Laserfiche WebLink
HHEE <br />The University report continues: "These impacts would take place at the same <br />time that economic dislocation will cause a sharp increase in needs for local <br />and state services. Anticipated increases in rural poverty and homelessness <br />could result in increased needs for food, clothing, shelter, counseling and law <br />enforcement. " <br />Information could be developed on others: <br />Panthers, PL Red - cockaded Woodpeckers, TX <br />Spuawfish, CO Mt. Graham Red Squirrels, AZ <br />Mojave Desert Tortoises, NV /CA Concho Watersnake, TX <br />Least Bell Vireo, CA Snake River Salmon, WA/ID <br />• Use of Public Lands. <br />Since the Act directly affects how national public lands should be used, the <br />people of the United States must participate in that decision. <br />The issue is : Should national public lands (40 percent of the nation) be set <br />aside as preserves for endangered species or to promote biodiversity, or be <br />used to promote the social well being of the nation's people through <br />management of its resources? <br />Are there methods for developing reasonable compromises? By the nature of <br />the Act, these decisions are made on a case by case basis. With each proposal <br />for resource development on public lands, the search for a new endangered <br />species swings into action. is this conducive to good resource and land <br />management? And is it finally time for a public, national land use policy to be <br />adopted? <br />• Private Property Protection. <br />The Constitutional protection of private property must be affirmed with regard <br />to environmental regulations which restrict use and value of private property. <br />Examples of restrictions and loss of value of private property can be developed <br />to help formulate this discussion. <br />• Flexibility and Management Alternatives. <br />Revisions of the Act must include use of alternatives, mitigation or conser- <br />vation measures to protect a species. The Act does not provide for <br />management discretion to accomplish the goals of protecting the species. Such <br />alternatives should be allowed if they will accomplish the purposes of the Act - <br />to protect a species in danger - without requiring the extreme restrictions <br />mandated by listing a species. <br />Such flexibility might help identify methods of simultaneously preserving a <br />species and permitting use of the resources affected. It would also help <br />prevent the "all or nothing" fights which have developed over listings of <br />specific species. <br />-4- <br />