For months, observers on both sides of the political fence have waited for Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, and his colleagues on the House Resources Committee to offer legislation to change the Endangered Species Act.

No bill is due until mid-July, but many have gotten their first glimpse from an outline passed around Washington, D.C. Activists on the right and the left have found plenty to dislike.

Pombo’s Resources Committee staff, however, says the summary is an old document that environmentalists are using to create controversy.

The four-page document bears the heading “Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act of 2005,” and refers to the proposed new law by that name. This is followed by 10 sections, each listing a problem with the 31-year-old act, along with a proposed solution.

According to the document's description, the new act would give local governments a bigger say in habitat decisions, improve the science behind decisions and give incentives to landowners who have endangered species on their land.

It also states that the legislation would eliminate the “outdated, expensive and irrelevant ESA Committee (God Squad)” and place enforcement under the U.S. Department of the Interior, an agency that has been criticized by environmentalists.

Brian Kennedy, press secretary for Pombo at the Resources Committee, said the document circulated for months and had been sent to politicians in both parties. He characterized the document as “a set of concepts.”

“It’s a little absurd to characterize this as a bill, when there are no mechanics involved,” Kennedy said.

Pombo recently sent a “dear colleagues” letter to congressional Democrats that noted, "We have an obligation to reauthorize the ESA, and I am working to have legislation ready for consideration on the floor of the House as soon as possible.”

However, a representative from one Democrat’s office said the letter was not accompanied by the summary. Tom Kiley, press secretary for Rep. George Miller, D-Richmond, confirmed that he first saw the summary last week and said that it did not come directly from Pombo’s office.

“Chairman Pombo has mostly kept Democrats in the dark about his plans for ESA,” Kiley said.

Property-rights advocate David Ridenour contacted the Tracy Press this week to say that he had seen the document and other material related to a proposed Endangered Species Act revision.

While he and others have long sought changes — or in some cases, outright repeal — of the existing act, Ridenour said that the summary gave him pause.

“He (Pombo) has spoken out very strongly for property rights over the years, but in terms of actually delivering, we haven’t seen much,” Ridenour said. “We’ve been hoping that this would be the year he delivered.”

Ridenour went on to say that some changes mentioned in the summary would be “a huge step forward.”

However, he said the portions about how property owners can respond when endangered species are found on their property make it hard for landowners who can’t afford to hire attorneys like corporations can.

But the most vehement opposition still comes from environmentalists.

The Center for Biological Diversity issued a critique that claims that the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act of 2005 would give corporations the ability to file lawsuits that would prevent the Endangered Species Act from being enforced.

It also claims the document is filled with untruths, such as an assertion that states are not allowed to comment on species recovery plans. Finally, the critique charged that the bill would seek to interfere with the work of scientists and slash protections for numerous species.

Kennedy said the center was using the summary for political gain.