Like riding in the dunes? Then help reform the ESA!

[Crowdog]

As users of off-highway vehicles, we all love Mother Nature's creatures and creations as much if not more that the average citizen. Most of us use our vehicles to get out into the backcountry to enjoy its' beauty.

Unfortunately, that's not how environmental extremists are portraying our sport and they have been using the laws like the Endangered Species Act to close down access to public land. The Endangered Species Act was never about saving species. It was about land use, and environmental extremists quickly turned it into a devastating legal weapon. The ESA attempts to protect species at all costs, with no consideration for trade-offs or compensation for human needs. The ESA in its current form causes unnecessary human suffering while failing to effectively protect endangered animals and plants.

There have been numerous examples of how the ESA has had adverse impacts throughout the country, and in the last few years we in the OHV community have learned its' effect first-hand at places like Oceano Dunes and the Imperial Sand Dunes. Too often, environmental extremist use the ESA, and little or no science to file lawsuits against our government to close down access to public land. And our understaffed and unorganized government agencies typically agree to close down an area rather than fight in court.

With the midterm elections behind us, and power in Washington shifting towards a more favorable climate for sensible use of our public lands, now is the time to turn up the heat. Please take a few moments to write your representatives in Congress, and urge them to reform the Endangered Species Act.

Proposed improvements to the ESA listing process should include:

- Preference for field tested and peer reviewed data

- Independent scientific review

- Historical context such as population trends, ranges, and fluctuations

- Data from all sources including property owners and other interested parties

- Public access to the listing process

You can find out how to contact your representatives at www.congress.org.

Most Sand Dunes have "species of special concern" (Dumont, Sand Mountain NV, etc), which are critters that are one step away from federal protection under the ESA. Environmental extremists will start hitting these other dunes in the future unless the ESA is reformed.

More info at: www.crowley-offroad.com, www.nesarc.org & www.sandmountain-nv.org/Tread_Lightly.htm

Jon

[Crowdog]

More info and links:
http://www.crowley-offroad.com/reform_the_esa.htm

[quadbiker]

Crowdog is on it. E-mail your congressman at www.congress.org and they will listen. Especially if you tell them you voted for them.

[Crowdog]

Repeal the Endangered Species Act

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 28, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com


"Intoxicating liquors" were banned by the 18th Amendment in 1919. It took 14 years for the country to realize its mistake and repeal the law that was horribly abused.

The Endangered Species Act became law in 1973. It, too, is horribly abused and should be repealed. Originally conceived to "protect" the Bald Eagle, and a few other species that were truly on the brink of extinction, the law has become the weapon of choice used by environmental extremists to shut down development, obliterate the concept of private property rights and transfer land-use control to the federal government.

During the Clinton years, four varieties of freshwater shrimp were listed as threatened or endangered, at the urging of environmental groups. The Fish and Wildlife Service did not believe they were sufficiently endangered to designate critical habitat for them.

The Butte Environmental Council – a collection of environmental groups – disagreed and sued the Fish and Wildlife service. To appease the extremists, the Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing to designate 1.7 million acres as critical habitat to protect the tiny shrimp that thrive in mud puddles.

How many mud puddles can there be in 1.7 million acres, covering 38 counties in two states? More importantly, how many of these tiny creatures live in these mud puddles? If there are that many, how can they possibly be endangered? Congressman-elect Dennis Cardoza says: "On its face, common sense tells you that that's not an endangered species if you can find that species in all these locations."

This lawsuit is not about protecting a shrimp – it is about blocking the use of this land for productive agriculture and future development.

The Fish and Wildlife Service shut off water to 1,400 Klamath Basin farmers to protect the endangered salmon – the same agency also clubs to death thousands of salmon hatchlings. Do they really want to protect the fish, or simply rid the farmland of people?

The Center for Biological Diversity sued the Fish and Wildlife Service in 1992 to force the designation of 731,000 acres of Arizona as critical habitat for the pygmy owl. Ten years of court battles by green groups are expected to result in doubling the habitat area, providing 66,000 acres for each known owl. Ridiculous?

Don Fife, a geologist who advised four secretaries of the Interior Department, asked a Forest Service botanist how a particular listed weed could possibly be endangered, when it appeared throughout the forest. The reply: "Everybody knows these aren't really endangered. We just need them to stop mining."

Fife secured a signed affidavit from a former Forest Service employee of the San Bernadino National Forest, which said the "staff had volunteers collect the seeds for these ESA-listed plants and spread them in the forest to stop mining and recreation on up to 44,575 acres of the mineral-rich forest."

These are only a few examples of how the ESA is being abused in order to stop productive use of both public and private lands. It is an abuse that should come to a screeching halt – by repealing the Endangered Species Act. More than 2,000 species are currently listed under the law, and more than 30,000 species are listed under a United Nations treaty.

Nature demands that all species adapt to change – or die. This was nature's law long before the first environmental organization came into existence, and it will remain nature's law long after the last environmental organization becomes extinct. It is not only presumptuous, it is profoundly stupid for environmental organizations to think that this fundamental law of nature can be repealed.

Environmental organizations that use the ESA do so not for the benefit of the species, but as a tool to achieve a much broader objective: to reduce and control consumption to ensure equity in the use of the earth's resources. This is the essence of "sustainable development."

This objective cannot be achieved if people are free to own and use their own property and resources. This objective cannot be achieved if people are free to make their own decisions about what products to buy, which automobiles to drive or where they wish to live.

Should the government control its people? Or, should the people control their government?

Like the 18th Amendment, the ESA gives government the power to control the people. The ESA was a mistake, as was the 18th Amendment. It is time to correct the mistake by repealing the ESA. This action will be an important step toward returning control of government to the people.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30220