Free: Contests & Raffles.
"Nevada Republican Sen. Dean Heller wants to rewrite the Endangered Species Act to ban any new listings without specific approval from Congress and the governors of states where the fish or wildlife live.The measure he and Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky reintroduced in the Senate this week also would automatically remove a species from the protected list after five years unless Congress voted to keep it there. In cases where a listed species is found only in one state, that governor would be in charge of implementing any protections."How is this a good thing?
To give the control to politicians is the advantage? That sounds like the exact wrong thing to do if we actually care whether or not a species/population recovers.
Quote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 01, 2017, 10:25:11 AMTo give the control to politicians is the advantage? That sounds like the exact wrong thing to do if we actually care whether or not a species/population recovers. The ESA isn't being used for species/population recovery, it is used as a tool to take private property rights away, shut down jobs, and close public lands. The ESA needs a law like this one, either that or gutted entirely.
If that would help get the stupid pocket gopher off of the list, then I'm all for the proposal. (I don't know what effect it would have on the pocket gopher). They're damn moles anyway.
Quote from: Curly on May 01, 2017, 11:18:25 AMIf that would help get the stupid pocket gopher off of the list, then I'm all for the proposal. (I don't know what effect it would have on the pocket gopher). They're damn moles anyway.Even if they're removed under the ESA they still have the highest level of protection under state law.
Quote from: bigtex on May 18, 2017, 03:17:59 PMQuote from: Curly on May 01, 2017, 11:18:25 AMIf that would help get the stupid pocket gopher off of the list, then I'm all for the proposal. (I don't know what effect it would have on the pocket gopher). They're damn moles anyway.Even if they're removed under the ESA they still have the highest level of protection under state law.Yes, but if they were removed from Federal protection would it not be easier to convince the State to lessen the protection? (BTW- did I mention that I hate the damned moles?)
Quote from: wolfbait on May 18, 2017, 07:57:38 AMQuote from: WAcoyotehunter on May 01, 2017, 10:25:11 AMTo give the control to politicians is the advantage? That sounds like the exact wrong thing to do if we actually care whether or not a species/population recovers. The ESA isn't being used for species/population recovery, it is used as a tool to take private property rights away, shut down jobs, and close public lands. The ESA needs a law like this one, either that or gutted entirely.The ESA is absolutely being used to recover populations (eagles, peregrine falcon....) . It's also being misused by the environmentalists, but that can be fixed without screwing the ESA and what it stands for. If you actually care about wildlife species, you would recognize the value of the ESA despite its shortcomings.
What do you suppose "best professional judgement" would be based on?? DATA. It's really clear that you have absolutely no actual experience with anything ESA, other than reading and adhering to blogs and websites that spin the story. If you want to learn a little about it get involved in a more meaningful way.