[MJY1288]

Some good news for a change

[StriperSniper]

a bill that would require scientific proof that land should be restricted before the Endangered Species Act can be applied to public land.

What about private land?

Is this just government protecting itself?

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[liberallarry]

Rep. C. L. "Butch" Otter (R-ID) has proposed a bill that would require scientific proof that land should be restricted before the Endangered Species Act can be applied to public land.... This bill...would let the secretary of Interior decide whether the habitat that holds these limited species is threatened or endangered.

The secretary of the Interior, always a great scientist. You can bank on it. What bullshit.

[Tacis]

Scientific proof? What's wrong with the old tried and true standby. In the past, all that has been needed is three or more scruffy and unwashed sensitive environmentalists (and, recreational ganja users) to provide really, really sincere testimony. Often, this testimony was enforced by or more celebrities who spoke dramatically and ensured that the fact that the construction that would destroy the habitat in question woulld block the ocean view from the servants' quarters had nothing to do with her testimony. Why, all of a sudden after all these years, do we need scientific proof?

[Tony Niar Brain]

This is a bit concerning for me. In the jargon of the science world, 'proof' is not an absolute term. It is not like mathematics where a proof of a statement can be established once and forever. Proof in a scientific sense is more like a process - a process that takes time, often in quantities measured in years - that is never truly finished.

My worry is that if there is a species that is in real danger, this bill and it's call for proof might cause a intolerable delay in action. After all, they're will always be skeptics. Abuses of the current laws aside, I'm worried that this bill might be causing new problems instead of just fixing the old.

[sauropod]

Comments?

[justshe]

Thanks for posting this information.

I hope this bill gets some traction. It is desperately needed....if only to raise the debate on the ESA. If you take the USF&W situation, and multiply the court mandated and Congressionally mandated rules, by which these agencies must work under (USFS, BLM, Army Corp of Engineers) and add in the FOIA that is being exploited by many of the greenie organizations (tying up valuable resources)......you begin to see where a LOT of our taxpayer dollars are going.

I often use the example that even if a hole needs to be dug in order to put in a fence post on national lands, it requires a cultural analysis (for artifacts). It is beyond STUPID!!!!

Many often turn around and point the finger at the men and women who work for these agencies as being stupid, lazy, ineffectual, and unresponsive. But, imo, MUCH of the blame goes to those who try to tie these agencies up in bureaucratic red tape...and the liberally packed courts.

[Dead Corpse]

Is anyone else a tad bit upset that there seems to have been NO previous requirement for this?

[yoe]

"Give the people who live here and the local leaders responsible for complying with the law some credit for common sense and good intentions," Otter said in support of his bill. "And if you're going to throw a blanket over big chunks of our land, you better make sure you have the solid evidence to back it up."

Hoo-Rah and Amen!

Send a fax or note to Rep. C. L. "Butch" Otter and thank him for this long overdue step in the right direction!

610 W Hubbard
Ste 206
Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
Phone Number: 208-667-0127
Fax Number: 202-667-0310
or go to http://www.house.gov/otter/email.htm
and fill in the message for his e-mail.

Give this man your support where ever you live - let him hear from you.

[DannyTN]

It seems to me like restricting land for protection of endangered species is taking land for public use. Does the government compensate land owners for the restrictions? If not they should.

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environmrnt ping.

Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.

[RightWhale]

We don' need no steenkin' proofs, we are envirogreenocologists.

[sergeantdave]

Not only should there be scientific proof when applying the fascist ESA, there needs to be publication in scientific journals of the need for land restrictions so it may be peer reviewed. (And "deep ecology" is not a recognized disciple; it's blood and soil nature worship, so deep ecology journals are out!)

Further, the ESA should be applied only to the collectivized, socialist government land, not private property. And if the ESA is applied to private land, the taxpayer must compensate the land owner with a price reflecting the fullest and best use of that land, as determined by the affected land owner. No exceptions, and it's not reviewable by any bureaucrat or court.

Further, any bureaucrat, judge or politician that has in the past taken private property under the ESA without paying compensation will be subject to seizure of all his property, wages and accounts by affected landowners. Failure by these people to turn over all assets within 24 hours of a judgement would be sentenced to 50 years in prison somewhere in northern Alaska.

Finally, any so-called environmental group or foundation that aided in the seizure of private property under the fascist ESA would be subject to pay damage claims at 50 times the court determined damages. And these courts would be manned only by individuals who own property and work the land. Lawyers need not apply, unless they hate the ESA.

I have more, but I'll quit for now.