By Tom Knudson
Bee Staff Writer, (Published
May 3, 2001)
The House Resources Committee, sparked by last week's
series of articles in The Bee, plans to hold hearings later this year on
environmental fund-raising techniques and other matters
The environmental movement
"is a very powerful force. It has become an industry," said
Resources Committee Chairman James Hansen, R-Utah, who said the committee
plans oversight hearings examining the environmental movement
"They've got buildings,
automobiles, airplanes, batteries of lawyers," Hansen said, speaking
of national environmental groups. "And they don't want to settle
issues. They keep wanting more."
The Bee series -- Environment, Inc., published April 22-26 -- investigated
the increasingly corporate nature of the nation's growing environmental
movement, including its reliance on costly, crisis-related direct-mail
fund-raising pitches and its use of litigation
In 1999, environmental groups
nationwide took in a record $3.5 billion in donations. But, according to
charitable ratings organizations and IRS records, some groups spend
substantial portions of donations not on conservation but on
administrative overhead and fund raising
"To my knowledge this is
the first time any paper in this country has ever done this kind of
report," said Rep. Richard Pombo, a Tracy Republican and member of
the House committee
"What most of these
groups are -- are fund-raising machines," Pombo said. "They
don't really care if they solve a problem. Their interest is in
maintaining the battle because that is what funds their
organization." Environmentalists reacted coolly to such comments
"Frankly, I don't think
this is the government's business," said Dan Taylor, executive
director of the National Audubon Society's California chapter. "Since
(environmental) groups are funded and supported through the public, let
the market decide." John
Passacantando, executive director of Greenpeace, said Congress is the
problem
"Congressmen, working
with industry, have done their best over the last 30 years to block good
environmental regulations," he said. "To say that somebody who
cares about rising rates of cancer or global warming, to say there is some
sort of greed motive in that is shameless." Colorado Rep. Scott McInnis, another Republican committee
member, said environmental groups have learned to sell fear
"They have every right
to tell their side," McInnis said. "But there ought to be a
fundamental obligation to tell the truth." Another
sore spot is the use of "citizen suits" to compel federal
agencies to enforce laws, such as the Endangered Species Act
While such suits have resulted in dramatic victories, Pombo said they are
prone to abuse -- and are generating hefty taxpayer-funded attorney fee
awards
"Groups have figured out
a way to exploit" citizen suits, Pombo said
"When they have a friendly administration, they use that (legal)
process to get things done that they could not get done through
Congress." But in
testimony before a House subcommittee Wednesday, Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., a
Democratic member of the House Resources Committee, defended the citizen
suit provision
"The administration
claims (it) is necessary to stop the lawsuits that have made the Fish and
Wildlife Service's job of listing species more difficult," he said
"The real answer is to
provide the Fish and Wildlife Service with those resources it needs to
address the backlog of numerous species that are either candidates for
listing or are in need of critical habitat designation." Key
committee members are expected to voice their views about The Bee series
on the House floor Tuesday, to be aired live from 4 to 5 p.m. PDT on
C-SPAN
The series has generated a
flood of letters and e-mail and has launched a debate within the
environmental movement itself
Some environmental leaders
reacted with indignation
"Yes, we are still
spending more on fund raising than groups like Save the Redwoods League or
Conservation International," wrote Sierra Club Executive Director
Carl Pope. "But those groups, bluntly, don't take on corporate or
governmental abuse of the environment. Instead, they take their money, in
many cases, from the very corporations that damage the environment, or
from big foundations afraid of controversy
"Yes, we occasionally
have donor events in fancy hotels," he said about a prominent event
in the penthouse of San Francisco's Westin St. Francis. "Not, I can
assure you, nearly as often as ... the Conservation Fund and the Trust for
Public Land." Others
sounded a different tone. "Congratulations for taking on a tough
subject and pulling up the shades for a little light to enter," wrote
Amos Enos, former executive director of the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation
The series drew numerous
responses from scientists, foresters and professional organizations
"As a professional
ecologist for about 30 years," wrote Richard Shepard, president of
Applied Ecosystem Services in Oregon, "I became disillusioned over a
decade ago with what I've been calling the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
Industry."