This Morning On The Hill
From Molly Block:
This morning the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations is looking into serious economic and environmental implications as a result of massive delays due to Section 7’s consultation requirements under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Ironically, many of these unnecessarily-hamstrung projects would improve conditions for threatened or endangered species – not to mention public health, safety and economic growth. Save your ink for the hearing’s Q&A, in the meantime here are several takeaways from written testimony you don’t want to miss:
- “In many cases, project approval would improve conditions for a threatened species while also bringing much needed economic development to rural America. Instead of providing these multifaceted societal benefits, these projects are mired in a 30-year + permitting process.” –Doug Stiles, General Manager, Hecla Mining Company, Idaho.
- “[N]early 100,000 projects had to undergo time-consuming and expensive consultation even though none of them would likely jeopardize a listed species or its habitat…When necessary infrastructure maintenance and upgrades are put-off because of these delays and costs, that can significantly harm species and the environment.”- Jonathan Wood, Staff Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation.
- “We need a better balance between the protection of endangered species and the ability to implement important public works and infrastructure projects — especially when public safety and health is threatened by a lack of water supply,” – Mr. Ronald J. Calkins, President, American Public Works Association.
- “There is no compelling argument that legislation is needed to resolve a specific conflict under section 7 or to make section 7 more effective for wildlife and people,” – Ya Wei Li, Vice President, Defenders of Wildlife.
Tune in here at 10:00 AM EST to learn more.
Click here for the hearing memo.
House Committee on Natural Resources