| Dismal Science at FWS
(Note: Cindy has penned an excellent article, keeping us thinking that the following quote is 'the rule, rather than the exception:' "When we make critical habitat designations, we just designate everything as critical, without an analysis of how much habitat an evolutionary significant unit needs." - Donna Darm, the acting NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service) Regional Administrator for the Northwest, in a 1998 intra-agency memorandum.) April 2003 By Cindy Coping From People for the West -Tucson Newsletter Volume 9, No. 4, April 2003 http://www.riverbadger.0catch.com/ppftwtusconfrms.htm Information and commentary on the environment, property rights, and multiple use of federal lands. -- Our Constitution is the contract with America For more information, please contact: Jonathan DuHamel The Draft Economic Analysis (DEA) for the proposed listing of Critical Habitat for the Cactus-Ferruginous Pygmy owl embodies the worst flaw of the Endangered Species Act (ESA): The US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) can and does replace both the scientific method and the rule of law with the unbridled whims of arrogant bureaucrats. Much of the proposed boundary of the 1.2 million acre Critical Habitat exactly overlies outer boundaries of grazing allotments, as if owls apply for nesting permits. The DEA ignores unjust and devastating Critical Habitat impacts to ranchers. Quotations from the DEA reveal a dark design: "The total cost of project modifications associated with [farming and livestock grazing] is expected to be modest; the Service generally finds these activities to be compatible with pygmy-owl habitat requirements". --DEA, page ES-2 "...The Service recognizes the negative impacts of livestock grazing on federally listed species but has stated in several biological opinions that there is no [repeat, NO] information to indicate that livestock adversely affects the pygmy-owl." --DEA page 4-2, item 81 "Past programmatic consultations for livestock grazing activities included project modifications such as surveying for the occurrence of pygmy-owls, limiting utilization rates, fencing, and/or prohibition of livestock grazing in riparian areas." DEA, page 5-23 "Past project modifications for livestock grazing activities have requested that livestock grazing in flood plains be halted altogether. This analysis assumes that the costs associated with this type of modification are captured in the costs of fencing." DEA, page 5-23 Does FWS honestly expect anyone to believe the unjustified loss of lush deeded pastures; arbitrary and capricious herd restrictions; installations of new wells, miles of underground plumbing, windmills, pumps, generators, drinkers, cisterns and the labor and transportation to operate and maintain them; restrictions on a landowner's access to water and the resulting uncompensated property devaluation and loss of loan collateral collectively cost ... ... nothing? The DEA omitted any mention of FWS proposals to limit herds to current 100-year drought numbers, which alone would drive every affected rancher out of business. The DEA also failed to acknowledge that Critical Habitat designations trigger litigation from all sources. Tax-exempt "charity" organizations such as the Western Watersheds Project (WWP) have published their goals to eliminate public lands grazing within ten years (See last sentence at www.westernwatersheds.org/wwpinfo/aboutwwp.html ). WWP and other multimillion dollar "charities" frequently sue to halt grazing, usually without credible scientific data. These clubs relentlessly use Critical Habitat listings as a weapon against all affected ranchers. The ranchers often win, but the lawsuits cost them dearly. The DEA cites unscientific propaganda from anti-business "charities" as if it were fact. The DEA brazenly mocks the court order that repealed the former owl Critical Habitat designation for lack of economic analysis. FWS also continues to defiantly violate two court orders to provide affected citizens the locations of known owl nests. The situation mirrors the Declaration of Independence which exposed King George as a "Tyrant": "He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws;" Until Congress reins in the FWS, Americans are no longer guaranteed the right to security in our effects, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause, freedom from uncompensated takings of private property for public use, or freedom from involuntary servitude. Clearly the Founding Fathers would have recoiled in disgust had they guessed the well-intentioned ESA would be perverted and enforced in the manner to which FWS has become accustomed. FWS will accept public comments on the Draft Economic Analysis until April 9, and on the proposed designation for CH until April 25. [Ed. Note: As noted by the "Old Gray Lady," the New York Times (17 Mar 03): "Rationally speaking, the costs of critical habitat designation add virtually nothing to the protection of the species," said Craig Manson, the assistant secretary of the interior in charge of the issue. "It sucks up a lot of the resources of the Fish and Wildlife service, and it causes a lot of social and economic upheaval, and the benefit to the species is virtually nonexistent, so it just doesn't make any sense." ' ----- Cindy has a B.S. in mechanical engineering, an MBA and is a rancher with inholdings in the Ironwood Forest National Monument (IFNM), which was established in year 2000. Additional Reading: Proposed Critical Habitat for Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy Owl in Arizona (this is the Federal Register listing; the main website for LEAS is http://www.leas.bizland.com Llano Estacado Audubon Society) http://www.leas.bizland.com/cactusferrugpygmyowl.htm Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy Owl information (all you ever wanted to know about the lil critter, plus ten thousand times MORE!) |