The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed Representative Richard Pombo’s (R-Calif.) bill to gut the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This bill would eliminate critical habitat protection, allow no independent peer review, weaken ESA recovery plans, politicize scientific decisions, allow projects that impact species and require the federal government to pay landowners not to break the law.

This bill is just the latest in what the New York Times described in a recent editorial as “Pombo’s steady stream of environmentally destructive legislation.” Pombo is an outspoken supporter of extreme property rights. He claimed, falsely according to the Times, that the ESA had “trampled” his personal property rights. As a result, ever since he came to Capitol Hill, the ESA has been in his crosshairs. Wyoming’s congresswoman Barbara Cubin is a supporter of Pombo’s ESA bill.

ESA Successes
The ESA has long stood for the basic ecological principles of ecosystem health and habitat conservation. Polls show that 86 percent of Americans support the Act. The ESA has helped restore America’s native plants and animals threatened with extinction for more than 30 years. It has prevented the extinction of 99 percent of all species ever listed under the law.

According to the National Research Council, the act has saved an estimated 172 species, but NatureServe database indicates that more than 9,000—or one-third—of the United State’s native species remain at risk. Of these, only 1,200 are currently listed under the ESA. Scientists estimate that 539 species have gone extinct in the United States in the past 200 years and the rate is accelerating. The ESA provides hope that we can slow these extinctions and also restore our native wildlife and its habitat.

What you can do
Write your congressional delegation and tell them you oppose Representative Pombo’s changes to the Endangered Species Act. Tell them that you support a strong act to ensure America’s rich natural legacy is protected for future generations.

The only species extirpated from Wyoming is the passenger pigeon. Some species such as the bald eagle, the peregrine falcon and black-footed ferret have come back from the brink of extinction thanks in large part to protections resulting from the ESA. Wolves and grizzly bears are also recovering healthy populations here, although neither is off the endangered species list largely because of political issues.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council’s conservation goal is to be a good steward of the environment and leave behind a legacy of healthy species and habitat. For this reason, we are strong supporters of the ESA. It’s not just about the plants and animals, however. Biodiversity is beneficial to all species including humans. Plants provide habitat and protect watersheds. More than 55 percent of the top 150 most popular prescribed drugs are natural compounds found in the wild. For example the Pacific yew provides Taxol for cancer treatment, rosy periwinkle is used to treat certain forms of leukemia and Digitalis helps fight heart disease. And what we don’t know yet may be lost before we can discover new remedies because of extinctions. At the current rate, experts estimate that the Earth is losing one major drug every two years. A cure for diseases such as cancer or AIDS may be in one of those drugs lost if we aren’t careful.

The Economy of Ecology
Protecting endangered species makes economic sense as well. Hunting, fishing and wildlife watching generate more than $100 billion in revenue a year, making it the 7th largest industry in the country. These activities employ nearly 2.6 million people—almost as many people as the U.S. computer industry. The reintroduction of the gray wolf to Yellowstone National Park has boosted revenues in local communities by $10 million annually.

The effectiveness of the ESA ultimately depends upon the commitment of the agencies to enforce its provisions and on Congress’s willingness to fund it adequately, but funding is chronically short. There are currently 286 species on the candidate list—species deserving of ESA protection, but unable to receive protection due to inadequate funds. In its fiscal year 06 budget request, the Bush administration requested only $18 million to address listing and critical habitat, even though the Fish and Wildlife Service stated that it would need $153 million over five years. Pombo’s efforts—if successful—will further weaken the bill and its efficacy.