tv Washington Journal Jonathan Wood Jason Rylander CSPAN August 21, 2019 3:34pm-4:38pm EDT
"washington journal" future as we look back to the first arrival of africans to america. 400 years ago at point comfort virginia. at 8:30 a.m. eastern we're live with state university history professor cassondra alexander newby for the history and origins of slavery in america. then at 930 live coverage of the commander in ceremony with speeches by virginia government officials senator mark warner, jim kaine, ralph northam and lieutenant governor dustin perfect. the history of africans in america from fort monroe, life saturday beginning at 8:30 a.m. on c-span "washington journal" in american history tv on c-span3. >> we will talk more about the endangered species act and
changes the ministration would like to make to the 1973 law, we have to first time guest on "washington journal" to talk about it, jonathan wood have senior attorney. good morning thank you for joining us and we also say hi to jason rylander at the defenders. good morning to you as well. remind us in the audience with the endangered species act is and how successful you think it's been in the last 40 years. >> it is one of the world's most successful wildlife conservations. it is been responsible for bringing back iconic species like the bald eagle, grizzly bear the manatee, humpback wha whale, her remarkable record of 1600 species on the list only 11 have been declared extinct since the listed track record we can be proud of. host: with that being said, do agree with the ministration it's
time for changes? how come? guest: the truth is, is partially successful, it is been good for preventing extension. 99% are actually understated because most of the species that are gone extinct will probably extinct before the state. but at the same time we are not recovering species at the rate the people want. less than 3%, has been reported to congress for improving or decliningin order species 32 321. host: i want to pick up the phone numbers for a guest. here are the number to call. if you live inn the eastern or central time zone called to a 27,488,000 phone. >> mountain time zone would be to a 27,488,001 phon 27,488,001.
in about legal challenges that might become it. we'll put ong the screen the basic provisions for publication we will walk right through. changes to the endangerede species act with the easy of the burden of the act and considering the economic impact of a listing making climate change less of a factor in makingas easier to remove it frm the endangered list and protection for threatened species. jason rylander what you see here with those potential changes? >> the administration is taking a wrecking ball to a number of provisions from the act in the way they are listed to the way that could buckle under critical habitat for the species. and the federal government assesses the impact of its decision on endangered species. so there's a lot of provisions that concern us. one of them under the t new regulation for the species are not received automatic protection d of act and the
exception is now the role because threatened species used to get the full protection of the act automatically unless hes ministration offered a special tailored rule that deviated from that in some way. now that will be different and create the burden on threatened species. we are also going to see a problem with considering economic impact in the listing process. congress made it clear that listing a species in a scientific decision whether endangered or threatened has nothing to do with how much it cost to save it or if we want to save it, is a biological status. so the considerations into a scientific decision will politicize further decisions about endangered species protection. host: do you agree with all the potential changes out there and the sense of the ones you agree with? guest: ethic most of the changes are technical and not changes at all. so for instance a lot of the talk is how far into the future
to endangered species. the new row codifies what's in place since 2009. so listing decision in consideration of economic impact acknowledges that they cannot consider economic impact. they just want to make a gag rule and acknowledge the impact. there are some significant changes in the world that will help us. jason mentioned the change to threatened species. i think that is a key element in improving the incentive to coveg an danger species. we've deprived landowners to move species from endangered to threatened and off the list and by lowering regulatory burdens as species recover is better and linings and landowners for species. >> ami give you a chance to respond. guest: jonathan mentioned the the foreseeable teacher and one
of the things that they do is continually raise the burden for protecting species and recessing the impact of federal actions on these issues. the ministration already has the ability to tailor special rules for threatened species. it is unclear why they would suddenly shift the presumption to one or threatened species don't get any protection unless they take action. that will mean more work for the agency at a time where it's underfunded and dealing with increasing burdens of trying to protect the number of species that are threatened by habitat loss and climate change on accelerating basis. host: make it each of you to react to the voices that are out there. the washington post, one of the lead editorials, the threat facing endangered species, try changes are more than worrisome. landowners seeking to develop the property. it's frustrating bureaucratic hurdle but exist to ensure the short-term economic
consideration and long-term any reversible ecological damage. it is fair to worry that the trump administration is once again focusing on the formerad d ignoring the latter. >> i disagree, the strict regulation prevent extinction in a place. economic costs will not be considered. the changes are geared toward conflicts to recover species and editorials like that do is highlight how broken ourgh politics are on the endangered species issues. if you go back and look at the coverage when obama ministration proposed changes it would be the exact same thing. every administration will be accused of getting the endangered species act. that is where we are politically. generally is not true, most changes are small. >> one more reminder will put them on the bottom of the screen, eastern and central (202)748-8000 phone.
(202)748-8001 phone. >> fo.he writes that the revisin finalize rulemaking hits squarely within the mandate with a revelatory goals. these changes were subject to ah robust transparent public process during which we receive significant vote the help us find finalize the votes. >> the vast majority were opposed to these roles but i think that statement isre important because it really emphasizes with the intention of the role making west and that was to reduce regulation. we have seen that unfortunately throughout the trump administration in burma to publicwhether opening a plan oil drilling or trying to open up the coast of offshore
drilling or reducing protection for public land and clean air and clean water. it is parcel of a agenda that seems to be designed to benefit industry overe ry our future international resourcesur for children. host: michael with illinois, jonathan is with the pacific legal foundation. >> caller: i can read their titles. here is my point, i want to talk about the fact that this is public land. i am in illinois, any statistical study will tell you that eastern states particularly the blue states finance all of the water projects out west, we subsidize everyone of these red states, the politicians and everybody else.
and then these idiots want to allow some farmer or rancher who has been stealing from the public treasury for years because he gets the low rates for almost free grazing which i had to pay for in my taxes. so i should have more of a say, let's do it the republican way, those states in the east that paid for this should have a say in those people living out there should not have anything. and i want those animals protected and i don't care if the ranchers go out of business and start. there's mike. host: let's get response from jonathan. guest: reforms should be a focus in market-based to prevent. but it is simply not true. endangered species issuesn are lanpublic land issue. as part of the story but the vast majority of private land that isnd habitat.
we should contribute more and pay more tod encourage it. but we also often consider the incentives for landowners whether if the incentive is to destroy habitat, important right now pray to thehtto real change these were to destroy habitat because if you don'ts you will face for burn from a galatian. guest: endangered species do not recognize state borders. they don't care if we will be a blue state or red state. they represent heritage that we have inherited and hope to pass down to our children. so i think it'spe a question of how we are going to reaffirm a national commitment to w protecting endangered species and natural resources. it is certainly true that endangered species can be found a publicly and privately and in
endangered species act and provisions that address protection for public land through federal agency consultation and provisions that could apply to private land through agreements and habitat conservation plans thatwa incentivize private stewardship of a resource. all of that is really important. host: expand the process so we know the endangered species act 1973 signed into law, this process comes in the form of a rural. how does this work within the ministration to make changes to the law. guest: basically is starts with the proposal, there was three different parts of the act, the public, process which the agencn has to consider and respond in a final rule that contains the responses. that is how the act is implement it today. congress has not looked at or updated the law in decades. most of the work and many of the
things he mentioned about habitat plans are administrative innovations because that is where all of the work is being done. host: that is exactly right. there have been some a ministry of an permit to the act and they probably could be additional ones. but thent. act itself has been n the book since 1973, people don't realize it was passed by a bipartisan senate and house, 92 - nothing in 390 - 12 in the house. and if we have a bipartisan commitment going forward. most of the discussion is about how administration implements the act and moving backwards and up rotation and not forward at r time when we really need to be increasing our protections for endangered species and the environment. host: let's hear from sarah.
>> caller: good morning and thank you. we need to protect the environment from capitalism, if you ever saw a documentary, the corporations, if a corporation where people would be sociopaths because there is no conscience in capitalism. it is all about making money. here in newki hampshire, we got feel-good industrial wind, and went through the process of the fcc committee, the site was a watershed surrounded by water and when i came to live in southern new hampshire at ten years old, we did not have bald eagles, now we do and this site is surrounded by water, eagles are water birds basically and
the second sec said if they lower a turbine and got rid of a turbine, the site change for some reason, the site had not changed in 15000 years and until they came in and blasted the top of our mountains off, they destroyed t the watershed and ty all did this because there is no money, there is foresight in new hampshire, 40 turbines producing 2.5% of the energy needs, the fifth site produces energy out of state, we have bats in the area, bees endangered, eagles endangered and that all went out the window because of capitalism you have the national forest in arizona, that was sold out to a mining company out of australia to do a copper mine.
this is what is happening to the federal lands. they belong to everybody and when they talk about species, they talk about habitat. we had a 5-mile forest destroyed and habitat for endangered right now the moose herd is endangered and they did not speak up, des did not speak up in the sec went along with it and we got capitalism.y capitalism. host: thank you for calling. the reason why we're able to do so much is we are more prosperous today than we were before. countries that do not have markets do not have an permit to outcomes because they don't have the incentive and the government systems to do it. here the private sector brings a ton of resources to protecting
the environment. corporations care about their perception and will invest environment to outcome. that is because were prosperous enough to care and afford to take the effort. guest: i think that is true but the threats to endangered species are greater than ever before. the united nations reports on climate change in him but biodiversity have been really striking and they've indicated we could lose as many as a million species in my lifetime and a new report a couple weeks ago indicated 70% of land areas are already disturbed and will add 1 billion people to the planet in the next decade or detwo. so will have to change. with oil and gas lobbyist, we have individuals with high
raking officials at the department of interior the stated they don't believe they should be public lands in the endangered species act should be repealed and the amount of money that is going in to influence some of these decisions that the expense of the public good is a problem and we will have to make changes if were going to preserve our future. host: we move onto west virginia. >> caller: i'm a a small-town farmer, i live on the country of west virginia. you know we are talking about animals and the environment. i am for the environment, but we got these animals, as a small farmer, i cannot keep fighting the animals because they eat my myaches, they raid my garden all the time, and the only thing i could do would be to build a
fence around all of my gardens to keep the animals out. it is a constant battle to try to raise product to sell at the farmers market. then farmers are all great but how do you take care something or even the squirrels come out of the woods and eat all the peaches that we have on the trees and the apples and everything, i constantly have to try to kill them all the time and i don't eat squirrels or nothing like that. it is horrible that the country has got to be no. host: let's hear from jason on this. guest: a potato, and we recognize that a lot of people are having farmland and try to make ends meet but we are talking about protection of
species that are not likely to iesee around different because habitat has already been destroyeds or because they declined for other reasons. most wildlife management is up to the states and one important piece of this is that states step up and do a better job protecting wildlife and managing wildlife before we get to the point where they need to be put on the endangered species list. unfortunately state spent 5% of the amount of money on endangered species that the federal government does and they say west virginia doesn't have its own and species act. there's a lot more that could be done to make sure that we have abundant wildlife and it works for people as well. host: here's a quote from rebecca riley at the natural resources paid were out of
unprecedented extinction crisis but the tripper ministration is steamrolling, the most effectivt loss to the ministration seems set and imaging systems with the industry systems over science and we intend to fight these so we can preserve the natural world for generations to come. guest: i'm sure a lawsuit will be filed. but the reality, of why it's so critical that we get the incentives right. and the things in the new rules that land rovers have better incentive and critical to achieving the goal. the previous caller mentioned the cost of thehe wildlife and highlights a concern that we as the public are enjoying the benefit of keeping the endangered species around. we are expecting land owners across the country to bring this class. it wouldec be more fair if we as the public in the legislation in congress are recovering
america's wild life we just focus on doing that and providing more incentives to encourage recovery and that's what we should be doing, not stopping were regulations of people already bearing. it is letting the public bear the cost of i public benefit the most effective way as well as regular and, there has to be cured and sticks and that's an approach that is worked well throughout the history of the act. there shortly will bee litigatin over these regulatory changes in the attorney general from california indicated that he was interested in suing the press conference for massachusetts as well and there will be action by some states and environmental bgroups and our intent is to me sure the endangered species continues to be successful going forward. host: about a: half-hour left jason who is with the wildlife and senior endangered species
counsel for the organization and were also talking with jonathan wood who is a senior attorney for the legal foundation talking about changes to the endangered species act and we had read that it took about two years to get to this point can either view explain why, they started the effort maybe two years ago. [laughter] guest: maybe jason does, generally it takes a long time. because you have hundreds of thousands of comments, obviously they will say the same thing of not having substance but agencies have to catalog and review them and write responses in the internal review the ghost of the inside the agencyto and outside by way have divisions and is not uncommon for rules to take two years. it is frustrating somewhat thata the government is the slow and inefficient but that's the way it works. >> knowing there's a process of one president make changes then another president needs to make
the others. >> that is right, it's hard to have a clear view of what exactly is going on inside the interior department at all times.th but for much of the ministration, a lot of the compositions are not failed. that may also have been contribute in. but it does take time to develop regulations and put them up for public, to assess the comments and respond to them which in this case i don't think the tripper ministration did. host: good morning jim. >> caller: jason, grizzlies and mountain lions have been introduced to the large blue state. thank you. guest: you know, one of the
greatest successes of the endangered species act has been that we been able to bring back the great wolf into the midwest as well and the great lake states and the northern rockies in thero beginning to expand thr range even into california and colorado. we are also involved in red wolf wproduction. and in north carolina and hoping to bring them back with their historic range in the south. it has been discussed and proposed in the past to recover wolves into part of the historic range in new england asir well. i think the important thing is, with these species, they are part of our birthright and we been successful in bringing the back at some of the work still needs to be done for the iconic species to be seen and enjoyed as much as a historic range as possible. and we have to travel to alaska to see a grizzly or what.
and yet a list of eight of amazing species that were saved at mechanics.com pay they start there with the bald eagle and you can go to that website to seeca more as a popular mechanis and then the grizzly bear in there as well. . . . good morning, very. morning, barry. caller: these animals go extinct, we have an issue down here which we call it red tide which is a naturally occurring condition with the ocean so my question is basically how much does climate change have
to do with these animals going instinct? we already know about capitalism and man-made development taking these ap animals out oftheir area . >> host: thanks for calling, want to start there? >> guest: climate change frankly scares me a lot when it comes to protection of endangered species and was starting to see effects of climate change on a few species and that was one of the first ones listed because of predictions about melting of the ice that we are seeing come to pass every day . there were temperature readings above the arctic circle i saw in the press yesterday that topped 94 degrees and that's just not normal. you mention red tide,sealevel rise in florida . those red tides are a big threat to manatees just at the point where where down listing them on endangered species threat and were beginning to think whether it should be recovered. we're losing portal rates, the information for a lot of our fisheries and this is changing, you can see changes in patterns, changes in
vegetation and that the chship as the heat range so if we don't address that and protect habitats both where they move and they might be migrating to, were going to be losing a lot of species. that's why in the united nation's report it's been suggested we could lose 1 million species due to habitat lossover the next few decades . >> does your organization lookat the idea of climate change in this context ? >> one of the things you have to start with is there's not much the endangered species act can do to address climate change, that's going to take congress to do that problem directly but i think the fact we are starting to see species threatened by climate change emphasizes why reform is needed . these species historically haven't worked so well for species considered management dependent, that leaving them alone isn't enough, we need to do active things to
restore their habitat or help them out so it's critical we have better incentives for land management to occur. the more we see species threatened by climate change, the more important it will be to build on those incentives and emphasize competition and other benefits rather than burdensome regulation. >> in northampton, on the line for jason rylander. >> caller: good morning today. i wanted to comment on the discussion and what i notice, sadly over the years is there is a problem with bringing attention to endangered species, all over the world. and first, you have the world population i can think of and how manylaws protect endangered species . how many laws protect the rain forest where 70 percent of our cures and medicines arederived from .
and also, quantifying that whole example which some of the indigenous people are doing but when you get back to our neck of the woods which i'm in new england, it seems like the overreach with environmental agencies and people are just so outrageous . now, i'm just saying that in perspective and i would like to say that, you know, people have their living to do. i'm particularly a builder and it seems like the regulations that have gone into place really, really prohibit the progress of our nation in a sense, but i surely wouldn't want the last white whale to swim off into the sunset never to be seen again. you gentlemen. >> host: let's hear from our guest mister rylander. >> guest: you raise a lot of different issues, one is that
we do derive enormous amounts of benefits and some of them mo economic benefits emfrom biodiversity, including medicines, including nature tourism and things like that. so it is really important andcongress wanted to pass the endangered species act, said the value of endangered species is literally incalculable. that's something we always have to bear in mind . i think the endangered species act does a good job of addressing the concerns of development and there have chbeen studies done about the endangered species act consultation process whereby federal agencies have to make sure that permit that they give out and projects that they approve do not jeopardize the survival of species and our research shows, we looked at 80,000 projects and most of those consultations occurred
informally within just a few weeks. and very, very few , less than one percent of projects have ever been stopped or really severely altered because of endangered species concern. so the idea that asa is truly stopping economic progress is denied by everything you see around you, the building to the stock markets, marquette economic situation so the benefits of native species detection need to be taken into account as well. >> host: to from role, democratic congressman. is bulldozing the most important tool we have to protect endangered species, the flowlacks are for one purpose only, more handouts to special interests . they only want a line their pockets, let's give jonathan wood a chance to respond to o anything you've heard in the last several minutes. >> guest: i don't think that rhetoric is helpful and it's been our cycle too much. i recall in the obama administration started working with state, landowners rather than
listing species and regulating it, the exact things were about that, but the obama's were in the pocket of big oil and putting the, that's more a statement where we are politically, that the reason i have no reform is that it's a landmine, it's filled with landmines. nobody wants to go near it because they don't want to face that rhetoric on the broader point of the last caller, the truth is endangered species are valuable for protecting us all but extremely costly and that's why it's important to focus on who bears the cost and in addition to being tardy of the legal foundation i work with the environmental research center which looks at the role of incentives in encouraging recovery in one of the things we found is that burdensome regulations encourage landowners to destroy habitats preemptively. aco listing: five or a critical habitat because for them on a earn a living and ifthey're going to face revelations, if they don't put down a tree or do something else, they're going to do it . >> john grasso, republican of
wyoming. what if we modernize the nsa in a way that promotes states and allows local economies to drive, we have another voice here, peter, cottage new york , thank you for waiting , you're on the air. >> caller: i came in late on the conversation but as far as i'm concerned, it's encroachments into wild areas by human beings that is the biggest threat to the environment and to endangered species. i'm in my middle 60s, when i was a kid, the big who was overpopulation. now in 1990, 1992 traditionally we brought in about 250,000 people a year, legally into this country. now it's about 1,000,002. if we want to protect the environment, i think the smart thing to do would be to reduce our legal population, coming in and also do something about illegal
immigration. because that's what putting a strain on the environment. now, evenas far as our farmers are concerned , the big thing now is that farmers thave to export their week and rain and soybeans to other countries. esand one big environmental problem is runoff from farms. how did farmers in this country make a living years ago when they weren't exploiting thomas to other countries . so if we want to be stable, no matter what we do as far as technology isconcerned . the thing is by 2050, we will have 600 million people in this country, if we go back to 250,000 ayear legal immigration, we will be about 400 million .l so to me, that's the main problem as far as the environment is concerned. it's encroachments, thank you gentlemen. >> thanks for coming, let's
start with jason rylander, illegal immigration adding to this issue. >> the color makes a number of points. and i think it's important to bear in mind that in the era of climate change, we are likely to see increased amounts of refugees around the world, fleeing areas where theycan no longer grow food . or where r, they have been inundated by sealevel rise and this is going to be an issue all over the world and you know, those people have to be treated fairly well. for me, the biggest issue is with protecting endangered species that loss is certainly prime one is land and swift transitions you renewable energy. we simply need to stop extracting fossil fuels at the rate that were doing. this administration seems to be doubling down on expected industries at the expense of investing in wind and solar and new technologies that may
reduce the impacts on our land and result in cleaner air and cleaner water to help the environment for all of us . and that's where we need to be focusing right now, while we opening up bristol bay, the last major productive salmon run in the world to mining. while we opening thearctic national wildlife oil and gas . why are we reducing the size of our national monuments and leasing or a cold and elsewhere around our public lands. and so we need to protect our habitat, we can do that and we have way to do that right now. >> ci disagree with the colors views on immigration. the truth is, the environmental movement of the 50s, 60s and 70s that positions on population growth in the environment and there's a reckoning with that
right now. the key to improving environmental outcomes including endangered species more human prosperity and more people focus on the effort . jason mentioned how renewable energy is increasingly competing with fossil fuels and that will continue regardless of what the government does and the reason why is wheezing that a lot of the innovations more competitive in the market. that's the key. if the market continues to push people in a positive environmentaldirection, not going to see continued environmental improvements and the key is prosperity . >> good morning kyle. >> good morning gentlemen, how are you all today? >> my question is for mister ward, i have a degree in agriculture economics and i'm disabled veteran that lives on a limited income area and i'm packing up already, mister ward. i don't need to supportthe cost of landowners, i don't land myself, god bless u.you . >> i certainly sympathize with the idea that taxes are too high but the truth is, re when we as a society want to have, enjoy some benefits,
the implication is we should pay for it. people will disagree and say the cost of contact protecting endangered species are too great . i could not have a large chair, they tend to pull well into the 90 percent, is one of the most popular issues we have so i suspect that if we did fund more of that and expect the public to do more of those,we do it more effectively . >> but ultimately that's a political decision. we want to continue to protect endangered species we should be willing to bear the cost and that's just the political capital we face. >> if you could help explains something that happened in the senate hearing a while back with maisie romo, the senator from hawaii and mister bernhardt, they were talking here about a potential revision to the bsa. here's an exchange, it has to do with economic impact and removing some of the language . here's a look and then we'll thtalk about it.
>> i like nowhere why your agency is considering changing the species listing decisions to take out language that such decisions should be made without reference to possible economic impact of such determination. so that means that in these listing decisions you want to be able to consider the economic impact on providing protection to endangered species, isn't that the import of the change that you contemplated? >> no because under the law, under the endangered species act when you're making a listening decision you can only consider five factors. those factors are factors that do not include economics so you cannot consider it for the listing decision itself. the question is could there be other ddocumentation -- >> i know mister bernhardt, you're not supposed to consider economic decisions but you're not taking up permission will be able to
consider economic ondecisions. >> although it may come about the rule and that still under debate, in the statute so no one can do that, that would be illegal. it would have to be thefive o doctors and that's it . >> jason rylander, can you explain what that's all about? >> guest: the endangered species act states clearly listing decisions are supposed to be made on the basis of the best scientific and commercial evidence available and the regulation of mirrored that but they also included language that said that economic considerations should not play a role and they spell this out very specifically. without reference to economics, i think that the language was in the regulation and theirremoving that language from the regulation . on the one hand you could say this simply doesn't change anything because the native species act already prohibits consideration of economics
enlisting, that's what secretary bernhardt is saying but then why are they removing the regulatory language ? they've made it clear in the preamble they want to issue economic impact statements at the same time as the listing and this will simply and argue cause delay of listings, it will burden the fish and wildlife service which has too much to do and it will have the effect of injecting most types of considerations into what should be a completely scientific review of the species biological status . >> caller: i agree with most of what jason said and disagree with the rest but what secretary barnhart said is correct, the endangered species actprohibits consideration of cost in making decisions, regulations continue to prohibit those considerations . there used to be a gag rule from acknowledging and that decision is mostly political, it's about transparency and that when we left the species, this is what cost the american economy. in the long run i don't think it's going to make much of an impact as people continue to support the listing and protection of these notwithstanding.
we have cost considerations in other parts of the statute, routinely cost hundreds of millions of dollars for species and overall and well in civilian and not a political controversy. so it's mostly about transparency, letting the public know what things cost at different stages in the long run it will not affect where the species get listed. >> let's move on to hoboken new jersey. >> morning. i have a question for you and also a statement it's based on. since the beginning of our species, mankind is considered itself. to all other forms of life. we are now trying to solve the problem of saving life on earth. if you had true reverence for all life equal to humans you would never have allowed this to happen. you're sitting there now with your tales all twisted trying to figure out how you say things. i want to ask each one of you superior to other life forms on earth? and or do you believe in the
anthropocentric view exclusively? >>. >> host: you had a comment to? additional comments? >> is there something you want to tackle? >> i personally believe that all the species that are traveling with us on this planet the right to exist and that that existence is something we need to take seriously . and you know, i also think that in my other life, i'm a classical musician and we perform music that is hundreds of years old. from the 17th century, from back, some of our day. we preserve society preserves the pyramids and works of art that are thousands of years old. and yet here in just a generation or two, we are causing the extension of hundreds, perhaps even millions of species that we will never be able to re-create. that's something we have to grapple with.
this is new and it's something that we are accelerating beyond natural rates of extinction. we just have to make sure that i hope that most people will agree that our natural treasures are very much worth preserving as part of our heritage in our culture. >> jonathan would. >> guest: the comments reflect the effects of prosperity and human prosperity on the way we think about the environment. no other species thinks about its effect on its local environment or theenvironment in general, it'sthe reason we do , advancement of enrichment to do something about it . so i think that's critical, keep things going in the direction i'm anthropocentric, i think human life matters a great deal and i don't think many people would trade their life for animal life but at the same time we areincreasingly caring about impact the environment, that human beings are evolving to care more about more species . as a vegetarian, i'm more than half my life i
sympathize completely and then devastated by the harm that caused the wildlife and animals but that's just a reflection of the fact that i'm going up in a society that i can afford to process and fear. >> for the publication puts out the main points of the white house, administration would like to put out there, making changes to the endangered species act. here they are again, using the regulatory burden of the endangered species act, considering economic impact of making climate change less of a factor. easier to remove he's on the endangered list and reduce protections for button species. to our guests we know that the legal challenges all this but when with these changes, when where they designed to take effect for mark. >> i believe they go into effect 50 days after their published which i haven't seen in many of you have but should be in next few months . >> let's go to very dennis, you're on the line.
>> caller: mitch, hi. i'm calling because i'm worried about what the administrations doing, the t actions they are taking thaten will hurt wildlife and the environment and over the last 20 years where i live in the rural area , i've seen our land completely change in the course it's because of the climate, the weather changing . you can't depend on seasons anymore. and since we've lived here, i've seen owls, ducks, geese, birds, crafts, they're just disappearing. we used have them be there regularly and now i don't see them atall . and birds in fact, tons of birds they're all disappearing, the ones that use to my right here, now they're not showing up and i also see them competing for food with all the little lizards and they compete with the birds for food and i think the way texas spreads
out, they love to make property that takes over a lot of wildlife territory. they should really be considering starting looking at the bigger cities and build up instead of out. >> host: thanks for calling, response? >> guest: the truth is the key to protecting habitat, to protecting new species is to incorporate them more into working within and a lot of environmental groups are doing innovative things . environmental defense has a working lands initiative that makes it so farmers can make a living while improving health and protecting at habitat. if we treat the environment as something distinct from humanity and the world we live in, where ultimately going to undermine our environmental goals. >> host: mister rylander. >> guest: i would agree with that, i would also point out the caller mentioned migratory bird. the administration has taken
a wrecking ball to the migratory treatments and change your interpretation of the law that the act protected against incidental take of migratory birds announces it doesn't and we're in court over that. every bit of our environmental protections right now are under attack from this administration so it sounds surprised that we are seeing the effects of what the caller was talking about.>> host: time for a couplemore calls, how is calling from langhorne pennsylvania .>> caller: hello? c1q r carol, okay. my screen was a bit off glad to have you, go ahead. >> caller: that's okay. i think this administration is taking everything american out of america. i'll be 80 this winter and i hope that i'm dead before all of america is gone. >> host: thanks for calling
and jackie is in keeling virginia, good morning . >> caller: i'm calling about, we've just been fighting down and we passed here in jeans but you get a mining company incorporation, any login, the mountain pipeline we're going through there just caring. nothing or no one ct for nothing or no one . the bees, and the main issue area the birds, and wildlife. that water supply. all of this boils down to the same thing.we've got to protect what wehad. we got to . recognize the importance of, we've all got beer together and we all have these units that have a purpose. and that these have a
purpose. you get rid of all these little animals, that everybody just thinks don't matter. all of themhave a rule, they have a purpose you on this earth . and it's for all of us. >> i think we lost jackie but we got the point from her though. jonathan, you want to respond to mark. >> easy to scapegoat. loggers have been common endangered species act's today and generally, there's been stories don't panic. we cut, prepare logging time in the pacific northwest the lastfew decades . to protect owls, or after the longing stopped, the declined even on national park service property which never had logging the first place and it's because there were other threats, but it wasn't as attractive a villain as logging. endangered species face challenges to be sure. but aisupply each other and increasing the politics of this issue on helping you . >> i think jackie was from
virginia, she mentioned a mountain valley pipeline. we went to court to you by the challenge the cursory biological analysis of that pipeline. which is running through rural communities and impacting pristine habitats and endangered species. also in court over with our partners about the atlantic coast pipeline in the fourth circuitthroughout the opinion as well and that project is now on hold . says the reason that a lot of these projects are not needed . we need a transition to renewables, we need these areas and make sure the projects are going to go forward, yet section looks at them with his eye of the doubt protecting our species and our natural resources. what we're trying to do. >> chris's online, i chris. >> good morning. >> i have a question. about invasive species.
is there any data that correlates invasive species is to the cause of species endangerment? like local species? that's my question. >> in either of you helpwith . >> local data like the species listed on the endangered species because of the effect of invasive species that another example of a management dependent species. unless you have incentives for landowners to go out and do things to protect and restore habitat, you're not going to recover these these is another example of why reforms like those we saw earlier this week are so essential.l. >> john is like species require management and it is t a growing problem that will affect our ability to protect threatened and endangered species going forward so that is that we a cancer. >> ,boynton beach,good morning .
>> how are you? >> caller: i had a question, back to what one of the caller said, they're talking about people's influence and i just want to know what the interviewers t thoughts are about books like shopping graves thoughts about the point of human populations over the next 40 years, those of you as before, going for the book it says part of the united states andspain will be ghost town because of people are dying off . so with that, my question is how much of this, all these debates are about environment impacts, get shifted onto individuals but really if the majority of corporations and businesses that are in the business, of decimating environmental spaces. why is the discussion, what is your opinion on the discussion of why it is
always framed like if an individual problem or individuals are going to be taxed for it. why these companies tax at much higher rates and also why are they allowed to do it . >> that was our last call, we have time for one final thought. let's start with mister rylander. >> for me, the important thing is that we protect our endangered species act and reaffirm our commitment to protecting endangered species in our natural habitats. is it ministration is going in the wrong direction on so many of these issues and the endangered species act isjust the latest of as many attacks on our environmental protections . we need to do better and it's , we're going to stand up in court and try to argue that these regulations are contrary to the will of congress and should be overturned. >> i still think there's a
difference between renovating to achieve the goal of protecting species and doing it. and increasingly government regulation isn't the chief driver of recovery efforts in environment improvement by defenders of wildlife, nature conservancy private landowners out there every day when things and restore habitat and that that's what our focus should be on, not government rules and regulations . >> our guests have been jonathan wood, pacific legal foundation and jason rylander is a seniorendangered species counsel at the defenders of wildlife organization, thanks for your time and information . >> thank you for having me. >> weeknights we are featuring book tv programs showcasing what's available again on cspan2 and tonight. [bleep] writing and publishing. robert caro discusses in working with comedian andlate talkshows : o'brien. author steve lautenberg and helen borg discussed their writing and some of the challenges they find the authors at the san antonio book festival.
also talk about publishing in an age of political polarization from the bay area book festival. like tonight starting at the easter here on cspan2 and enjoy book tv this week and every weekend on cspan2. >> saturday on book tv at 7 pm eastern, and her latest book how women on the ground, others are theb& the challenges email erin and middle easternjournalists face while reporting . >> all the authors were able to push through whatever barriers they had advised really openly and honestly about their deepest bundles. one of the essays that comes to mind is you mentioned her, it's such a raw and honest account of grief and loss. and also reflects the state of the arab world today. this isn't anuplifting book . >> sunday at 7:45 eastern, princeton university professor imani perry on race, gender and class in america. most recent book is read, a
letter to my son. >> the reality is i have to harm them, not simply with either a set of skills, and intellectual tools that allow them to flourish in school, and ethics and values, but also a way to make sense of the hostility that they encounter every day, from people at times whose responsibility is to treat them as community members. >> and at 9 pm eastern on "after words", media research enter founder and president brett bozell on his book on mass: big media's war against trunk. >> all modicum of decency has been cast aside. the motto of donald trump to his opponents, from his opponents to him, they call him our worst, they are attempting to do far worse to him than what they accuse of him doing to them. it's telling you they have no rights, none. >> watched the tv every
weekend on cspan2. >> sunday night on q&a, theoretical physicist talks about our destiny beyond earth and achieving digital immortality. >> it takes everything known about you on the internet, your digital footprints, your credit card records, what movies you see, what wines you like my, what countries you visit. your videos, pictures, audiotapes and create a profile that will last forever so when you go to the library of the future, you will not pick out a book about winston churchill, you will talk to winston churchill. >> sunday on c-span q&a. >> president truckstop talk to reporters this afternoon on the way to kentucky
receipts there. it was asked for the latest on trade negotiations with china. >> the news of which many of youare members , is trying to convince the public to have a recession. let's have a recession. the united states is doing phenomenally well. but one thing i have to do is economically take on china. china has been ripping us off for many years. president clinton, president bush and president obama and others should have done this long before me. my life would bemuch easier , although i enjoy doing it, but my life would be much easier if i just said let china continue to rip off the united states. it would be much easier, but i can't do that. we are winning against china. lost 2 and a half million jobs in a short time.
they want to make a deal. the deal that's it for the united states. where they want video, probably we will make a deal. but if i didn't do that, and i'm not doing this, somebody said it trumps trade more this is my trade more . this is a trade war that should have taken place a long timeago by a lot of other presidents . over the last five or six years, john is made $500 billion. 500 billion. lifted out of the united states and not only that, if you take a look, intellectual property that. add to it. and at a lot of other things to it. money, excuse me. somebody had to do it. i am the chosen one. somebody had to do it. i'm taking on china. i'm taking on china on three and you know what? we're winning because where the piggyback area where the one that all these countries including the european union want to rob. and take advantage of.
european union, $200 billion. china, morethan $500 billion . i was put here, i was put here by people, but here by people to do a great job. and that's whati'm doing and nobody's got a job like i've done . now, with china rather wait for a little more than a year ? and try and get sleepy joe biden to negotiate with instead of president trump? 80. but i don't think so. you know why? you're losing too many jobs too fast. and the worst year in 27 years i think was actually 52 or 54 years. it's the worst year they had half a century. and that's because of me and i'm not proud of that. but you know, they want to negotiate and we will be joe doesn't have aclue . we will be joe said china's wonderful area china is wonderful. but china. but i'm wonderful for the usa.
>> house financial services committee chair maxine waters held a field hearing on combating homelessness in the los angeles metro area and its impact on a national level. los angeles mayoreric garcetti and other local government officials participating in hearing to address affordable and supportive housing . >>. >> the committee on financial services will come to order without objection, the chair is authorized to divers a recess of the kennedy anytime. members of the house are not on the full committee are authorized to participate fully in today's hearing and member of the local media were invited to this hearing may engage in audio and visual coverage of the committees proceedings. i would like to remind all here at any recording of today's proceedings is solely to educate, enlighten and inform the general public on an accurate basis of the committees operations