Changes on act raise debate

California Attorney General Jerry Brown recently filed a lawsuit against the Bush administration for provisions made to the Endangered Species Act on Dec. 30, causing UCLA students and researchers to have mixed feelings.

With George Bush’s presidency coming to an end, the last minute provisions enacted by the Bush administration eliminate required scientific review of federal projects to protect threatened areas, said Scott Gerber, a Brown spokesman.

The provisions, which became official in December, have been the most radical changes made to the Endangered Species Act regulations in recent history since it was signed into public law by President Nixon in 1973, said Valerie Fellows, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The act was made into law “to provide for the conservation of endangered and threatened species,” according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Web site.

The Endangered Species Act is probably one of the strongest environment laws,” Fellows said. “Congress recognized that our heritage as people also revolves around the environment and Congress recognized that some of our nation’s plants and animals were going extinct … It’s not just to protect but also to help them recover so they don’t need federal aid anymore.”

Gerber said these provisions were pushed by federal agencies who claim they have the adequate means to determine whether or not it is safe to construct or drill oil in different areas without the help or interpretation of scientific experts.

The provisions were made so that federal agencies could quicken the process for federal projects, which were being delayed by the long scientific consultations, said Chris Paolino, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Interior that put the provisions in motion.

“What we have done is clarify what agencies can do … It will have a wholly beneficial impact and won’t be a threat,” Paolino said.

If the impact is too insignificant or can’t be accurately tracked because it is part of global climate change, scientific consultation is not needed to determine how areas will be impacted, Paolino said.

“I think it’s going to have a positive impact on wildlife and the community in general. It brings clarity to the consultation and stops the massive backlog … It helps communities who are planning for projects get benefits much more quickly … I think it’s a win-win,” Paolino said.

But some student activists think otherwise.

Letting government agencies do this type of interpretation leaves room for corruption, said Victor Weisberg, a third-year environmental science student and co-chair of E3, which stands for Ecology, Economy, and Equity.

E3 is an on-campus environmental organization that addresses issues relevant to helping the environment.

“Scientists allow for there to be pure review of endangered locations. I think it’s silly for U.S. government agencies to think they can do it themselves,” Weisberg said.

Weisberg went to Hawaii for a week over the winter break to help plant endangered trees in the wild with other UCLA students, and he feels that more should be done to save wildlife rather than leave room for hazardous dishonesty.

Brown accused the Bush administration of violating the Endangered Species Act by ignoring the environmental consequences that could become a threat to wildlife and making provisions that are inconsistent with the purpose of the Endangered Species Act, Gerber said.

Brown claims that the Bush administration has overstepped its boundaries by producing these illegal provisions and will do what is in his power to overturn them, Gerber said.

“We do not think it is not beneficial. We believe that it needs to be overturned,” Gerber said.

The Bush administration has a history of disregarding science and its record, Gerber added.

On the other hand, Brown has a history of arguing in favor of science and the environment, which is why he believes that real scientists should be working on the field determining where it is safe to construct and where it isn’t safe to construct, Gerber said.

Brown feels that he has a commitment to the public to fight for this cause, Gerber said.

“I think it’s really cool how our attorney general is taking care of this … it is absolutely necessary that we try to save endangered species,” Weisberg said.