The Bush administration on Thursday eliminated 35-year-old regulations in the Endangered Species Act that required an independent scientific review of proposed federal projects to determine whether they imperil protected plants and animals .
review
bush administration thursday eliminate 35-year-old regulation endangered species act require independent scientific review propose federal project determine imperil protect plant animal
The Bush administration on Thursday eliminated 35-year-old regulations in the Endangered Species Act that required an independent scientific <m> review </m> of proposed federal projects to determine whether they imperil protected plants and animals .
The Bush administration on Thursday eliminated 35-year-old regulations in the Endangered Species Act that required an independent scientific <m> review </m> of proposed federal projects to determine whether they imperil protected plants and animals .
Instead , federal agencies undertaking projects like road and power plant construction or oil and gas drilling will make their own assessment .
Without the independent reviews , such projects could be accelerated .
As part of the changes announced by Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne in the final days of the Bush administration , the department finalized an interim rule that allows oil and gas drilling in polar bear habitat off Alaska 's coast .
The rule change is designed to prevent the Endangered Species Act from being used to regulate greenhouse gas emissions , essentially making climate change policy .
Kempthorne , who characterized the new rules as a common-sense streamlining of bureaucratic processes , acknowledged that there was disagreement within the department regarding the rules , which take effect in 30 days .
Under current law , agencies must submit any plans that could harm species on the endangered list for review by scientists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , which enforces the Endangered Species Act .
The process has been criticized by home builders groups and the oil and gas industry for delaying costly projects .
The consultation requirement was intended as more than just a check and balance .
Jamie Rappaport Clark , executive vice president of Defenders of Wildlife and director of Fish and Wildlife under President Clinton , said the consultation process resolved the problem of `` mission conflict '' between agencies .
The Department of Defense , for example , might not understand why an endangered plant should be considered when expanding a bombing range .
`` The problem is the agencies do n't always properly consider , understand or protect species in their habitat because they are focused on the pursuit of their primary mission , '' Clark said .
`` It 's hard for the biologists to satisfy their responsibility to protect species if the agency perceives it affects their primary mission . ''
President-elect Barack Obama said he would reverse the rule changes , as have some members of Congress .
But that requires a lengthy rule-making process .
In the House , members can invoke the rarely used Congressional Review Act to overturn the regulations .
`` These changes are going to result in more species being put in jeopardy , '' Clark said .
`` But more importantly , we are not going to know what we do n't know anymore . ''
Officials said agencies would still be held liable if they approved projects that harmed threatened or endangered species .
Kempthorne also noted that any federal agency could choose to informally consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service at any time .
H. Dale Hall , director of Fish and Wildlife , said he had concerns about how fast the estimated 235,000 public comments were processed .
Staff assigned to the job spent eight hours a day tabulating the comments .
Working under strict time restraints , agency employees had nine seconds to read each letter , according to one calculation .
Officials said that more than 200,000 of the comments opposed the rule change .
Attempts to revise the Endangered Species Act have been rebuffed by Congress in recent years .
Sen. Barbara Boxer ( D-Calif. ) said Thursday 's actions were another assault on the law .
`` These midnight regulations are part of a continuing effort by the Bush administration to repeal our landmark environmental laws through the back door and weaken protections for our nation 's endangered species , '' she said in a statement .
`` I believe they are illegal , and if similar regulations had been in place , they would have undermined our ability to protect the bald eagle , the grizzly bear and the gray whale , '' Boxer said .
Environmental groups , which took the administration to court to force it to list the polar bear , vowed to continue the legal battle .
Three groups , the Center for Biological Diversity , Greenpeace and Defenders of Wildlife , filed suit in San Francisco hours after the changes were announced , arguing that the regulations failed to follow the public review process .
`` The Bush administration has repackaged the same old lump of coal as a holiday present for the polar bear , and once again handed its friends in the oil industry a huge gift , '' said Kassie Siegel , climate program director at the Center for Biological Diversity and lead author of the 2005 petition to list polar bears .
`` These regulations seem designed to drive the polar bear extinct . ''
The rule regarding polar bears comes seven months after that animal became the first to be placed on the Endangered Species List primarily because of global climate change .
The melting of sea ice is threatening the polar bear with extinction .
This summer , scores of polar bears were observed swimming in open seas , far from land or ice floes .
But Kempthorne said that he would n't allow the 1973 law to be used as a `` back door for implementing climate-change policy . ''
To that end , he clarified regulations addressing threats to polar bear habitat : greenhouse emissions from automobiles , power plants and other human activities .
The act requires federal agencies to designate habitat critical to the creature 's survival , then protect it by strict enforcement .
Kempthorne said that according to his reading , court rulings require pinpointing a specific source of a threat to habitat -- something that he said was scientifically impossible .
That interpretation of the courts ' opinions gives the government few options to protect polar bear habitat .