Earth's Worth: Page 4 Endangered Species Handbook

Vanishing Species

Earth's Worth: Page 4

In the United States, many politicians and businessmen have opposed environmental and endangered species legislation on the grounds that these laws reduce the profits of commercial ventures. They propose that every developer whose project is blocked by such legislation should receive financial compensation from public funds. These businessmen calculated the value of their financial loss on the appraised value of their land, and added potential profits lost. In 2001, for example, farmers in California sued the Fish and Wildlife Service to compensate for water it lost when a water allotment was diverted for endangered salmon and smelt (Russell 2001). The court ruled in favor of the farmers and ordered the government to pay them the value of the lost water, arguing that the government is constitutionally prohibited from taking property without paying for it (Russell 2001). This ruling could end in negating the effectiveness of habitat protection under the Endangered Species Act for lack of sufficient funding. Ecologically, farmers depriving endangered fish of habitat are impoverishing entire aquatic ecosystems and, in all probability, polluting waters with pesticides and other chemicals in the process. Yet if the value of maintaining the ecosystem in the San Francisco Bay area was calculated in terms of the millions saved in flood damage control, water purification, production of shrimp and other fish, the ecological values would far outweigh short-term commercial losses. If environmental protection laws were written in terms of ecological values, destroying natural ecosystems for the economic benefit of a few would not be allowed.

When the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), native to old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest, was listed as Threatened on the Endangered Species Act and large sections of its habitat protected, it became a focal point, polarizing pro-logging and anti-logging activists. Owl haters urged others to kill these birds, who were blamed for ending the logging industry, with bumper stickers such as "Kill an Owl, Save a Job." Such venom totally obscured the fact that the forests were being overcut and that logging jobs were destined to be cut anyway, as the last old-growth disappeared under the saw. A state in the heart of this owl's range, Oregon, found that decreasing logging ended in helping its economy; an influx of technological businesses provided better salaries than those paid for logging jobs (Egan 1994). The Governor of the state supported the logging restrictions as helping to maintain the overall quality of life in the state, preventing floods and attracting tourists, which are supplying another large segment of the state's revenues. Yet pro-business interests continue to fuel the fires, writing books which conclude that it is easy to understand why a landowner, having an eagle or Spotted Owl nesting, could be tempted to destroy a nest or even kill an endangered animal. Such people maintain that the owner of such land might be expected to destroy it by logging or development prior to designation of Critical Habitat for the species in order to be able to reap profits. The Northern Spotted Owl has, in fact, declined since it was listed on the Endangered Species Act, mainly as a result of Habitat Conservation Plans that have been detrimental to its populations, but also, very likely, illegal killing played a role.

One conservative critic of the Endangered Species Act noted that the Act "has undoubtedly caused the deliberate destruction of millions of other endangered plants and animals" (Jacoby 1998). This explains, according to the critic, why after 25 years, 97 percent of the endangered species list remains endangered (Jacoby 1998). If so many endangered animals are being killed deliberately, enforcement of the Act is urgently needed. Such attitudes are extremely detrimental to the survival of endangered species and should be addressed. Although many animals are being killed, the main reason these species remain endangered is a deteriorating environment and a half-hearted commitment on the part of the US government and the public to saving these threatened species.

A study of America's environmental laws and their effect on the economy was conducted by the nonprofit Institute for Southern Studies, a social policy research group. It concluded: "At the policy level, the choice is really not jobs versus the environment. The states that do the most to protect their natural resources also wind up with the strongest economies and best jobs" (Smothers 1994).