ESA Should Include Costsby Maxine Keesling
Capital Press, September 2, 2011
It was refreshing to read the Capital Press editorial of Aug. 12 titled "ESA threatens to drain federal pocketbook." That editorial was so in contrast to prevailing media pronouncements of fish-fish-fish being the sacred icon of us all.
I am personally irritated by the major environmental groups pushing for removal of the four lower Snake River dams, which along with the other dams provide 72 percent of this region's electricity, as well as transportation arterials providing barge transport that keeps thousands of trucks off our highways.
Prior to this ESA-fish editorial I had not seen the financial figures for fish protection -- "well over a billion dollars" -- with billions more if the dams are removed.
The Endangered Species Act should be amended to include cost as part of the criteria for determining the extent of species protection. A lot of things in this country have diminished in quantity since European settlement. But satisfactory substitutes have been created, and most of us prefer to live as now rather than as prior to European settlement.
learn more on topics covered in the film
see the video
read the script
learn the songs