Science and politics

Conservative lawmakers who complain that environmental laws too often are based on emotionalism and politics should hate the proposed revision to the state endangered species law. Instead, they have embraced it, and pushed aside science in the process.

Many residents probably aren’t aware that the state has an endangered species list, in addition to falling under the federal list. That’s because the state list, under the direction of the commissioner of the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, has worked quietly and well. The state list is necessary because some species are endangered here, but are not endangered elsewhere in the country and do not qualify for federal listing. Since the state law was approved in 1979, eight species have been listed as endangered; six have been labeled threatened. The commissioner has been careful in applying the authority to expand the list.

Such care would give way to politics if LD 428 is approved. This emergency legislation takes away listing authority from the commissioner and a scientific advisory board and sends it to the tumult of the Legislature, where arguments based on sound science must compete with concerns over the next election.

Legislators under the bill would be barred from introducing species for the list, but would vote on recommendations from the commissioner, virtually assuring fewer listed species than the number justified by the commissioner. Legislative debate is likely to produce a popularity contest for listing: the cute, furry ones get protection; invertebrates get forgotten. Too bad the biodiversity of nature isn’t skewed toward cuteness.

Sen. Alton Cianchette introduced the legislation as IF&W Commissioner Ray Owen was considering 30 candidates for the list. Though there has yet to be a case of development stopped or curtailed because of Maine’s list, proponents cited the possibility as ample reason for giving themselves authority to decide which species will be protected. Such thin reasoning is further evidence against turning over this important decision to a Legislature kept busy by the approximately 2,000 bills it considers each biennium.

While some legislators are all for giving themselves these broader powers, the bill would not surmount a veto challenge by Gov. Angus King. He has announced a willingness to challenge legislative decisions that will harm the state. The governor has just such an example in this bill.