagined the controversy it would unleash: fights pitting
the protection of plants and animals against the rights of humans to
own and manage their land, perform their job and meet the needs of a
growing population.
"It's the most visionary environmental law that has ever been
passed," says Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt.
Yet even as they celebrate the law, Babbitt and many
environmentalists agree new ways must be found to address the natural
conflict between landowners and species.
Few Listed Species Recover Passed by Congress with hardly any
opposition - 92-0 in the Senate and 355-4 by the House - the law
protecting imperiled species was signed by President Nixon on Dec.
28, 1973.
Strangely, it received only scant attention at a time when the
country grappled with an oil embargo, long gasoline lines and a
president threatened with impeachment.
It seemed only right then to protect an array of dwindling bbirds and
animals: the majestic bald eagle, the powerful grizzly, the
picturesque whooping crane, the condor with 10-foot wingspan and the
feared alligator.
Few realized it also would protect the snail darter, kangaroo rat,
Delhi fly, black-spored quillwort and the much-maligned furbish
lousewort [a flowering plant in Maine].
When Nixon signed the bill, there were 109 species believed to need
protection. Today there are 1,177 species under the law's umbrella,
six of every 10 of them plants.
But while the number of protected species has grown dramatically,
only a handful have recovered or are even moving toward recovery.
Only 27 species have been removed from the list, and of those 16
disappeared or had been listed by mistake.
These numbers have been used by critics as evidence of the law's
failure.
"This law is being judged by its intentions and not by its results,"
argues Rob Gordon, founder of the National Wilderness Institute,
which advocates property rights.
Opponents Cry Foul
But most environmentalists maintain the recovery figures are no
accurate barometer, either. The law, they say, has prevented the
disappearance of hundreds of species and changed public attitudes.
"It's been the catalyst for a profound change in how we view and
treat the land," says Mark Van Putten, president of the National
Wildlife Federation.
Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife and a Senate
staffer when the law was passed, marvels at its vision. It demanded
that species be protected on the basis of science, not politics, and
seeks to protect from ecological harm "future generations that don't
vote today."
In its history, the law has on more than a few occasions raised the
blood of those in its line of sight.
"It's done violence to property rights," says Rep. Helen Chenoweth,
R-Idaho, who considers the law unconstitutional though it's passed
Supreme Court muster a number of times.
Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., who headed a legislative task force
that urged a top-to-bottom overhaul, sees its reach as "de facto
federal control of private property."
Snail Darter: Poor Poster Child?
It was only a few years after its virtual unanimous endorsement by
Congress that the first sign of strife emerged - in the fight over a
Tennessee dam and the snail darter.
The Tennessee Valley Authority was building a dam on the Tellico
River in 1977 when the project suddenly was blocked by an endangered
species - the snail darter - found in the river. Congress overrode
the law and eventually the dam was finished.
But no longer was anyone under the delusion that the law was meant to
protect only grizzlies and whooping cranes.
"It was not the best poster child for the Endangered Species Act,"
says conservationist Van Putten. The confrontation "gave an image of
an inflexible act."
In 1982, Congress put flexibility into the law. It allowed landowners
or developers to get a permit for "incidental" killing of species or
their habitat on a case-by-case basis.
Nevertheless, over the years the law began to symbolize to some the
worst of big government.
In the Northwest the battle was over the spotted owl, an endangered
species. Logging was halted across vast stretches of forest and
critics blamed the law for loss of loggers' jobs. Environmentalists
argue the restrictions helped protect valuable old-growth forests,
including the Pacific Yew, whose bark is valuable in treating certain
cancer.
And when scores of homes were destroyed by wildfires in southern
California, critics said the homes were lost because of the kangaroo
rat, which the law protects.
Homeowners, the word was, were prevented from cutting down brush near
their homes, feeding the fires. Investigators later said the fires,
driven by 80 mph winds, were so intense they would have destroyed
homes even if brush had been removed.
New Fights
Today, along the New Mexico-Arizona border, attempts to reintroduce
the Endangered Mexican gray wolf have been stymied by what
investigators believe is systematic killing. So far, five of the
first 11 freed wolves have been shot and another disappeared.
And atop Vail Mountain in Colorado, arsonists set fire to three
buildings and ski lifts this fall to protest the loss of habitat for
the lynx, a small bobcat being considered for protection. Although
mainstream environmental groups denounced the fire, a small band of
militants claimed responsibility.
Though not as incendiary, other confrontations dot the landscape:
In Pennsylvania, concern over the endangered myotis sodalis, known
as the Indiana bat, is blocking a $500 million extension of an
interstate highway.
Monterey, Calif., has yet to learn whether it must pay a developer
$1.4 million because it moved to protect plants that are home to the
endangered Smith Blue butterfly.
People in west Texas around Lubbock wonder if the black-tailed
prairie dog may soon be added to the endangered list. The rodent
seems plentiful in Lubbock, but environmentalists say it is heading
toward extinction.
Babbitt Promotes Flexibility Since 1993, Babbitt has sought ways to
negotiate with landowners in contractual agreements that would allow
development of land, but still provide species protection.
"Without positive incentives, the Act's goals are unlikely to be
achieved," says Michael Bean of the Environmental Defense Fund.
Bean believes fear of the law has prompted landowners to quietly
destroy imperiled species or their habitat when found or - at the
very least - do little to promote protection.
Babbitt's "habitat conservation plans" allow landowners to harm some
species and habitat while they use the land. In turn, the landowner
agrees to set aside land and develop plans to protect certain
species.
Currently there are 243 such agreements, covering 6.2 million acres
in 16 states.
To spur such plans, Babbitt has offered landowners a promise of "no
surprises" for the contract's life, meaning no new requirements to
protect additional species in the future.
Many environmentalists criticize such assurance because of the
uncertainties that might develop years from now.
But Babbitt argues the plans are a way to avoid train wrecks. "There
is flexibility and strength in the law," he insists, "and it can be
made to work."
Facts About the ESA
Enacted: Signed by President Nixon on Dec. 28, 1973. Passed by Senate
92-0, by House 355-4.
Purpose: Protect imperiled species from becoming extinct. Covers all
mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fishes, clams, snails, insects,
arachnids, crustaceans, flowering plants, conifers, ferns and others.
Requirements: Anyone may petition to have a species listed as either
threatened or endangered. If listed, species is protected from being
killed or its habitat destroyed. Government must designate critical
habitat and develop a habitat recovery plan.
Exceptions: Government may issue a permit for "incidental taking" of
a species as part of land use or as part of a specific habitat
conservation plan.
Number of species on list: 1,177 (475 animals, 702 plants).
Endangered species recovered: 11 (brown pelican, Gulf and eastern
populations; Palau dove; Old World flycatcher; Palau owl; American
alligator; Rydberg milk-vetch; gray whale, eastern, North Pacific
populations; Arctic peregrine falcon; eastern gray kangaroo; red
kangaroo, western gray kangaroo (range in Australia, but had been
protected in United States for import purposes).
Habitat conservation plans: 243 (range in size from half acre to 1.6
million acres).