It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
How do you feel about the short list i provided of what people are having problems with.
* Economic factors could be considered when the status of a species is reviewed for ESA protection.
* Species given a "threatened" designation would not necessarily enjoy the same protections as those considered "endangered."
* Changes could preclude existing requirements as to which federal agencies are consulted on a prospective listing.
* How critical habitat designations are made could ignore a species' historic habitat that is currently unoccupied by that species.
originally posted by: angeldoll
originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: angeldoll
You do know we don't have African lions in the US right?
You do know Trump recently said Americans can bring back the heads of lions to the states, right?
No. Of course you don't.
The African lion population, which was declared vulnerable in 1996, has decreased 43 percent in the last 21 years.
well sociopaths rule the world. Most rulers since the beginning of time have been just that. How does that make you feel?
originally posted by: TheRedneck
[Yes, black bears are rare here and should be protected, but not when the bear is attacking a person. Under present law, shooting a black bear that is killing you is still a serious crime. No one should be forced to choose between death and prison over the actions of an animal, just like no one should be forced into extreme poverty in the same way.
originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: howtonhawky
Er... I thought I answered that... except for number three, which I don't understand enough to comment on intelligently.
If the EPA is to be revamped, why not include all the necessary changes? Why do it piecemeal? I really don't care about bipartisan support on this one; I don't know many (four legged) animals that are members of either party. There are some issues where partisanship seems to matter, but this just ain't one of them.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: mikell
But squirrels are not endangered and neither are raccoons.
he has reduced the size of national monuments
the actions on this current endangered species act
cuts NASA climate monitoring program
EPA changes rules on transparency
rollback on car emissions standards
is utterly against anything that suggests there is climate change (as the government starts changing the wording or removing government websites on climate change)
proposed sweeping rollbacks and cuts for the climate and clean energy programs
loosened regulations on toxic air pollution
removes the 100 + year old law protecting birds (accidental bird death law)
mining health study halted
climate advisory panel halted
... and a whooole bunch more (Paris agreement, auctioning off 77 million acres off oil and gas leases, largest ever), etc. etc. etc.
It will take both parties to get these changes and there are way more then four. The four outlined are just the most contentious ones and may sink the whole lot. When they are compared to the overall scope of the bill they are not really necessary and without them much change would not be contested.