This letter to the editor, published in The Washington Post and written by Defenders of Wildlife’s Andrew Bowman, pushes back on the paper’s pro-permitting-bill editorial, arguing its Endangered Species Act changes would weaken wildlife safeguards without actually speeding up energy development.
The Oct. 10 editorial “Democrats, don’t kill this win for U.S. energy” didn’t mention one of the most troubling provisions of the Senate permitting bill: its sweeping changes to the Endangered Species Act.
Endangered wildlife is not standing in the way of America’s energy future. Federal reviews of projects affecting endangered species are already remarkably efficient, often completed in weeks or months rather than years. These reviews help projects move forward while preventing needless harm to wildlife.
Yet the Senate bill would dismantle parts of this system, shifting certain federal wildlife reviews to states and potentially creating a patchwork of duplicative processes. Other provisions would allow certain projects to bypass wildlife reviews altogether. How does eliminating safeguards while potentially adding bureaucracy amount to progress?
America needs more energy infrastructure. It also needs healthy ecosystems and thriving wildlife. These are not competing ambitions, and Congress should reject any deal that treats them as such.
Andrew Bowman, Washington
The writer is president and CEO of the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife.
