Posted on 09/04/2013 5:13:30 AM PDT by george76
as debate heats up on Capitol Hill over the proposed listing of the Sage Grouse as an endangered species, a key concern of Colorado Republican Rep. Scott Tipton is that it may never be de-listed, even if the population recovers.
If the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) decide to list the species, the new protections would restrict management of two million acres in Colorado considered critical habitat, including private property. That means limited use of the property for grazing or energy development.
“If we have a recovery in Garfield County, it will never be taken off the listing because we may not have recovery up in Moffat County,” Tipton said during a House Resources Committee hearing last month that focused on the contentious Endangered Species Act (ESA).
“Don’t you think that we need to have better practices when we get recovery in different regions?” Tipton asked USFWS Director Dan Ashe, who testified at the hearing. “We’ve got to be able to have better policies, because we are hurting small businesses.”
At least 1,500 species of plants and animals have been added to the special protections act since Congress passed the law in 1973.
...
the ESA is a one way street — animals and plants go on the list, but they don’t really come off
...
At the core of the ESA’s dysfunction is how it motivates government bureaucrats and environmental groups to continually add rather than remove species from the list.
...
Environmental groups use the act as a means of land-use control, and they add species because those species give them the ability to control the land
(Excerpt) Read more at thecoloradoobserver.com ...
And there you have the liberal agenda, in a word.
For decades college professors have had their students map uninhabited areas to document “rare species”.
The process is decidedly unscientific and assigns the term “species” to distinctions as subtle as color markings, within a known species.
The objective of this “mapping” has been to have a catalog to reference in the effort to HALT DEVELOPMENT OF ANY KIND.
Every plot of land, every body of water ‘houses’ marginal populations of differentiated life forms. The individual success or failure of a given ‘species’ to thrive in a given area is part of the natural process.
In the past there have been well known pollution episodes that have been clearly detrimental to other life forms. Now, the majority of actions by the advocacy groups, Sierra Club et al, and their close friends in the various local-to-Federal governments are preventative and prescriptive, citing POTENTIAL dangers for forbidding human actions.
Thus you end up here, where marginal populations can be labeled ENDANGERED and thus activities and rights are forever encumbered by such labeling. This is a prime example of regulatory creep in that it is far beyond the original scope of the enacting regulations being used.
I’m surprised that no one on death row has claimed this protection, as their DNA is subtly different from other humans making them unique, hence endangered.
Sometimes wisdom and brilliance is SIMPLE.
Your post #2 is just that. Thanks.
The decline of the prairie chicken is MOSTLY due to federal mismanagement of fires. It has little to do with man using the same space. I swear I am going to start a group and sue the Feds for poor fire management causing damage to Grouse habitat. Last year in Nevada they let over 7,000 acres of prime Grouse habitat burn because it costs to much to fight range fire(s).
A major agenda item for conservatives must be the return of the enormous amounts of mostly western lands that have been taken by the national government through presidential proclamations and bureaucratic rules.
Each and every president now is taking more and more lands away from the states for the most ludicrous of reasons. The most oppressed of the western states is Nevada, which has *about* 87% of its lands controlled by the national government.
However, the BLM and other agencies now no longer track how much land is controlled by the national government. Except when relatively tiny amounts of land, say 50,000 acres, are sold off by the national government for say, $75 million.
How about that for “capital gains?” Pay nothing for the land and sell it back at high prices. To who? They aren’t saying.
Some have suggested that the national government intends to sell “enclaves” of land to foreign nations, like China, which would then be their sovereign territory, like the grounds of their embassies.
Sage grouse are really nice birds. I prepare them with a marinade of lingon berry preserves, malted vinegar, and thyme and they end up tasting pretty good!
Let me get this straight. You are going to the masters of CONTROL and argue that FEDERAL MISMANGEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDS RESULTED IN ENHANCING EXTENDED CONTROL.
Do you expect to win the case or do you just have too much money? May I suggest other charities to donate the money to where it will have much better chances of accomplishing satisfactory results?
Do you actually think this is possible with today’s brand of federal bureaucrats in the corrupted NSA/IRS/DHS. I think you’re wishing.
Hey, who wouldn’t be for the poor kids, I mean birds....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.