Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
Pacific
Legal Foundation Announces 2006’s “Top Five Earth
Day Lies” -- Myths Pollute Policy Debate April 20, 2006: As the nation’s premier defender of property rights and a balanced approach to environmental protection, Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) seeks to clarify discussion by announcing its 2006 list of the “Top Five Earth Day Lies.” These are untruths, peddled by environmental extremists, that distort and pollute debate.
This year’s list highlights the myth that heavy
regulation promotes environmental health. “In
their zeal to promote their eco-political
agenda, many environmentalists ignore evidence
that overbearing regulation is
counter-productive,” said PLF Vice President
Dave Stirling. “A balanced approach—one that
takes into account the human factor, the effect
on jobs, the economy, and people’s ability to
provide shelter and support for their
families—is actually the most promising and
humane way to protect the environment.”
In advance of Earth Day (April 22),
Stirling is available for comment on the
2006 “Top Five” list. A former chief
deputy attorney general of California, he
is a research fellow at Stanford
University’s Hoover Institution, where he
is preparing a book on how over-regulation
harms the environment and constitutional
rights.
LIE NO. 1: THE ENDANGERED
SPECIES ACT HELPS ENDANGERED SPECIES
Truth: The ESA puts species
in danger and undermines
constitutional property
rights.
For more than 30 years,
the Endangered Species
Act has been used as a
weapon by radical,
litigious
environmentalists to
lock up vast areas of
private property in the
name of “species
protection”—often
without scientific
justification, and
without compensation for
people who can face
financial ruin when they
are prohibited from
making productive use of
their land.
The best way to
protect imperiled
plants and animals
is not to deny
private property
owners the
reasonable use of
their land. That
policy only
encourages
landowners to keep
quiet when they
spot a threatened
animal or bird,
and to regard the
species as their
enemy.
For these
reasons,
the ESA
doesn’t
work.
Approximately
1,300
domestic
species have
been listed
as
endangered
or
threatened
over the
ESA’s 30
years of
existence.
Only 33 have
been taken
off the
list—and 15
were removed
not because
they were
“recovered,”
but because
the original
listings
were based
on faulty
science.
LIE
NO. 2:
SALMON
FISHING
MUST
BE
HALTED
ALONG
THE
WEST
COAST
TO
PROTECT
“ENDANGERED”
CHINOOK
SALMON
Truth: Halting fishing would be an economically devastating “solution” in search of a non-existent “problem.” Salmon are not “endangered.”
Federal officials are considering cancelling this year’s ocean salmon fishing season, from California’s Bay Area northward to Oregon and Washington, because of what regulators claim is the low salmon count on the Klamath River. But the feds are artificially underestimating salmon populations by not counting vast populations of hatchery-spawned salmon. This undercount violates a 2001 federal district court ruling that pointed out that hatchery salmon are genetically indistinguishable from stream-bred salmon.
Halting salmon fishing will deal a crippling blow to local marinas and economies by closing down a $150 million a year industry.
LIE NO. 3: THE FEDS MUST MICROMANAGE PRIVATE PROPERTY TO PROTECT CLEAN WATER
Truth: State governments adequately protect clean water; federal intrusion is unconstitutional.
Traditionally, land use zoning has been the job of local governments, in keeping with the Constitution’s limits on the national government. But federal regulators are trying to make themselves into a National Zoning Board, with power over land use decisions nationwide, by misusing the Clean Water Act. The Act gives the federal government oversight only over property that abuts “navigable waters.” But the feds have now defined that term to mean almost any water, anywhere. As Investors Business Daily puts it, “If collected rainwater drains into a gully, thence into a ditch, thence into a river, it’s now deemed under government control.”
The feds’ power grab is being challenged by PLF in a case currently before the United States Supreme Court. Rapanos v. United States, which will probably be decided by June, contests the feds’ attempt to regulate a Michigan man’s land because it has wetlands on it—even though the property is 20 miles away from the nearest navigable water.
LIE NO. 4: DRILLING IN ANWR WOULD HARM A FRAGILE ENVIRONMENT
Truth: Past energy development in Alaska belies doomsday warnings.
Even though sky rocketing oil prices are driving gasoline pump prices to new highs, extremists in the environmental community continue to oppose the Bush Administration’s plan for oil and natural gas drilling on a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Yet the proposal is extremely limited—it would allow drilling in a small area of the northernmost region of the 19.6-million-acre federal reserve; the proposed drilling area is about the size of Dulles airport. Drilling engineers believe recent technological advances would require the use of as few as 2,000 surface acres—just one acre for every 10,000 acres in the refuge area.
Doomsday claims that the project would threaten the porcupine caribou, arctic wolf, and the polar bear are belied by experience. The porcupine caribou herd occupying the Prudhoe Bay oil field on Alaska’s North Slope has increased tenfold—from 3,000 to 32,000 animals—since oil production began there in 1977. In fact, there are no scientific studies demonstrating that any Arctic species has been reduced in number as a result of North Slope oil production activity.
LIE NO. 5: THE BEST FOREST STEWARDSHIP IS TO LET FORESTS BURN
Truth: Removing dead wood prevents out-of-control fires, and spares species from incineration.
There’s a species of self-described environmentalists who act as if they never met a forest fire they didn’t like. For example, following a devastating 2001 fire in the Lake Tahoe area, some enviro-extremists cited the continued “presence of owls” as a reason to oppose a plan to clear dead wood through logging.
But how does it help owls or other species if the forest is allowed to remain a tinderbox? Burned trees serve as wildfire fuel; and wildfires kill owls, scorch their habitat, and incinerate the small rodents that owls love to eat. On the other hand, quick removal of dead trees and reforestation of the area increases the species’ chances of long-term survival.
Clearing dead wood, reforestation, and active forest management are central to sound forest stewardship. Taxpayers and nature lovers should be tired of seeing the nation’s natural resources endangered because myopic environmentalists oppose tree cutting even at the price of letting forests burn.
About Pacific Legal Foundation
Sacramento-based Pacific Legal Foundation is the nation’s oldest and largest public interest legal organization dedicated to protecting property rights, limited government, and individual freedom.
“Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.. ” -- Theodore Roosevelt (1858 - 1919)--
|
Home
Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:14 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2005, All Rights Reserved