The Bush administration yesterday announced plans to relax the law protecting endangered species to allow federal agencies to decide for themselves whether construction projects such as highways, dams or mines might harm endangered animals and plants.
Under the altered rules, the government would no longer have to consult with independent scientists about the effect of new projects on wildlife. Thousands of consultations take place every year.
The US interior secretary, Dirk Kempthorne, said the proposal would help the US use the species law "more efficiently and avoid misusing it to regulate global climate change". He added: "It is not possible to draw a link between greenhouse gas emissions and distant observations of impact affecting species."
Kempthorne defended the proposal as an effort to clear up "confusion" and prevent "unnecessary" wildlife protection work. In a draft version of the plan leaked to the media, his department claimed US government agencies would "err on the side of caution" when performing their internal environmental reviews
Still don't agree with it. How is the goverment suppose to know what things will have a global impact or not? I would much rather look like a radical tree hugger years from now then to be helping my grandchildren put on oxygen masks so that they can breath(if we aren't careful).IMO~~ This is only a way for Bush to open new areas of drilling and distruction for his oil company buddies.
I always search to find more answers..
The Bush administration yesterday announced plans to relax the law protecting endangered species to allow federal agencies to decide for themselves whether construction projects such as highways, dams or mines might harm endangered animals and plants.
Under the altered rules, the government would no longer have to consult with independent scientists about the effect of new projects on wildlife. Thousands of consultations take place every year.
The US interior secretary, Dirk Kempthorne, said the proposal would help the US use the species law "more efficiently and avoid misusing it to regulate global climate change". He added: "It is not possible to draw a link between greenhouse gas emissions and distant observations of impact affecting species."
Kempthorne defended the proposal as an effort to clear up "confusion" and prevent "unnecessary" wildlife protection work. In a draft version of the plan leaked to the media, his department claimed US government agencies would "err on the side of caution" when performing their internal environmental reviews
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/12/endangeredhabitats.endangeredspecies