Tag: piping plover

Is Endangered Species Act Endangered?

  • The piping plover is a tiny bird, about the size of a parakeet. (Photo courtesy of the USFWS)

The Endangered Species Act protects plants and animals that are on the brink of extinction. The American Bald Eagle and the Timber Wolf are examples of animals that have recovered because of the Act. But, some conservative members of Congress think the Endangered Species Act goes too far. They say the law often stands in the way of economic progress and private property rights. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has this story:

Transcript

The Endangered Species Act protects plants and animals that are on the brink
of extinction. The American Bald eagle and the Timber wolf are examples of
animals that have recovered because of the Act. But some conservative
members of Congress think the Endangered Species Act goes too far. They say
the law often stands in the way of economic progress and private property
rights. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has this story:


(Sound of shoreline and low peeps of the plover)


The piping plover is a tiny little bird. It’s not much bigger than a parakeet. This plover scurries around on the beach. It’s making a distress call and showing a broken wing display because it’s
nervous about a group of people building a cage around its nest.


(Sound of metal cage rattling)


But the people are here to help; they’re trying to protect its nest. Plovers build their nests out of little round stones right on the beach. Amanda Brushaber is a biological technician with the National Park Service. She’s leading a group of volunteers who are working to save this rare little bird.


“Right now, we’re exclosing the nests that have eggs in them. The
exclosures keep the predators out, and keep the birds of prey out, so that
the eggs have a chance of making it to hatch, which takes 28 days.”


These birds are getting help because they were put on the Endangered Species
List back in 1986. At one point there were only eleven breeding pairs left in the Great Lakes
region. The birds like wide sandy beaches that have strips of stones and cobble.


But these shorelines have been under a lot of development pressure. And with more buildings and more people on the beaches, the bird’s had a tough time surviving.


The piping plover is just one of the more than 1,800 plants and animals that
are protected by the Endangered Species Act. The Act has been around for more than thirty years. It’s considered the strongest law in the world in protecting endangered
plants and animals, and for the most part, it’s remained unchanged since it was first passed.


But some members of Congress think the Endangered Species Act goes too far. They say enforcement of the Act is often heavy handed to the point that it’s an abuse of federal power.


California Congressman Richard Pombo chairs the House Committee on
Resources. He’s a vocal critic of the Act. Brian Kennedy is a spokesperson for Congressman Pombo and his Committee. He says the Congressman’s constituents are afraid of finding an endangered
species on their land because it could limit how they use their land.


“In other words, if the federal government finds an endangered species on a
fraction of an individual’s private property, he loses the use of that
property and then when that individual goes to sell it, it is worth less
than it would be otherwise.”


Private property advocates say they want owners compensated for this loss. Otherwise they say their rights to their land are being taken away. They refer to this loss as a ‘taking.’ But people who enforce the Act say there’s a lot of misunderstanding about
what it means.


Jack Dingledine is a biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says they work closely with landowners to make sure a development won’t harm a protected species.


“If a landowner finds an endangered species on their property, they do have
an obligation not to harm the species when it’s there. It doesn’t mean that
we’re going to close beaches, and we don’t seize people’s property, but we
would ask that they consider any actions that might harm the species.”


Harming a species includes damaging the place where it lives – even if that
habitat is on privately owned land. And this is what makes private property advocates bristle. They see this as an infringement on their rights to do whatever they want
with their land.


Several bills are being developed that would change the way the Act is
implemented. The sponsors of these bills say the changes they want to make to the
Endangered Species Act will be an improvement.


But supporters of the Act say these bills do nothing to improve the law. Kieran Suckling is with the Center for Biological Diversity. He says these critics of the Endangered Species Act are hiding their true
agenda.


“Down the line, these are all industry sponsored bills that have no purpose
other than to get rid of environmental protection to benefit industry,
period. They can spin it any way they want, but at the end of the day, that’s
what their bill says.”


Supporters of the Endangered Species Act are troubled by the way Congress
has changed its tune. When the Act was first passed 32 years ago, Congress voted for it by a 355
to 4 margin. The law was extremely popular because there was a sense of urgency about
protecting endangered plants and animals.


Many environmentalists are concerned that if the Endangered Species Act is
weakened now, we’ll see more wildlife wiped out of existence.


For the GLRC, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Nesting Season for Piping Plovers

  • A pair of piping plover chicks. (Photo courtesy of Michigan DNR)

In the last century, the increase in shoreline development has
driven a small and rare bird close to extinction. Each spring, the Piping
Plover nests along the shores of the Great Lakes. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Kramer gives us an update on the effort
to protect the bird:

Transcript

In the last century, the increase in shoreline development has driven a
small and rare bird close to extinction. Each spring, the Piping Plover
nests along the shores of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Tom Kramer gives us an update on the effort to protect the
bird:


The Great Lakes population of Piping Plovers has been on the endangered
species list since 1986, when the number of nesting pairs dwindled to 17.
These days the number of nesting pairs is up into the 50’s. But biologists
say the bird still needs protection.


Lisa Gamero coordinates the Piping Plover Patrol for the Michigan Department
of Natural Resources. Gamero says nesting sites are becoming scarce as the birds compete with
people for lake frontage.


“Their habitat needs are basically, kind of a wide open beach, with a lot of small pebbles or cobbles, sand, and they usually have to be within a hundred feet of the water, and the nearest vegetation needs to be about a hundred feet away from where they decide to put their nest.”


The plover will remain on the federal endangered species list until its
numbers increase to 150 healthy nesting pairs, for 5 consecutive years.


For the GLRC, I’m Tom Kramer.

Related Links

Scientists to Issue Opinion on Missouri River

  • A day marker for barge traffic on the Missouri River. Environmentalists say there's not enough barge traffic on the Missouri to warrant the millions spent on maintaining the lock and dam system. Barge operators disagree. (photo courtesy of USGS)

A team of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists is putting the final touches on its latest recommendation for the management of the Missouri River. The document, known as the Biological Opinion, will guide the Army Corps of Engineers in deciding how to control the river in a way that best protects endangered birds and fish. It’s the latest turn in a contentious battle that for years has pitted environmentalism against economics. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Kevin Lavery reports:

Transcript

A team of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists is putting the final
touches on its latest recommendation for the management of the Missouri
River. The document, known as the Biological Opinion, will guide the Army
Corps of Engineers in deciding how to control the river in a way that best
protects endangered birds and fish. It’s the latest turn in a contentious
battle that for years has pitted environmentalism against economics. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Kevin Lavery reports:


The new Biological Opinion will be the second such document in three years.
The 2000 Bi Op – as it’s often called – advocated high water releases on the
Missouri each spring to cue the spawning season of the pallid sturgeon.
Reducing the flows in the summer, the Bi Op explained, would expose sandbars
to provide nesting grounds for two endangered birds, the interior least tern
and the piping plover.


That philosophy had been the view of many in the Fish and Wildlife Service,
who have studied the Missouri for more than a decade. But in early
November, the Department of the Interior announced it was replacing the
original scientific team to expedite the process of crafting a new outlook
for the river.


The decision unsettles environmentalist Chad Smith with the group American
Rivers. He feels the switch was an attempt by the Bush Administration to
silence those who offered a politically unpopular opinion.


“It seems to us like there’s an effort being made to try to find
someone to give the administration the answer that they want; that they don’t want to make flow
changes even though the science is crystal clear.”


The Fish and Wildlife Service team leaders deny that politics played a role
in rebuilding the scientific staff. The 15-member team in fact includes
seven who either worked on the 2000 Bi Op or have specific research
experience on the Missouri.


Commercial shippers that do business on the river are hopeful that new
thinking may lead to more growth for their industry. Navigation on the
Missouri has always been negligible, but industry officials say the past
summer was nothing short of devastating. A series of court decisions and
overturns led to a three-day drop in flow levels in August that ground barge
traffic to a halt.


Chris Brescia is President of the Midwest Area River Coalition 2000, which
represents barge operators. He says that incident punctuated their position
that unpredictable flow levels make the Missouri an unreliable
transportation mode:


“The conflicting court orders literally brought everything to a
standstill because it was unsafe for operators to quote freight rates and to
presume that they could navigate on the river when they didn’t know at what
point in time the court was going to reverse a decision to support
navigation.”


Central to the debate over how to manage the Missouri is the issue of
whether the economic value of river commerce is worth the cost of keeping
the river navigable. For the past decade, the Corps of Engineers has spent
just three million dollars a year on navigation. The Corps’ own data
indicates that navigation is worth about three times that amount each year.


One fully loaded 15-barge tow can carry more than 22-thousand tons, about as
much as 870 large semi trucks. Barge operators say having the river as a
viable transportation route keeps the cost of other shipping modes down.
But American Rivers argues that the two million tons of fertilizer, grain
and similar products barges carry each year on the Missouri fall far short
of what the Corps projected decades ago would be carried on the river.


For its part, the Corps of Engineers says whatever the cost-benefit ratio,
navigation is a congressionally mandated purpose it’s obliged to continue
paying for.


The draft of the Corps’ 2004 operating plan does not include the flow
changes environmentalists have demanded. Corps spokesman Paul Johnston says
his agency recognizes that those measures will not provide the biological
conditions the listed species need to survive. Instead, Johnston says the
Corps plans to spend more than 40-million dollars next year to accelerate
its habitat creation program:


“We’ll be looking for opportunities to acquire appropriate land
from willing sellers, and we’ll be looking at building tern and plover
habitat as well. So I’m really convinced we will reach a point where we can
have a much richer river than we have now and still enjoy the economic
benefits.”


The scientific team has until December 15 to complete its Biological
Opinion. The Army Corps of Engineers hopes to have its final operating plan
for the Missouri in place by March 1.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Kevin Lavery.

Related Links