Protecting Our Endangered Species - NOT

From BushGreenWatch, indications of a disappearing ESA (snippet):

"The pattern one vividly sees when examining the Bush Administration's record under the Endangered Species Act is a general reluctance to obey the law, and then an expensive and time-consuming effort to cover the federal violator's tracks once sued," says William Snape, vice-president and chief counsel for Defenders of Wildlife. President Bush has appointed crusading opponents of the ESA to key positions, including Craig Manson, the assistant Interior Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, who told the Los Angeles Times in an interview: "If we are saying that the loss of species in and of itself is inherently bad, I don't think we know enough about how the world works to say that." Currently the Administration is proposing to create a gigantic loophole that might push many species in other countries into extinction. Under the proposal, hunters would be able to kill elephants and other "trophy" animals; wildlife traders, circuses and the pet industry would be permitted to capture rare birds from the Amazon (or other species of endangered foreign wildlife) as an economic boost to cash-strapped countries. Ivory tusks, skins and antlers could also be imported.[9] Environmentalists have criticized the Bush proposal as an invitation to the return of large-scale poaching. The ESA lists 1,363 U. S. plant and animal species and 558 foreign and animal species as threatened or endangered. Since taking office, the administration has listed no additional species on its own accord.

Saving species is not essential to deficit reduction, healthcare, environment quality, education or international trade. But as the party of "compassionate conservatism" (as they so claim), one would expect Republican support of a policy profile that concentrated on respecting and supporting our planet's natural resources and inhabitants.

Ouch! Someone just kicked me back into reality.