Issues of concern to people who live in the west: property rights, water rights, endangered species, livestock grazing, energy production, wilderness and western agriculture. Plus a few items on western history, western literature and the sport of rodeo... Frank DuBois served as the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003. DuBois is a former legislative assistant to a U.S. Senator, a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Interior, and is the founder of the DuBois Rodeo Scholarship.
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Has the Endangered Species Act become immune to amendment?
An animal rights group has filed a lawsuit arguing that the Endangered Species Act — which is itself constitutionally suspect — limits Congress’ powers, i.e.
Congress cannot legislate on endangered species issues unless that
legislation would be consistent with the ESA. This absurd proposition
has already been rejected by that bastion of anti-environmentalism: the
Ninth Circuit, which recently characterized the protection of endangered species as the “highest priority” under federal law. The subject of the most recent controversy is a permit exemption for
exotic hunting ranches, which finance populations of species that are
endangered or extinct in the wild through regulated hunting. This
fantastically successful model for species conservation has been
consistently attacked by animal rights groups. A few years ago, 60 Minutes produced
a piece on this success and interviewed those on both sides of the
political and legal fight. Lest you have any doubt that the opposition
isn’t about species conservation, the leader of the animal rights group
is asked directly whether she would rather see these species go extinct
than be saved in this way. And she said yes! The group previously sued to stop a administratively adopted permit
exemption for these ranches on the grounds that it violated the ESA. The
district court agreed with them, and the case is now on appeal. In the
wake of this decision, Congress decided to change the law, perhaps
because it didn’t think the ESA was meant to contribute to species
extinction. A court interpreted the law. Congress, disagreeing with the result,
changed the law. That should be the end of the story. Nope. The group
argues that Congress violated the Separation of Powers. Because there is
a pending lawsuit, Congress’s decision to change the law in effect
directs the judiciary to decide the case in a particular way...more
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment