Dear members:
There is a case before the US Supreme Court which is of importance
to the forestry community. I am refering to the Sweet Home case, which
is a challage by the Sweet Home chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon
against a clause in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which defines "harm"
as destruction of habitat. The US court of Appeals for Washington, DC,
reversed a lower court's desicion that the clause was legal. The White
House has asked to Supreme Court to decide the matter. The case is based
on a 1975 desicion by the US Fish and Wildlife Service that the word "harm"
in the law passed by Congress should be interpretted as destruction of
habitat, even though it was not explicitly stated as such. According to
an article in The Seattle Times, a close vote is expected, with Justice
Anthony Kennedy possibly the deciding vote
I believe this subject would be an excellent subject for a
round-table discussion for the newsgroup, especially in terms of how
private-land foresters would react if the appeal was upheld, since
land-owners would no longer be required to set aside land for endangered
species. It would also be interesting to hear from public foresters
in how they would react, such as whether or not they would consider further
reducing harvest levels on public lands to compensate for estimated habitat
loss on private lands. This important case certainly warrents an
exchange of viewpoints.
Sincerely yours,
Doug Marshall
marshall@forestry.auburn.edu
Douglas J. Marshall
Auburn University
School of Forestry
108 W. Smith Hall
Auburn, Alabama 36830
The views expressed above do not represent
Auburn University, the School of Forestry,
or my employers.
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0