Jim Beers
Like Ebenezer Scrooge in Charles Dickens' famous tale, perhaps a glimpse of
some Current matters and the Past conditions that led to them will provide a
picture of the Future sufficient to create the change necessary to avoid
disaster.
Today I would like to borrow Mr. Dickens' literary device and talk to you
about Federal environmental developments and the steady havoc they are
wreaking in this nation. First I will tell you about Current environmental
activities in Washington, then I will explain about the Past history of
Federal environmental law enforcement and how it became the problem it is
today, and then we will wind up with a look at the Future of Federal and
State land acquisition, easement, and land control by bureaucracies and
their surrogates like The Nature Conservancy.
I.
SOME CURRENT FEDERAL ACTIVITIES
A. The US Army
Corps of Engineers has recently notified the
Federal Court (where they have been delaying and obfuscating a Federal
lawsuit to stop them from dumping tons of toxic sludge twice a month from
the DC Water System into the Potomac River) that they have "decided"
to stop
the dumping and truck (in 80 truckloads per week) the sludge they create to
a landfill for proper disposal. The suit has been in Federal Court for
over
5 years and the brave, but tiny and true, conservation organization (The
National Wilderness Institute) is dormant as they went broke trying to
withstand the delays, failure to provide documents, and outright misleading
of the Court by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Fish and Wildlife
Service, the EPA, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the National
Park Service to name a few.
Imagine an outlet in a National Park spewing a black sludge like oil in a
steady flow 6 feet by 3 feet twice a month during the night into the Potomac
River for 6 to 8 hours at a time. Further imagine it going out one or
more
of three such pipes, one of which dumps right on the only spawning site in
the Potomac of the long-Endangered shortnose sturgeon under a permit from
EPA to the Corps approved by the other agencies. Further imagine that
sludge containing not only deadly (to young fish) elements like Aluminum but
also exotic chemical residues from the period (1914-1920) when that section
of Washington was used for a massive government research and development
program for delivery devices for poison gases and the discovery of other
chemical warfare compounds. (The only known aerial photos of that area
from
the early 1920's [at the National Archives] have been cut out of the photos
and no one can explain why or how.)
The lesson here is not only the double standard and perfidy of government
holding itself to a standard different than it applies to us (like King
George and his Parliament?); the lesson is really about what and who we DID
NOT HEAR FROM. The national "environmental" (Sierra Club,
NRDC, Greenpeace,
et al) organizations were AWOL. The national "conservation"
organizations
(Trout Unlimited, Ducks Unlimited, National Wildlife Federation, and all
manner of fishing and hunting organizations) were AWOL. The "animal
rights"
organizations (PETA, FFA, AWI, Defenders of Wildlife, et al) were AWOL.
The
State's fish and wildlife lobby organization (IAFWA) was AWOL. The
District
of Columbia and Maryland and Virginia were AWOL. The US Congress was
AWOL.
Have I left anyone out? No one would risk offending their Federal
"partners" and the source of all those Federal dollars.
Not only did these outfits fail to help financially, they never even
publicized what was going on, and they wouldn't even lend their name to the
lawsuit. Today there are lots of catfish in the Potomac but fishing is
all
catch and release because their levels of toxins are off the charts. But
not to worry, the bureaucrats all got their bonuses and pay raises and all
those Washington lobby group staff boys and girls and bureaucrats still
speed right by the River every morning and evening as they scheme on how to
curry government funding by telling the rest of us what their nefarious
"partners" will see that they get rewarded for telling us to do.
B. There are three legislative proposals perking in the Congress at this
time that bare special
attention:
- One would outlaw any slaughter of horses anywhere in the nation.
Not
only couldn't you sell YOUR horse for slaughter, horseflesh could not be
sold here or to others overseas for human consumption or dog food or mink
food or any human use. Never mind that you have on old horse or an
injured
horse or that the government can't begin to "place" all of the
"wild" horses
in "homes". This latest SEIZURE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY BY
GOVERNMENT ON BEHALF OF OTHERS simply makes horse ownership more expensive and
problematic for
all but the rich. If horses, why not sheep or ostriches or deer or
fill-in-the-blank?
- Another would use newly-minted Federal authority to outlaw
cockfighting
anywhere in the US. This centuries-old (in the US) tradition and
millenniums-old tradition in the rest of the world has been, and should
remain, a state and local prerogative. Why? Well having never been
to a
cockfight I can only say that EVERY argument I read or hear for this new
Federal authority is as applicable (although inapplicable in my book) to
trapping, hunting, fishing, livestock slaughter, dog training, and
practically every other animal use of OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.
- The final proposal being floated is new Federal authority (really just
a
projection of Animal Welfare Act evolution that mimics Endangered Species
Act evolution) for the Federal government to license and "regulate"
dog and
cat breeders. It is called "PAWS" and is the brainchild of
Senator
Santorum, last years' "Puppy Protection Act" sponsor, who is engaged
in a
tight reelection race and is pandering to whoever (moderates?,
middle-of-the-roaders?, urban commuters?, or the radical animal rights
organizations?) for support. The proposed limits for Federal authority
are
but a few litters per year and are arbitrary. The hearings about such
legislation were only open to supporters. If the limits are 25 pups per
year, why not 10 per year or no puppies at all? What about breed
breeders?
If dogs and cats, why not gerbils and tropical fish or any animal to be
named at a later date?
C. The recent attempt to "reform" The Endangered Species Act
has been
fascinating to watch. House Resources Chairman Pombo and a commendable
Democrat, Rep. Costa of California introduced a modest bill to have the
government pay landowners when they "take" their property for
Critical
Habitat and to force the government to tell a property owner within 180 days
whether they can use their own property or not. This passed the House
overwhelmingly despite fierce Democrat Party opposition. This is the
first
time since inception that ANY serious reform has been proposed. The Act
goes unauthorized for 20 years yet funding and power increases annually like
a perpetual "Perfect Storm".
A companion bill is "tied up" (i.e. being buried) in the US Senate.
A Rhode
Island Senator (Chafee) is the subcommittee Chairman "handling" it.
While a
"Keystone Center" works to "develop" a "Critical
Habitat" Report for the
Senate (a smokescreen by zealots) things are at a standstill. If
something
is not voted out of the Senate on Endangered Species Act reform by early
spring, there will be no possibility of any reform during this session of
Congress and the whole thing will sink beneath the waves.
D. One bad recent sign in this regard was the electrification of any
sensible environmental energy proposals after the recent elections back
East. Pombo's proposal to give States authority to allow offshore
drilling,
and the proposal to finally inventory and drill in ANWR both have evidently
faded. Speaking of oil.
Remember Katrina and the oil price spike? Well for about two months the
high price of oil generated calls for banning SUV's, breaking out the old
solar panels and harassing oil companies. Then oil prices dropped and
Congress and the bureaucrats announced the discovery of a lack of highway
funding. This is the same fund by the way that the recent Transportation
Bill made famous for all the "pork" it contained. Now Congress
is
considering some new gimmick in all (new?) vehicles whereby we each would
pay an annual tax for all miles DRIVEN to increase our highway tax payments
in addition to the per-gallon taxes we pay now.
What does this have to do with the environment? Well I want to tell you
that Federal land-management agencies are still increasing their use of
these funds for their own purposes, which by the way harms the rest of us
more than by just diverting the money. The National Park Service is
still
proceeding to plan and fund closure of two major State highways (there since
before the Civil War) through the Manassas Battlefield in Virginia and the
construction of a bypass that will crowd already overcrowded roads and
condemn private homes to a tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. On
the
Outer banks of North Carolina the National Park Service and US Fish and
Wildlife Service are pushing a 1 to 2 Billion dollar, 17-mile bridge around
the Outer Bank Wildlife Refuge of Pea Island to close a state highway there
that provides refuge and beach access. While they talk of closing the
highway behind the dunes to "restore natural processes blah, blah",
the
clear result and purpose will be to change the sole channel between the
Sound and the Ocean from a routinely dredged boat-worthy channel to a
fluctuating series of rivulets dependent on storms and tides. The real
result will be to close down the most productive fishery (sport and
commercial) on the East coast by closing the ONLY outlet to the sea for 100
miles. This will affect boaters, fishermen, businesses, and communities
and
reduce visitors to the "public" refuge and park and make more
"closable"
land available to these agencies by eliminating a boat basin and a Coast
Guard Station and other boat-service facilities. Only the very rich (as
with so many of these environmental shenanigans) will be able to enjoy the
fishing once this plan is implemented.
One other use of the highway funds is the earmarked $80 Million per year
that has gone to the US Army Corps of Engineers since 1989 for the southern
marshes of the State of Louisiana. That is One and One Quarter Billion
to
date if you don't have a calculator. Those funds have NEVER been audited
and so far as can be determined have gone almost entirely into Engineering
Feasibility Studies. Speaking of audits..
E. For the past two years the Congress and the US Fish and Wildlife
Service
have made almost $100 Million available to State fish and wildlife agencies
to prepare State Comprehensive Wildlife Plans. These plans were to be
composed in a comparable fashion and cover ALL fish and wildlife. How could
anyone question such a "warm-fuzzy"? Let me count the ways.
Last summer my state of Virginia issued a news release that even the
Washington papers jumped on like a duck on a junebug. "State
announces 925
species of plants and animals are approaching Endangered status in
Virginia," read the headline. My state had just
"completed" its'
"Comprehensive Plan" and just as with Federal Endangered Species
listings
had counted every species, subspecies, race, variety, population, distinct
population, etc., etc. in the State and then made wishful thinking judgments
about how many there "were" or "should be". Then
they applied, in classic
environmental rationale, all the "acres of this" and "acres of
that" and all
those pesky farmers and rural communities and businesses that were keeping
the state from looking like it did when our Forefathers stepped off the
boat. Then they estimated the "cost" of preventing extinctions
and
maintaining "whatevers" and increasing everything from flying
squirrels to
Indiana bats. As you can imagine reality had nothing to do with
projected
costs. How could anyone ever consider cost when our environment is
"at
stake"?
Well where do you suppose those fifty Plans were sent? If you answered
to
the US Fish and Wildlife Service, you get an "A". What will
they do with
them? If you answered roll them all up and at the right moment (say
before
an election, or when some powerful politician is in trouble?) tell Congress
that:
"There are 16, 472 'species of plants and animals in trouble' across the
nation. The States have identified all these 'species that are
approaching
Endangered status' and what is needed to 'protect' or 'save' them. If
these
species reach Endangered status, the Federal costs will be prohibitive.
Therefore we request funding what the States have estimated is necessary to
'save' these plants and animals. The states estimate it will take $40
Billion, 600 Million (why not?) to save them but today we are only asking
for $500 Million per year for us (US Fish and Wildlife Service) to 'give'
the States (after withholding administrative funds and telling the States
what they can and cannot spend it on) to begin this 'important and necessary
environmental action'." So old Senator Claghorn will just give them
$300
Million to start to show us how "responsible he is" and then next
year it
will go to $750 M, then to 1.2 B, and well you know the rest.
But enough about the Present, what about the Past?
II.
PAST HISTORY OF CONSERVATION LAW ENFORCEMENT
I have spoken to several North Dakotans who have remarked about the
arrogance and overbearing nature of law enforcement by US Fish and Wildlife
Service employees. Last year I spoke with a ranch lady and a California
deputy sheriff that told me about National Park Service enforcement agents
that were doing things that belonged in Germany or Russia 70 years ago to a
lady in a "new" National Park to drive her off and "take"
her family land
and dispossess her. The deputy sheriff described awful and reprehensible
enforcement activities. A month ago, a documentary moviemaker
interviewed
me at my home for about four hours. She told me several horror stories
about government abuse of private property owners but one involved Forest
Service enforcement agents kicking a rancher off his grazing allotment.
They had recorded the encounter surreptitiously and when the tapes were
turned over in Court it was discovered later that after a long pause on a
tape (the agents had returned to their vehicle) one agent said he should
have "capped the old SOB" when he had a chance. How did all
this ever come
to be?
Before the interstate outlaws like Dillinger and organized criminal gangs
like Capone of the 20's and 30's, Federal law enforcement was mainly US
Marshals enforcing interstate matters and Federal violations, the latter
being relatively rare. The FBI emerged from all the turbulence of
the 20's
and 30's and by the 50's was into espionage, communist spying, bank
robberies, kidnappings, and The Cold War. Then came the 60's with all
the
anti-war protests and the social turbulence and tightening Federal employee
work rules the FBI was going broke. Overtime, weekends, holidays, long
stretches of continuous work all combined to put agent costs through the
roof. So the FBI came up with Premium Pay. Agents would get 15,
20, or 25%
added to their salaries (and retirement pension) along with a 20-year
retirement option in return for exemption from overtime, etc. pay. This
was
justified by citing danger, enforcement necessities, etc. to Congress.
This
did not go unnoticed by other increasing Federal enforcement agents.
Soon ATF and Customs agents formed "associations" and worked to
"get"
Premium Pay and the 20-year retirement. Then the US Fish and Wildlife
Service and National Park Service and Forest Service and BLM and National
Marine Fisheries Service agents went after Premium Pay and the 20-year
retirement. They soon learned that they had to describe their job as
dangerous and as requiring lots of "training". Previous court
case rulings
and Federal work regulation wording were studied, memorized, and inserted
into position descriptions and case reports. News releases about
cases
claiming "conspiracies" and vague references to "millions"
of this or that
became common. Hiring was suddenly "former" agents from the
outfits that
got Premium Pay instead of land management-oriented employees. The new
agents wanted an "outdoor job" with peace and quiet but quickly saw
that
their role was to "beef up" the image for the benefits. The
result of all
this self-aggrandizement was to justify government "unmarked"
vehicles at
home first for field agents then all their bosses in Regional Offices and
even Washington (they were "on call" you know). They finally
all got
Premium Pay, early retirement, and suddenly found themselves believing all
the hype about their jobs, but that was only the beginning. All the
refuges
and parks had managers, superintendents, assistants, and even maintenance
men doing law enforcement part-time or most of the time who then said,
"hey
what about us?"
Such employees were involved in class action suits for "back-Premium
Pay"
and "increased retirement" benefits based on past law enforcement
work.
Others wanted it for current enforcement duties. They fought to change
position descriptions and reporting venues. So the standards for all
land
management agency law enforcement activities increased as everyone described
the "danger" and "necessity for long hours" and
"gangs" and "armed suspects",
etc. that they routinely encountered day in and day out. Training, gun
qualifying, gun types, equipment, vehicles, etc. all were soon enough
appropriate to what Elliot Ness should have had. And costs have gone
through the roof and with all the Homeland Security concerns today, I have
no doubt that the self-image of our Federal land management agents and what
they see as their tasks go well beyond what any of us would think
appropriate to the tasks of such employees or their agencies.
Today all land management agency enforcement is total, unbelievably
expensive, and separate from and uncontrolled by the agencies themselves.
Not only do the agencies shrink from controlling law enforcement because it
has become so specialized; Federal law enforcement itself is an isolated
portion of the bureaucracy that sets its' own standards and shares more with
each other across agencies than is shared between law enforcement units and
the agencies they each reputedly "work for".
III.
A VIEW OF THE FUTURE OF FEDERAL LAND CONTROL
The original concepts of Federal and State land control (both Constitutional
and when National Forests, Parks, and Refuges were conceived) have been
turned on their head. BLM management of grazing lands for the benefit of
all is considered passé. Forest Service management of forest lands for
multiple uses is but a quaint footnote in history books. Wildlife
refuges
managed for the breeding, migration, and wintering of waterfowl (as
authorized by Congress for acquisition) have been once and will again be
changed to unmanaged "native ecosystems" (whatever that means).
National
Parks are faux European aristocratic estates that claim everything they
"see" with impunity and close roads and exclude the public from the
very
resources they were formed to make available to the public. All of them
are
terrible neighbors, increasingly incapable of managing resources, and the
tools of radical groups with radical agendas.
We could blame the Endangered Species Act or The Wilderness Act or NEPA or
radical employees and appointees but it is these and more. We could
blame
the radical organizations like HSUS, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, and
all the rest but it is more. We could blame the lawyers for all these
groups and the staffs of Federal politicians but it is more. We could
blame
the State fish and wildlife agencies that have become little more than
lapdogs for Federal bureaucracies promising steady money but it is more.
We
could blame "our" indifferent organizations from hunting and fishing
groups
to cattle and farm groups but it is more. We could blame a media that
never
heard an environmental song it didn't go into a swoon over but it is more.
We could blame our pandering politicians that get money and votes and
publicity from one group to deny another group their rights but it is more.
We could blame the Courts and judges for increasingly saying that there are
no rules and whatever Congress or the President says is the way it will be
but it is more. We could say it is the way we now popularly elect US
Senators or the way we let the UN dictate what we do by signing on to all
sorts of agreements that then trump our Constitution but it is more. We
could blame it on ourselves for not holding politicians accountable for
these things because they "give" us "our thing" but it is
really ALL of
these things at work together over time.
We have all seen how Federal land control has shut down logging, closed down
communities, closed roads, eliminated grazing, impaired fishing and hunting,
steadily displaced State authority, and generally gone increasingly
unmanaged and unused. We have seen how the unholy
"partnerships" between
bureaucracies, Congress, and land-buying and land-easing "fronts"
like The
Nature Conservancy using public funds, tax breaks, resale to the government,
and closed books increases the government land control effectiveness
exponentially. Increasing unfettered use of eminent domain powers (Kelo,
et
al) for whatever government wishes only strengthens the possibilities
available to future land controllers to effect their hidden agendas. Now
consider what millions "given" to State fish and wildlife agencies
for
specific projects determined by the US Fish and Wildlife Service will do to
this already over reaching government land control operation. There are some
other new things coming over the horizon to consider as well:
-Native Ecosystems are code words for a radical and indefinable, except for
bureaucrats and grant-receptor professors, use of Federal lands from WPA's
and Forests and Parks to further introduce Federal control on States and
communities and rural residents.
-Invasive Species (the flip-side of native Ecosystems) is proposed code
words for a legislative mandate for Federal intrusion on both private
property and to anyone entering public property.
-Wildlife Corridors are another emerging code phrase for appeals to State
and Federal legislators to "link up" and "connect"
existing government
holdings for wildlife to "move freely" and "migrate".
Wildlands is the environmental dream of ever-larger and contiguous
government holdings that "preserve" wildlife (i.e. exclude all human
use and
presence). One such plan calls for human-free contiguous land blocks
from
Alaska to Texas.
Rewilding is the rubric for establishing free-ranging buffalo herds on the
Great Plains. Before you smile too much, consider this. When you
think
government buffalo stomping through your crops is unlikely, 15 years ago
ranchers thought that wolves killing their stock was impossible too. The
people doing this stuff are never "responsible". They are
always rewarded
and increasingly retire in luxury. Before you think common sense or law
will protect you, consider this. While we have listened for 5 years to
bureaucrats and appointees whine about how bad the "Invasive
Species"
problems are, they were all quiet as church mice lately when some professors
called for introducing free-ranging African species like leopards and
grazing animals on the Great Plains. You in North Dakota are every big a
target eventually as those Idaho ranchers, those Oregon loggers, and those
North Carolina tuna fishermen. You all go quietly, one at a time, and
the
rich guys and bureaucrats move in behind you to live like the aristocrats we
thought we got rid of when we kicked out King George and his Parliament.
Predators, non-existent Ivory-billed Woodpeckers and lynx, road closures,
and increasing rule from an unresponsive central government seem inevitable
future impediments to rural living. State fish and wildlife agencies and
"our" organization staffs change jobs with Federal bureaucrats
regularly and
represent the agendas that best serve themselves. Retired Federal
bureaucrats get hired as consultants and for their "connections" to
complete
this closed circle. State politicians and bureaucrats are as addicted to
Federal funding as pups to a teat. New proposals like the State
Comprehensive Wildlife Plans bode massive Federal control and direction of
State bureaucracies increasingly only nominally under State control.
Professors hungry for grants and recognition and lawyers from the radical
organizations are ready to pounce at a moments notice when either power or
money is smelled on the wind. Like Ebeneezer Scrooge we are repelled by
this future and ask what we can do.
The answer is at once simple and hard.
- We need to elect politicians that are willing to repeal and reform the
environmental laws of the past 35 years. If anyone says this will result
in
immediate harm, don't believe them. Building new models based on
American
freedoms and rights is what should have been done in the first place.
Constitutional responsibilities and property rights are two things that
should have never been tampered with.
- We need to strongly reaffirm to both Federal and State bureaucracies
that
they are under the authority of our elected politicians. This entails
reducing budgets, extraneous tasks, staffs, grant availability, and land
holdings. This means firm State legislators and Governors every bit as
much
as Federal Representatives, Presidents, and Senators. Speaking of US
Senators.
- I am convinced that the pernicious effects of changing the way we
elect
US Senators from election by State legislatures to the popular State vote
(XVII Amendment, 1913) has contributed more to these problems than anyone
realizes. US Senators elected by State Legislatures would NOT pass
Endangered Species Acts (that "took" property without compensation
or
foisted wolves on citizens) or Wilderness Acts (that closed public lands) or
Animal Welfare Acts (that made private property into government property) or
close State highways for National Parks or build 17-mile bridges around
National Wildlife Refuges or shut down fisheries or THEY WOULD NEVER GET
REELECTED (if they did, guess who wouldn't get reelected then). US
Senators
elected by a popular vote benefit greatly from money and volunteers and
publicity and other things from national groups whose interests they serve
at the expense of a few of "their" state residents. Today's US
Senators are
every bit the arrogant European primps of history that believed they somehow
ruled by their innate wisdom and some sort of "right" rather than
someone
charged with serving their state in the context of national politics and the
rule of a republic. We need to repeal the 17th Amendment just like we
repealed the 18th Amendment. It took 14 years to convince everyone that
Prohibition was a bad deal; 92 years of the popular election of US Senators
and the last 35 years in particular should be enough to make the need for
repeal evident to everyone living in a building of three stories or less.
Thank you for having me here today.
Jim Beers
If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.
A PRESENTATION TO NORTH DAKOTA LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION
AT DEVILS LAKE, NORTH DAKOTA - 13 DECEMBER 2005
This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91
Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:
JimBeers7@earthlink.net