[MCN] Overpopulation/overconsumption (Part 5)

[John Meyer]

Today is Day 5 of a series that talks about overpopulation/overconsumption.

 After being overturned by U.S. Senator Steve Daines/Congress on my last three court wins for public lands/endangered species, I've learned it is important to not only have the law and the science on your side, but also public opinion. In order to win in the court of public opinion, you have to ensure the public understands the issue. As Nelson Mandela says, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”

 Education

 Most scientists agree that consumption of fossil fuels is exacerbating and/or causing climate change. In Montana, this means shrinking glaciers and wildfires. Climate change is also driving species into extinction.

 Montana is a stronghold for the threatened Canada lynx. The medium-sized cats evolved massive paws that allow them to travel over deep snow where other predators like wolves and coyotes can’t go. What are Canada lynx chasing around in deep snow? Snowshoe hare. As snow decreases, Canada lynx and snowshoes hare will lose their evolutionary edge and have to compete with other species that they previously avoided.

Cottonwood previously won an Endangered Species Act lawsuit to protect over 10 million acres of “critical habitat” for Canada lynx on public land in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. The Forest Service appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Cottonwood won again. The U.S. Supreme Court decline the Forest Service request to hear the case.

I had the chance to meet with Senator Daines in the Bozeman airport a few years ago <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy8e98FUl04> on the way to a bowhunting trip in the Midwest where I was born. I asked him if he was going to weaken the Endangered Species Act and he told me he was going to improve it. Senator Daines then led efforts in Congress to eliminate the provision of the ESA that Cottonwood used in court to protect the snow-dependent cats.

A few days ago Senator Daines told Montanans we need “commonsense, science based decision making under the ESA.” The economic costs of protecting a species has not been a consideration in past decisions to list a species as threatened or endangered. It is a consideration under the new regulations.

 Conversation starter

 - Do you think economic considerations will impact common sense, science-based decision making?

 - Should species threatened by climate change be allowed to go extinct because of the economic costs to the fossil fuel industry?


John Meyer
Executive Director & General Counsel 
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center
P.O. Box 412 Bozeman, MT 59771
John at Cottonwoodlaw.org
(406) 546-0149

The information contained herein is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you must delete this email and inform the sender of the error.

Like what we're doing? Click here <http://www.cottonwoodlaw.org/#donate> to donate. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bigskynet.org/pipermail/missoula-community-news_bigskynet.org/attachments/20190816/3514c1a4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen Shot 2019-08-16 at 8.55.13 AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 379607 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://bigskynet.org/pipermail/missoula-community-news_bigskynet.org/attachments/20190816/3514c1a4/attachment.png>