There's talk of over-hauling the Endangered Species Act in the U.S. Congress, and Idaho Congressman Raul Labrador is one helping lead that charge. From the Grand Forks Herald:
Republican Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho, a member of the Natural Resources Committee, complained that the law is so broad that the federal government can intervene even if a species is only in one state.
“We’ve been confronted in Idaho with the potential listing of the slickspot peppergrass, which only exists within the state of Idaho,” he said.
The slickspot peppergrass is a rare desert flower that’s found only in the southwestern part of the state.
Those wanting to do away with the ESA point out that there are nearly 2,000 species under the Act, and only around 24 have seen recovery. That's signals that the law is not very effective.
On the other hand, conservationists argue that it takes a long time for a nearly extinct species to recover. So judging the ESA, enacted by Nixon, by the numbers we have now is unfair.
Of course neither argument really gets down to the nuts and bolts issue that our federal government has no money to be saving any species. Do I need to link again to the National Debt Clock?
A step in the right direction would be doing away with the ESA altogether, and allowing the states to control their own issues. The IF&G is taking the stance that they wish they had unadulterated control over grizzly, wolf, caribou management. If more private money were invested in local chapters of conservation groups, and less going into a large "public" fund that keeps an inefficient bureaucracy in tact, the better.
Here's the full story from the Grand Forks Herald.
