The most effective way to preserve threatened species is by improving and expanding their habitat. One might expect that an endangered species law would reward people for creating habitat. It does not do that. For example, it could pay people who establish breeding grounds for the spotted owl or the marbled murrelet. We do not do that. Instead, we punish those who happen to have endangered species on their property. It is the wrong way to go about it. It benefits all of society. We should not impose on small property owners the imposition that does us all good. We need to change our policy. It is not a good amendment.
Frank Riggs: “The most effective way to preserve threatened species is by improving and expanding their habitat. One might expect that…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the shortcomings of endangered species laws and their impact on property owners.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
Now that we have struck that note of bipartisan cooperation and agreement, I just want to interject for the Record, and here I think is the clear, and I believe collegial difference between the Democratic Members of the House of…
Yes, and my opinion is that that local school district should have to go to court to adjudicate an unclear or conflicting provision between Federal and State law. And then if a Federal court order results, then obviously that local school…
I do not see how we can support a policy that... facilitates, furthers illegal drug use and actually... puts us as lawmakers... in the position of... engaging in enabling behavior. And, furthermore, it sends the worst possible message that…
That mandate is embedded in current law, and what we are trying to do now by proposing reforms to the Federal Bilingual and Immigration Education Acts is to give local school districts more say, more flexibility, more discretion, more…





