Endangered Species Act is Endangered By Latest Revision

The U.S. House recently passed a new version of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, and several flaws in the proposed legislation stand out.

The ESA has, in the past, garnered a lot of criticism for affecting development projects when endangered species habitats were discovered on site. The snail darter fish, for instance, became famous in 1977, temporarily holding up a dam project in Tennessee.

This new version of the act, however, will require the government to compensate developers for any profits they might have lost if the discovery of an endangered species gets in the path of their project.

The potential for large payouts by the government is very rea. Last week, a White House statement admitted as much, saying such payouts pose a "significant impact" on the federal budget. According to the White House, payments could total some $20 million annually, but bill opponents attach a higher price tag.

A second flaw in the revised bill puts a political appointee, the secretary of the interior, in charge of making scientific determinations about endangered species. The current law has those decisions in the hands of the scientific community, and it should remain that way to avoid manipulations by those with economic, not ecological, interests.

The revised bill also eliminates the "critical habitat" protections of the original version, removing an essential component of the Endangered Species Act. Critical habitat designations are the only part of the law that clearly outline recovery as a goal and should not be gutted. These designations have proven effective over time, as species with critical habitat protection are twice as likely to recover as those without it.

This overhauled version of the law now goes to the U.S. Senate, which should realize that it removes too much protection from a law that has had tremendous impact in saving both wildlife species and their habitats from destruction.