Facebook Twitter Email
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13, 2002

I do not envy the National Academy for the task it was presented with. In a two month period, in the midst of their daily responsibilities, the NAS Committee members had to review more than 10 years of data and a very complex ecosystem. Then, without being able to review all the evidence, they were forced to issue a preliminary report that was less than favorable to the decisions chosen by the federal agencies charged with protecting our endangered species.

When their report was released, the predictable firestorm erupted, with claims that the federal biologists who prepared the biological opinions for 2001 had based their conclusions on "junk science" and political agendas. If such statements and interpretations of the report are not reflective of a political agenda, I do not know what is.

The panel did not find that the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service based their decisions on bad science, but instead that they did not have enough science. In the case of the Endangered Species Act, however, as is the case with any environmental law, the agencies do not have the luxury of waiting until they have all the science, but instead must rely on the science available to them and then err on the side of protecting the species.

Moreover, many of the panel members have clearly emphasized the preliminary nature of this report and discouraged the rush to judgement. More than one panel member has been quoted as saying that opportunity to review all the science and the system may well reveal that more water for fish, and less for the farmers, was in fact a justifiable requirement.

Those who argue that this NAS report is clear evidence of a need to amend the ESA to ensure all science is considered before policy decision can be made should heed their own call. Let the NAS finish its complete review of the science in the Klamath Basin before rushing to judgement and proposing dramatic changes to the law. The very real needs of irrigators, Indian tribes, and the fishery resources will not be served if we allow "junk policy" to be implemented on the basis of a single interim report.

In the meantime, the Klamath Basin Federal Working Group can begin to tackle the problems in that ecosystem that stretch far beyond the confines of the ESA to the fundamental operation of the system itself.