“Invasive Species” Report

 

 

March 1, 2006

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

 

 

This report is an update. With the passage of the Transportation Bill last summer and the ensuing relative silence on our side regarding “IS,” it might appear that little is going on. Not so. Here are the 5 top-drawer items as we see them:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The three Senate bills will each have separate sections, which follow below. A brief summary of the last two items are contained here. As of this date, there is no action requested of you. This is just for your information. However, it is quite possible that in the near future it will be necessary to issue an action alert to keep “IS” out of U.S. law.

 

2006 is shaping up to be the year of “Aquatic Invasive Species” in Washington. From the six-month flood of media articles (mostly ghostwritten by “IS” special interest groups), and information gathered from various Congressional offices, it is clear that these special interests are concentrating their efforts on “Aquatics”. We also know any action will begin in the Senate. One danger of both "Aquatic IS" bills: the fine print proves it isn't only about sea and lake creatures, but also includes tributaries and riparian areas.

 

Thanks in no small part to your efforts, legislation that is now U.S. law – like the Transportation Bill, the Noxious Weed Act, etc. – disastrous "IS" language was deleted. That legislation dealt mainly with terrestrial plants. In that arena, "IS" was legislatively denied. However, bureaucracies continue to subvert these mandates while seeking avenues for major new funding and power. The new arena: "Aquatic Invasive Species."

 

While there are currently scores of "IS" bills to be found through search engines, our intelligence reveals three that may emerge during this session. Two, S.770 and S.363, are "Aquatics" bills, while one, S.1541, is of a more general nature. Any or all may hit the Senate floor at any time. It is unimaginable that S.770 and S.1541, both 'horror shows,' can be salvaged with any amount of wordsmithing. S.363 can only be made tolerable if all "IS" language is deleted and the vast new "IS" powers granted to the EPA removed in their entirety.

 

Though not yet a true piece of legislation, the Administration’s Great Lakes Plan, issued in December 2005, bears watching. Much of it is a Great Lakes version of S.770, an “IS” plan based on “Aquatic IS.” The rest is a plan to restrict the rights of rural citizens in Great Lakes States, much like existing plans in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and the Everglades. At the moment it is just a plan, but it shows that the Administration cannot be trusted to protect property and commonsense rights. 

 

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/collaboration/strategy.html

 

The deceptively titled “National Invasive Weed Awareness Week” (NIWAW) is an all-out annual K Street lobbying effort by “IS” special interests. Financed and staffed by those standing to profit immensely from “IS” legislation and funding – including the bureaucracies themselves – NIWAW is, in reality, only marginally about weeds. Congressional offices are being deluged this week with entreaties faster than you can say “Hatch Act.”

 

http://www.nawma.org/niwaw/niwaw_index.htm

 

 

S.770: National Aquatic Invasive Species Act of 2005

 

 

February 28, 2006

 

S.770 is the “comprehensive” bill over which the Greens have been drooling. More than $150M will fund “Invasive Species” (“IS”) projects we have seen before: monitoring, “rapid response” and management plans, “research” as precursors to regulation, native ecosystems, databases, impossible “screening” models, partnering with international NGOs, ad nauseam. "IS" and other definitions in S.770 give the Greens and bureaucracies free rein.

 

S.770 is Bad News - all 130 pages of it - but this and other "Aquatics IS" bills contain details that make each unique.

 

1. The recent entry of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) onto the “IS” scene is of ominous significance. Those who know the horrors of Sec. 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) testify to the importance of this. The EPA has been maneuvering behind the scenes to gain primacy over the “IS” agenda. What better way than to use its already court-sanctioned authority over “water” than to assume regulatory control over “Aquatics?” Within Green and bureaucratic circles, “biological pollution” has been a synonym for “IS” for some time. Recent court cases/adjudications in California and Wisconsin have “confirmed” this power -- having done so without benefit of “IS” legislation. If S.770, with authorities granted to the EPA and accompanying embedded definitions, becomes U.S. law, it’s “Katie, bar the door!”

 

2. “Aquatic Ecosystems,” as defined, include wetlands. “Aquatics” is not just about e. coli, fish and zebra mussels in the Great Lakes. It is also about seasonal potholes, creeks, sloughs (“fens” to the Greens), riparian areas, maybe even cisterns. Think Sec 404 CWA. Think EPA. Think Wayne Hage. Think 9th Circuit. Then think how S.770 would affect your farm, ranch or rural property.

 

3. S.770 renders oversight impossible. What committee will oversee the combined shenanigans of the EPA, Fish & Wildlife Service, Coast Guard, Corps of Engineers, Homeland Security, and NOAA? Though not all are named in the bill, the 20-plus Federal agencies with their fingers in the “IS” pie would become further empowered.

 

4. S.770 differs from the Transportation Bill in that, although its regulations would eventually affect every American, the pork-barrel aspect is weighted toward NGOs operating in favored States, primarily the vote-rich Great Lakes States.

 

5. S.770 embodies the Precautionary Principle. Under its “screening” sections, all living "nonnative organisms" must be “proven” to not cause harm. To the Greens, “environmental harm” means the mere presence of "nonnative" species. S.770 tightens the garrote by adding “structure and functions of ecosystems” and “public welfare” to the criteria for “harm.”

 

6. S.770 is touted as a bill to regulate “Invasive Species” originating outside the U.S., but its definitions provide for regulation of domestic transfer of species from one “ecosystem” to another.

 

7. S.770 establishes an “Emergency Rapid Response Fund” within the U.S. Treasury.

 

8. S.770 creates Federal, State and Regional Rapid Response Teams.

 

9. Grants are established for “systematics and taxonomic” research to satisfy government “needs to identify 'Invasive Species.’”

 

10. S.770 essentially requires States to duplicate or mimic Federal "Invasive Species" programs through Federal funding.

 

11. S.770 requires coordination with International organizations such as the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP). GISP was created by initiatives at the UN, the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the Convention on Biological Diversity and other Green organizations.

 

12. Among S.770's many fiscal abominations, $30M is authorized annually for “IS” grants. 

S.770 is quite possibly “the next ESA.”

 

S.363: The Ballast Water Management Act of 2005 

 

February 28, 2006 

 

Senate Bill S.363, by title and at first glance, appears to be legislation with a legitimate practical purpose, i.e., one designed to improve water quality, especially in the Great Lakes (GL). If it were addressing a known procedural problem like dumping excessive bacteria and chemicals into the Great Lakes, which was previously un- or under-regulated, arguments against it would be difficult.

 

However, from the preface of the bill (“Findings”), it is clear that this is another “Invasive Species” (“IS”) bill with all the known ramifications of that "native ecosystem" agenda. It is not just about e. coli or harmful microbes – It is also about plants, fish and animals.

 

S.363 is notably a stand-alone version of sections in the comprehensive “Aquatics Invasive Species” bill, S.770. The Greens, bureaucrats and special interests far prefer S.770 to S.363, because S.770 is all-encompassing, grants vast powers (especially to the EPA), targets the entire country, and has ten times the annual funding of S.363. Nevertheless, S.363 codifies “IS.”

 

This is the No. 1 reason to oppose all bills containing even a mention of “IS.”

 

As with the “Aquatics IS” bill, S.363 not only codifies “IS,” it also partially codifies the EPA’s rise to power in the world of “IS” regulation. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is also empowered to determine which interlopers cause “harm to the environment.” We know from seven years of experience that the “IS” crowd considers any "nonnative species" to cause “harm to the environment” by its mere presence. The powers given to these two agencies become virtually unlimited through “adverse impact” clauses and the authority to “designate additional regulated areas,” which won’t stop at the Great Lakes.

 

From the Devil’s Details Department comes the fact that, despite the bill’s title, non-ballast water factors are to be included in future standards and procedures. Think mission creep. Think boat hulls, wading boots, trailers, etc.

 

There are other concerns about S.363: its impact on commercial shipping, commerce, jobs, commercial sport fishing, existing authorities, etc. With 50 years of ballast exchanges since opening the St. Lawrence Seaway, any net benefits to stricter, more costly ballast regulations are highly questionable. This begs the question: If ships have been dumping critters from the Black Sea into the Port of Milwaukee for 50 years, what further “damage” can be done?

 

This report will leave the commerce aspects to those interests who could be harmed by S.363. For our purposes, the introduction of “IS” into U.S. law – and the ascension of the EPA into “IS” regulation – are cause enough for alarm.

 

 

S.1541: The Public Land and Conservation Act of 2005

 

 

February 28, 2006 

 

S.1541, despite its deceptive title, is in fact a stand-alone “Invasive Species” (“IS”) bill. At eighteen pages, S.1541 is brief in relation to the 130-page S. 770 “Aquatic Invasive Species” bill. Nevertheless, it accomplishes three basic Green objectives:

 

1. As with all “IS” bills, the No. 1 item is that it codifies the bogus, pre-1492 “native ecosystem” “Invasive Species” concept. The result: if passed, S.1541 establishes by law a major environmental agenda on the order of the Endangered Species Act. 

 

2. S.1541 could be titled “Grants to Greens.” Unlike S.770, which boldly empowers the EPA and other bureaucracies with new “IS” authority, S.1541 is essentially a program to fund the Greens via $250M in grants through the Department of Interior (DOI). It is a jobs program for the bureaucracies and Greens.

 

3. S.1541 sets the stage for new Federal authority, endorsing both the National Invasive Species Council (NISC) and its Management Plan where, to date, none exists by law.

 

No. 1 above is by far the most important. The grant scheme in No. 2 is nothing new to those with experience in the modern-day environmental movement. But the subtlety here is that $250M buys a lot of support for the new – and phony – agenda of “IS.” No. 3 paves the way for the establishment of permanent, stand-alone bureaucracies like the NISC. By doing so, it codifies the “IS” agenda.

 

Over $1B per year is currently spent by 20+ Federal agencies on a dizzying array of more than 192 “IS” programs. In the 7 years since the “IS” Executive Order was issued, approximately $7B has already been spent – most of it on Green grants, bureaucracy-building, brochures, meetings, plans, studies, partnerships, etc. Our land, water and air are not one whit cleaner now than they were in 1999 through any “IS” program. Codifying “IS” and further funding it via S.1541 – or any other “IS” bill – mocks common sense.