FORMATSBACK
THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY
THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY
The Republican effort to modify the Endangered Species Act would imperil America’s special wildlife that is already threatened with extinction, argues the New York Times editorial board. The GOP’s proposed measures would allow economic concerns to be part of a conversation that should remain scientific only. Interest groups with ties to the oil industry are likely behind this push, which risks harm to endangered animals in pursuit of maximum profit. The Endangered Species Act has long protected some of America’s most prized species, such as the bald eagle, and ensured that vital areas of nature are protected.
Keep on reading at the New York TimesThe Endangered Species Act is not perfect and can be improved, suggests Zippy Duvall of Agrinews. Its rate of removing species from the endangered list is only five percent at a cost of $1.4 billion a year. Too often the act’s protections have come at the cost of American agriculture, farmers and ranchers. Farmers aren’t allowed to protect their animals from predators that are considered endangered. Regulations add to their costs, making it much harder to run their businesses. America’s wildlife can still be protected while also reforming the Endangered Species Act in ways that benefit the agriculture industry.
Keep on reading at Agrinews