One long-standing myth is that any law claiming to be good for the environment is actually good for the environment. Anyone living along levees in the South who watched environmental lawsuits block improvements in the 1990s and then heard the Army Corps of Engineers criticized after Hurricane Katrina for not previously making improvements had to wonder why the media didn't cover one obvious source of blame for the entire region not being more resistant to floods.
No, instead we got treated to Sean Penn carrying a shotgun, apparently to mow down the zombies the media claimed were floating in New Orleans and everyone blamed Pres. George Bush because the tropical storm turned into a hurricane.
Here in California, wildfires became something of a running joke about environmentalists in the early 2000s. They are rather easy to mitigate; you clear out dead brush and dead trees and make fire breaks. When wildfires blazed through much of California a few years ago, who got the blame? The government - because the government was supposedly in bed with Big Logging every time state biologists tried to make a plan to prevent raging fires that belch pollutants into the air.
Most recently, environmental laws are keeping a rare High Sierra fish from being able to recover. I am talking about the Paiute cutthroat trout. Ordinarily I would not worry too much about one fish; the supposed slippery slope of ecological doom that will happen if any species dies - thousands of species go extinct every day without ever even being discovered - doesn't apply to taxes or progressive cultural issues so it strikes me as the usual partisan stuff when it's claimed about an obscure fish.
In this instance, I have to write because the Federal government and the State want to restore the fish, they even have a plan to restore this rare fish to its historical range, but they can't. The law is the law and the badly written Wilderness Act says the auger that would be needed to do so, which can only be powered by a gasoline-powered generator since there are no power lines there...can't be used in designated wilderness areas.
Federal biologists know it's goofy, so do state ones. Maybe even U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. knows it is goofy but, let's be honest, no judge is getting appointed or elected in California without having the right progressive credibility so if there is any interpretation to be done, he is siding with progressives. He dutifully did, and issued a permanent injunction based on the Wilderness Act, which means the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are now forced to try and spend more taxpayer money on lawyers to get around the federal Wilderness Act law in order to comply with the federal Endangered Species Act and restore the Paiute cutthroat trout, which they are required to do by law.
Wilderness Watch and two other activist groups who don't understand responsible environmental stewardship sued to block the trout's restoration, claiming the use of the auger should not be exempted from the Wilderness Act and, really, denied that the project was necessary at all. The federal and government agencies stated that in order for the Paiute to survive non-native invasive fish have to be removed and that the auger was the most environmentally responsible way to do so. The ecological damage would otherwise be higher.
The judge sided with the activists and said the non-native fish have rights under the Act also and the auger was a no-go, writing in his opinion "the public interest favors preservation of the unimpaired wilderness".
Environmentalists for the win! Activism at all costs 1 - Endangered species 0.
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Sexual Fantasies: Threesomes Are Normal, Golden Showers Not So Much
- Ghost Light From Dead Galaxies - A Hubble Halloween
- Mediterranean Diet Linked To Better Kidney Health
- Greenpeace Says Its GMOs Are Better Than Science's GMOs, Still Hates Golden Rice
- US Wildlife Bans On GMOs And Neonics Lack Transparency And Scientific Rationale
- Game Theory: When Are Groups Social? Or Insufferable?
- Coulrophobia: Are Clowns Scary? Ha Ha Aaaargh
- "Twelve years in a major urban public school system, and I couldn't once bring myself to eat a school..."
- "Hardly a day goes by without some creative new take on the eternal Evil White Man meme. Without..."
- "There would be no controversy if it were all balloons and ponies stories like that. But I hope..."
- "Let's talk about this disaster: I lost a course at the university where I work and became ineligible..."
- "Partisan nastiness doesn't advance dialogue. We are all in this together. You asked for solutions..."
- Battle of Britain: NGOs and scientists clash over proposal to loosen EU GMO restrictions
- Genetically modified clean energy from bacteria
- Designer babies: You can screen for cystic fibrosis but intelligence is a ways off
- Science as profane: What superstition of 1752 and 2014 share in common
- What’s so “natural” about “natural crop breeding”?
- Worried you have cancer? Take a Google pill!
- Report examines health care challenges for pregnant women enrolled in covered California
- NYU research: Majority of high school seniors favor more liberal marijuana policies
- ESA Frontiers November preview
- Sexual fantasies: Are you normal?
- Synthetic lethality offers a new approach to kill tumor cells, explains Moffitt researcher