“Invasive Species” Quiz #2

 

 

 

April 7, 2005

 

 

1. What bill shoehorns "Invasive Species", an aspect of international law, into U.S. law?

 

2. What bill adds “Invasive Species” to the legal arsenal of endangered species, wetlands, and critical habitat, thus causing expensive delays and cancellations of needed government projects and, in time, private projects as well?

 

3. What bill guarantees increased tonnage of sediment, pesticides, phosphorous and nitrates into the Chesapeake Bay and other coastal and inland bodies?

 

4. What bill explicitly elevates “Invasive Species” to the level of habitat conservation and water quality for Federally-funded statewide planning?

 

5. What bill explicitly elevates “Invasive Species” to the level of habitat conservation and water quality for Federally-funded local planning?

 

6. What bill invites enviro-lawyers to blackmail government into using tax dollars to fund “further environmental studies” on “Invasive Species” by State and Local enviro-groups?

 

7. What bill obliges Vermont and Maryland to mitigate their State Flowers at construction sites, to be replaced by “native” species designated by radical enviro-groups?

 

8. What bill specifically adds “Invasive Species” to wetlands and brownfields under its “Environmental Restoration” title, ushering the EPA into the regulatory domain of plants and animals?

 

9. What multi-$Billion bill allows up to 20% spending under its “Pollution Abatement” and “Environmental Restoration” titles to be spent on “Invasive Species” mitigation and plant inventories?  

 

10. What bill diverts funding from construction, funneling it instead to enviro-groups who implement the Biodiversity agenda through “Invasive Species”?

 

Bonus Question (5 points; choose one): How do you want the government to spend your tax dollars over the next six years in legislation promoted to be for capital improvement projects?

 

a. on native plant inventories

b. on “Invasive Species” mitigation

c. to subsidize enviro-groups

d. on legal fees to defend construction plans

e. to build highways

 

 

Answers:

 

1. The Senate version of the new 6-year, near-$300B transportation bill: the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, known as SAFETEA 2005. (The House has removed all “Invasive Species” language from its version of the bill: The Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, known as TEA LU.) 

 

2. SAFETEA

 

3. SATETEA

 

4. SAFETEA

 

5. SAFETEA

 

6. SAFETEA

 

7. SAFETEA

 

8. SAFETEA

 

9. SAFETEA

 

10. SAFETEA

 

Bonus Question: e. building highways is the only correct answer.

 

The newest Big Scare by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their partners in government is called “Invasive Species”. Senate Bill SAFETEA 2005 embeds “Invasive Species” into U.S. law.

 

You can stop “Invasive Species” from becoming “the next ESA” by simply telling your Senators that all “Invasive Species” language MUST be stricken from SAFETEA.

 

 

Explanations:

 

1. SAFETEA codifies "Invasive Species". Using closed-door tactics, a few clauses are sneaked into a huge, seemingly unrelated bill.

 

2. SAFETEA introduces “Invasive Species” into Federal law. Endangered species, critical habitat and wetlands are already part of the plethora of American environmental law through the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA). Both laws have been used extensively by environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to cause $Billions in delays and cancellations of both private and government projects, including highway construction. A look at history and current NGO master plans reveals “Invasive Species” to be “the next ESA”.

 

3. A perverse consequence of “Invasive Species” in SAFETEA is that it will have the exact opposite effect of its stated purpose, which is to protect the environment. One example is the case of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Crownvetch (the State Conservation and Beautification Plant of Pennsylvania), birdsfoot trefoil, tall fescue and ryegrass were proven through decades of empirical research and practical experience to be superior for roadside erosion control. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) now lists these plants as “Invasive Species” and has informed State DOTs that once “Invasive Species” authority has been granted, their use will be prohibited. By forcing State and Local agencies to use substandard species, pollution in all U.S. watersheds will increase dramatically.

 

4. The point here is the inclusion of “Invasive Species” in statewide planning via SAFETEA.

 

5. Same as No. 5, but for local planning.

 

6. Environmental NGOs have discovered that they can use Federal environmental law to finance themselves through blackmail litigation. By filing for injunction on a project, they effectively force Federal, State and Local governments to give them grants for further environmental impact studies. NGO legal teams use the ESA, CWA and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) as tools for government financing. Adding “Invasive Species” provides these NGOs another revenue stream.

 

7. This is another unforeseen consequence of SAFETEA. Vermont’s State Flower is red clover. Maryland’s is black-eyed Susan. Both are listed as “Invasive Species”. Neither is harmful.

 

8. SAFETEA endorses the pseudoscience of “Invasive Species” under this subtitle. By including “Invasive Species” under “Environmental Restoration”, the inference is that the environment can only be healthy if populated by (restored to) species that were present prior to 1492. Enter the EPA.

 

9. SAFETEA does limit the amount spent on “Invasive Species”, but note that even a percentage of $Billions is still a lot of money – money specifically used to fund enviro-groups.

 

10. A pie can only be divided so many ways. SAFETEA underwrites enviro-groups by diverting funds, which would otherwise be employed for highway construction, to on-site "pre-construction studies". State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) are ill equipped to undertake this additional environmental assessment. Only such enviro-groups as The Nature Conservancy and its lesser State and Local counterparts have positioned themselves to do this. State DOTs must, by default, contract to these groups.

 

 

Further Reading:

 

See http://www.PropertyRightsResearch.org/2005/articles04/inspetest.htm to reference "Invasive Species", junk science and deliberate scare tactics. Enjoy the quizzes. Learn how enviro-groups use the political system -- and “Invasive Species” -- to fund themselves and control your life. Read the works of Inhofe, Crichton, Sagoff and others that point out the dangers. Empower yourself to help keep “Invasive Species” from becoming “the next ESA”.