04/28/05 E.S.A. reform needed, Part three

04/28/05 E.S.A. reform needed, Part three

To say that the federal government's task in managing all the aspects of the Endangered Species Act is a daunting one would be an understatement. SANSONETTI: The job, under the Act, of the federal government & to not only maintain the number of plants or animals endangered but to make the circumstances such that those plants or animals fully recover so they can sustain themselves again on United States' soil. And according to Tom Sansonetti, who just recently stepped down as the U.S. Justice Department's top attorney for environmental and natural resource issues, the reason for the difficulty is the way the courts order how E.S.A. must be managed. In his opinion, the court's involvement in a matter that should solely be determined by Congress and the agencies that oversee E.S.A. is the primary reason reform of the Endangered Species Act is needed. Now environmental groups, those that file listings and issue challenges in courts, contend E.S.A. does not need reform but instead needs the government to do a better job of enforcing those regulations on the books. Sansonetti says the lack of federal monies and personnel available to manage E.S.A. coupled with the growing number of filings for listing makes any realistic enforcement very unlikely. Yet, the courts still have their say on what species will be listed and if critical habitat designations are required. However, Sansonetti is quick to point out that some courts are becoming more sensitive on the balance of land use versus species protections when considering E.S.A. listings. And the chances of that happening improve in the Western U.S. SANSONETTI: It's my observation that the further away from Washington D.C. you get, the more likely it is that a local federal district judge & they are going to encourage collaboration and cooperation in coming up with a plan to resolve some of these conflicts between property use and endangered species. And Sansonetti, in his view, says the reverse is true when a federal judge far away from the impacts a listing would have on western landowners, whether it be Washington D.C. or Portland Oregon, considers such a case. And because inconsistency on the bench from the mandate versus collaboration standpoint remains, Sansonetti says that any real hope in E.S.A. reform lies in the hands of Congress. His views on what Congress must do, and how fast they can do it, is the subject of our next program.
Previous Report04/27/05 E.S.A. reform needed, Part two
Next Report04/29/05 E.S.A. reform needed, Finale