WSP01980 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e . . 002291 . . :03-273-3413 ESEE I:Sr1 781 P14 MAR 31 '?2 10:55 SUMMARY The Bad News is: · Imoact of Act beinG extended. The impact of the Endangered Species AC1. is being extended to regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency, · Biodiversitv bills introduced. Bills promoting biodiversitY. if passed, will add one more layer to the environmental laws stopping development or human activitY (other than hiking and camping) on federal lands and, it must be remembered. that the Federal government owns nearty 40 percent of the land in the country. If its use is withdrawn from the national economy, there will be a severe negative impact. . Judoes now manaoino land. So many Federal land management actions are being challenged in the COurts that the judiciary is now managing the land. Many of these court challenges are brought on behalf of the Endangered Species -Act. The Good News is: · Private Prooertv Act oasses Senate. The Private Property Rights Act, if passed, would mitigate one of the negative impacts of the Endangered Species Act. According to the Forbes article, ~the Senate bill has some professional environmentslists up in srms. If each of their efforts to protect 'biodiversity' csrries a price tsg, the terms of the debate shift in ways they do not like. It will no longer be: Should we protect the spotted owl? It becomes: How much as we willing to spend to protect the spotted owl?" Note: The bill passed by nine votes; 17 Democrats teamed with 38 Republicans to "hand environmental extremists the biggest legislative defeat in their history, " the article says. This indicates a pOsitive change in Congressional thinking - at least in the Senate. . Conaress has affirmed oublic oarticioation in technical decision-makino. A major provision of the Superfund Act mandates, during the process of determining the best cleanup methods for Superfund sites. that very specific activities be implemented to involve the public in hearings, comments and other participatory methods. EPA, the responSible agency, must provide a written record of its "CommunitY Relations Program" for each site and, when the agency files its recommended technical method for cleaning up tha site, a concurrant document lists all concerns of local citizens, how they were addressed and, if specific concerns were not addressed in the selected method, the agency must explain why they were not considered. This Congressional precedent shows a faith in the American people to contribute intelligem recommendations for technical (scientific) decisions and faith in the ability of an agency to explain complex issues to the public. -12- 4/92