Forums

Trump rolls back endangered species act

Trump rolls back endangered species act

rhj | August 12, 2019

Stick to cars or maybe citydata

SCCRENDO | August 12, 2019

I drive cars that preserve the environment. Destruction of the environment is a relevant crime to Tesla owners.

rhj | August 12, 2019

No it’s relevant to you.
And destruction is a matter of your opinion
But your distortion field wants everyone to see it as a crime against humanity?
Present the facts. Let each decide for themselves.

SCCRENDO | August 12, 2019

Read the link

rhj | August 12, 2019

This uncontrolled excess needs sunshine and change
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/312436-confisc...

rhj | August 12, 2019

Yes tanks for the link
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said the changes would modernize the Endangered Species Act — which is credited with rescuing the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the American alligator from the brink of extinction — and increase transparency in its application. “The act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,” he said in a statement Monday.

If this “Change” does something reckless then by all means rally your legislators and protest,
But change and transparency is desperately needed.

And remember Nixon The vilified Republican was the one who signed this into law with many abuses since then

NKYTA | August 13, 2019

"Mr. Bernhardt, a former oil and gas lobbyist,"

There you have it.
Beyond disgusting.

Follow the Effingham money!

RedShift | August 13, 2019

@rhj

Disgusting you want to support the destruction of the habitat for animals.

Nice try at deflection BTW with your link.

MitchP85D | August 13, 2019

rhi, don't you get it? Trump wants to kill all of the animals of the earth so he can stuff his pockets with dirty oil money. And if you don't think that, then you are a racist, sexist, homophobe!

finman100 | August 13, 2019

nope. so sorry you are against critters. you are on the wrong side of history if you agree with anything donald does. it's just so obvious to smart people.

fail.

sleeper service | August 13, 2019

Could be Trump's way of dealing with endangered animals. If they're dead, they're no longer endangered.

teslu3 | August 13, 2019

This promotes mining, drilling and development in sensitive habitats. I.e., more subsidies for fossil fuels and corporations plus increasing pollution and other externalities.

andy.connor.e | August 13, 2019

Increased consumer activity promotes more mining of resources. If you want to reduce our impact on the planet, stop buying so much stuff. Reducing your consumption reduces the demand.

SCCRENDO | August 13, 2019

@andy. Unfortunately there are many who care not for the environment and continue to use fossil fuels. The free market is a great way to control the economy. But at times a responsible government needs to intervene to ensure public safety and indeed the safety of the planet. This act was brought in to save species from extinction and it has. Examples would be the bald eagle, grizzly bear and the humpback whale. The claim is that these regulations cut red tape for businesses. The reality is that this is wanton destruction of species which upsets the ecosystem of the planet
https://www.complex.com/life/2019/08/trum-administration-overhauls-endan...

andy.connor.e | August 13, 2019

Its not even just about fossil fuels. What i said is true about everything. Overconsuming leads to everything that we do not like about what is happening to the global environment.

sosmerc | August 13, 2019

"Could be Trump's way of dealing with endangered animals. If they're dead, they're no longer endangered."

Kinda like the way he wants to handle anyone that is not WHITE. If he can just get them all to just go away there will be no more problems (his "perfect" world)
He is sure NOT my president.

teslu3 | August 13, 2019

"If you want to reduce our impact on the planet, stop buying so much stuff. Reducing your consumption reduces the demand."
"If you want to reduce our impact on the planet, stop buying so much stuff. Reducing your consumption reduces the demand." Do you mean individuals? Or all of us?

Some individuals reducing consumption will have very little effect. We have large subsidies that encourage overconsumption of polluting fuels, chemicals and other stuff.

Remove subsidies and internalize costs of externalities - very few companies or individuals can do this; it must be with government support. A fee & dividend approach would make it revenue neutral and give economic incentives to make better choices.

NKYTA | August 13, 2019

@teslu, check. And stop having babies (over population).

@sosmerc, finally tired of bullshit Winning. Thank goodness.

Not God. Good.

nwfan | August 13, 2019

Our we next? Ignoring the endangered species act at our peril.
I seem to remember DDT and how it impacted the Bald Eagles and
not to mention humans. Without the use of DDT as pesticide claim was
we would not be able to feed ourselves. Ban in 1972 by the Nixon
Administration.

Ignoring rules that protect animals leads to repeat of Love
Canal. Flint MI, Lake Erie burning and Beijing type air quality.

nwfan | August 13, 2019

The person the lead the charge on eliminating DDT was Rachel Carson. She wrote
Silent Spring which sold millions and help end DDT sales.

Many believe the banning of DDT help the spread of malaria leading to the death of millions.

Selective banning? More research? What's the solution in balancing nature with human life?
Policy questions that need to be answered by the Sec of Interior.

SCCRENDO | August 14, 2019

@nwfan. In medicine we prescribe “poisons” to help people recognizing the potential harmful effects. It is a point of balancing the risks and benefits. If a condition is life threatening one needs to risk more consequence. If the condition is minimal zero risk will be tolerated. The same philosophy should apply to our food supply. I cannot judge DDT at the time as I did not have the whole picture then. It is possible that it was the right thing to do. Society is now more informed of the consequences of our actions and I believe we have safer alternatives than DDT. But I need to leave that to the experts in the field.

Tesla2018 | August 14, 2019

Doesnt science show that natural selection and survival of the fittest is best? Species have come and gone throught the ages.
Would you really want to have dinosaurs running around trying to eat you? Now they are all dead and we can use fossil fuels for our advantage to power equiptment to harvest and transport things so that humans can survive.
The only species that we have to worry about replacing us is cockroaches, ants and mosquitos. As hard as you try to get rid of them, they keep coming back and they will eventually consume our corpses after we are gone!

Mike83 | August 14, 2019

Amazon has a good documentary worth watching "Love Thy Nature" with Liam Neesom. It beats the fake news.

SCCRENDO | August 14, 2019

@Tesla2018. Evolution and change are slow. But humans, other animals and plants are inter related. And when changes occur they impact everyone although some more than others. We adapt to slow changes. But sudden losses are devastating. Loss of crops or loss of animals leads to loss of others. As regards fossil fuels. We all survive by using the earth’s resources. But using too much again causes problems. Burning fossil fuels creates CO2. And small amounts can be dealt with. Large amount can not. And the excess CO2 that cannot be dealt with forms a greenhouse layer that traps heat and we get climate change. It dissolves in the ocean and acidifies it etc. etc. You have interesting thoughts but learning science will clarify this all. The main issue is excess that upsets the balance.

RedShift | August 14, 2019

@tesla2018

I’m shaking my head at the sheer unintelligent content in your post.

You stupid moron, humans can wipe out all living things other than themselves if we desire.

Would you want to live in such a world?

Perhaps if we had less people like you, and more people who are empathetic and caring, the world would be a far better place.

blue adept | August 14, 2019

@SCCRENDO

So, yet another example of the repeal of laws/legislation that were enacted out of the recognition of the need to enact them to protect that which we not just as a country, but as a species, hold precious and worthy of said protections...?

Trump opportunism at its' finest, exploiting his current position to set his companies' current and future ventures up for increased profit margins once he is out of office.

SCCRENDO | August 14, 2019

The reality is that there are enough stupid people to elect him. I guess when you have enough voters who think that we can eliminate every living creature except cockroaches and ants and still survive they can be sold a bridge in Brooklyn by the felon in chief.

blue adept | August 14, 2019

@rhj

If by "...modernize the Endangered Species Act" you meant...

"The new rules would make it easier to remove a species from the endangered list and weaken protections for threatened species, the classification one step below endangered. And, for the first time, regulators would be allowed to conduct economic assessments — for instance, estimating lost revenue from a prohibition on logging in a critical habitat — when deciding whether a species warrants protection.

OVER ALL, THE REVISED RULES APPEAR VERY LIKELY TO CLEAR THE WAY FOR NEW MINING, OIL AND GAS DRILLING, AND DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS WHERE PROTECTED SPECIES LIVE..."

Then, yeah, if undermining (if not altogether doing away with) the very policies that were put into place out of necessity to protect those species just so the fossil fuel industry could exploit more resources by ruining even more ecologies is what you want to call 'modernization' (heavy sarcasm).

Way to gloss over the opening statement of the actual issue to support your agenda (more sarcasm).

blue adept | August 14, 2019

@teslu3

"This promotes mining, drilling and development in sensitive habitats. I.e., more subsidies for fossil fuels and corporations plus increasing pollution and other externalities."

Exactly!

+1

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@andy.connor.e

While there is some merit to your position on 'consumer over-consumption' (excessive use of produced foods has lead to the needless and wasteful discarding of over 40% of edible foodstuffs nationwide), the actual issue is more so the result of the continued reliance on fossil fuels, over fishing/hunting/harvesting, and the lack of implementing recycling practices industry-wide, that are the most impactful on the global environment and result in the most lingering ramifications.

Think of it as an 'all of the above' type of causation.

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@SCCRENDO

Both "enough stupid people" and enough people who're oblivious of the need to sign up for and show up to vote no matter however improbable a candidate might appear to be because their apparent improbability of being fit to serve in the presidency isn't enough to stop them from winning the seat by default/simple voter inaction.

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@nwfan

You need to add the West Lake Landfill in Bridgeton, Missouri (feat. in the 2015 documentary, "The Safe Side of the Fence" and the 2017 HBO documentary, "Atomic Homefront") to your list of affected sites resulting from government oversight/overreach/ignorance.

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@Tesla2018

You are aware, are you not, that our fuel sources are extracted from millions of years of carbon-trapping, accumulated plant-based waste and not actual dinosaur remains, right?

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@Tesla2018

Oh, and that the extinction of the dinosaurs was millions of years premature and resulted from an asteroid strike and not the sort attrition attributable to centuries worth of species-on-species elimination that results from selection of the fittest.

So many under educated people lacking knowledge of the full set of the facts, so much so in fact that it's to the point where it actually appears...intentional.

It's easy to see why we've so much confusion and misunderstanding among the various people of this world.

blue adept | August 15, 2019

The next thing you know you'll be trying to tell me that the increase in methane emissions are attributable to, of all things, "cow farts", instead of the actual culprits, i.e., the millions and millions of oil pumping derricks, wellheads and platforms scattered all across our urban, suburban and rural landscape in addition to the ever ongoing and increasing location and extraction efforts of future wells.

While our overall cattle population has grown and shrank over the centuries (it is far less now than what it once was), there have been even greater concentrations of cattle scattered about in roaming herds all across the continental United States and beyond without any impact whatsoever on atmospheric concentrations of methane.

The ONLY thing that is different now are our efforts to locate and extract petroleum and gas concentrations just as they are the ONLY real contributors to increases in atmospheric methane concentrations.

STOP DRINKING THE KOOL AID PEOPLE AND WAKE THE FRAK UP!

blue adept | August 15, 2019

@RedShift

While I'm not necessarily an advocate of terminating the lesser informed/intelligent among us for the sake of our overall betterment as a species...

+1

blue adept | August 15, 2019

Damn, people, I'm not trying to run the conversation or anything, only contribute, so please feel free to chime in at any time....

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ross1 | August 15, 2019

So, we need more asteroid strikes! Long live the asteroids!
Without asteroids we wouldnt have dead dinosaurs, and consequently no oil!
When will the squeaking wheel ever be satisfied?

jimglas | August 15, 2019

The earh will soon be rid of this temporary infestation by humans. We will destroy ourselves.

andy.connor.e | August 15, 2019

@blue

Ya basically all of the above. Its all the problem.

sabbia | August 15, 2019

I wonder if Tesla2018 thinks that by eliminating some species there will be more hospital beds for him.

Neomaxizoomdweebie | August 15, 2019

I love self loathing humans.

RedShift | August 15, 2019

@neo

Chief, we just loath those who lack common sense and empathy. Those with short sighted greed. Those who don’t understand that this is the only planet we have to live on.

Neomaxizoomdweebie | August 15, 2019

@Red,
Squaw,
Watch who you call Chief.

I found out why my cabin air filter stinks every time I turn on the A/C. Its all these endangered species that Trump is killing off with our economy.

jimglas | August 15, 2019

was the racial slur necessary?

rxlawdude | August 15, 2019

@nwfan, one of the less-known side effects of DDT's devastation of bald eagle population was that the Channel Island Fox population in the Channel Islands off of SoCal was almost totally wiped out.

Why?

Fewer bald eagles (non-predators of the fox), replaced by golden eagles (predators of the fox, and they did!).

So there's a domino effect when wiping out species. Many times, we are foolish in solving short-term problems but causing massive problems down the road by doing so.

SCCRENDO | August 15, 2019

@Neomaxizoomdweebie. Welcome back. Your cynical dismissive approach to serious issues is arrogant and displays you ignorance or unwillingness to address the reality out of selfish concerns. We are a democracy which is unfortunate because people like you get to vote on the future of our planet

Neomaxizoomdweebie | August 15, 2019

Hahahahaha! You’re hilarious!

RedShift | August 15, 2019

@neo

And you are callously irresponsible. Worse, you don’t understand the repercussions of your actions and those of whom you support without question.

Neomaxizoomdweebie | August 15, 2019

Hi, I’m a liberal. All I know is what CNN and MSNBC told me to think. That’s how I know Trump is a racist.

Pages