(c) Jessie Harris
Read the
NPCC News Archive
(c) Priscilla Titus
(c) David Tibor
(c) John Game
(c) Susan Meyer
(c) Lori J. Makarick
|
NPCC Special Report: Legislative and Budgetary Barriers to Native Plant Protection Equal Protection for Plants Campaign Equal Protection for Plants Sign-on Statement
House Legislation Protecting Wildlife From Climate Change Excludes Plants See our Press Release Read our LETTER to Congress Read the legislative language excluding plants.
______________________________________ For Immediate Release, September 18, 2007 Contact: Emily B. Roberson, Center for Biological Diversity Native Plant Conservation Campaign, (415) 970-0394 Plant Science and Conservation Groups Ask Congress to Add Plants to Legislation Protecting Wildlife From Climate Change WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today the Native Plant Conservation Campaign, Ecological Society of America, Botanical Society of America, American Society of Plant Taxonomists, and the American Society for Horticultural Science sent a letter asking Congressional leaders to add provisions to protect plants to new legislation designed to help wildlife survive threats from global climate change. The Native Plant Conservation Campaign is a program of the Center for Biological Diversity. The campaign is a network of 38 native-plant societies, botanical gardens, and other plant science and conservation organizations representing more than 80,000 individual plant scientists and enthusiasts nationwide. The request addresses the Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act, a section of the Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act. The legislation passed the House this summer and may soon be considered by the Senate. The Act contains groundbreaking provisions that would direct federal agencies to develop strategies to assist wildlife affected by global warming. But it does not allow the agencies to develop strategies for the thousands of plants also at risk from climate change. “While we applaud this step forward in addressing the impacts of climate change on wildlife, the most effective conservation strategies must be designed at the ecosystem level — to include plants, wildlife, and their habitats,” said Dr. Norman Christensen, president of the Ecological Society of America. “Because of complex interactions among species, it is imperative to employ protection for plants as well as wildlife to ensure the health of ecosystems and their resilience to climate change.” “Plants are the foundation of life on this planet, and critical to human welfare,” said Dr. Emily Roberson, director of the Native Plant Conservation Campaign. “Through photosynthesis, plants generate the oxygen we breathe and create the fuel for life. Their roots help clean the water we drink, and they supply foods, fibers, medicines and countless other products and commodities we depend on for survival, jobs, and economic security.” "Horticulturalists value native plants, not only for their aesthetic value in the landscape, but for their present and potential contributions as medicinal plants and new crops. In addition, native plants worldwide are an important source of genetic diversity for breeders of both ornamental and crop plants," said Dr. Mary Peet, president of the American Society of Horticultural Science. Scientists are already identifying numerous plants that may be lost to climate change. These include delicate mountain wildflowers like the deep-yellow snow buttercup and bright blue sky pilot as well as alpine forest types like spruce/fir in New England — all of which may disappear completely as mountaintops warm. Coastal plants are also at risk as sea levels rise. Some mangrove forests, for example, may be wiped out, causing serious problems in areas like Florida where mangroves have protected coasts from hurricanes and floods and created habitat essential to multi-billion dollar fisheries and other industries. The omission of plants from the Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act is part of a broader trend. Plants are often treated as “second-class conservation citizens” in the United States; funding and legal requirements for their conservation are substantially lower than for animal species. Nearly 60 percent of species listed under the Endangered Species Act are plants, but less than three percent of federal endangered species funding goes to plants. One example is the federally funded Wildlife Action Plan program, which provides money for state species and habitat conservation projects. More than $400 million was disbursed by the program between 2001 and 2006, but not a dollar went to plants since federal law explicitly prohibits states from using Wildlife Action Plan funds for plant conservation (unless such conservation comes as a byproduct of "wildlife" conservation projects). “No scientific evidence supports the contention that meaningful conservation of wildlife or habitats can be accomplished in the absence of vigorous plant conservation,” said Roberson. “If it is to achieve its goals, this landmark energy legislation, like all conservation laws and policies, must provide equal protection for the plant kingdom.
Equal Protection for Plants Campaign The Califonia Native Plant Society and the Native Plant Conservation Campaign
have launched an Equal
Protection for Plants Campaign. Our longterm goals are to amend FESA, improve
budgets, and change state species protection laws where necessary, to provide plants with
the same protections and recovery opportunities that are currently provided to other
listed species. We have launched a public education campaign and a petition drive to build
support for this idea. Fact Sheets:
Open Letter
calling for Plants
and animals contribute equally to the stability, health, and functions of the ecosystems
on which we all depend for survival. However, plants and animals are not treated equally
under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Federally
listed plant species are among the rarest and most imperiled species in our nation. But
although the Federal Endangered Species Act prohibits the unauthorized destruction or even
harm of Federally listed animals everywhere they occur, it allows many listed plants to be
killed, without limit, on non-Federal lands, except in restricted circumstances*. In fact,
some plant species can be knowingly driven to extinction without violating the Federal
Act. Lesser
protection for plants is unsupportable biologically. It disregards our current
understanding that plants and animals are inextricably intertwined in the structure and
functioning of healthy ecosystems. Unless
plant species are protected from extinction as vigorously as animals, efforts to conserve
biological diversity will inevitably fail. Plants and animals depend upon each other for
food, habitat, indeed for their very survival. We cannot arbitrarily pick only one kingdom
to protect. Ecosystems cannot survive with only one group or the other. For these
reasons, the undersigned organizations urge that the Federal Endangered Species Act be
amended to provide the same protection for plants that it currently provides for animals
through all of its policies, programs, and penalties. Signed (as of October 5, 2007),
*Section
9 (a) (1) of FESA (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) gives animals full protection from
destruction “within the United States or the territorial sea of the United
States” or “upon the high seas”. But Section 9 (a) (2) (B) of FESA
prohibits destruction of Federally listed plant species only on “areas under Federal jurisdiction”.
Plants also cannot be killed in knowing violation
of state law, while trespassing, or in violation of Section 7 of FESA which governs
Federal agency actions. Therefore, listed plants are only protected (1) on Federal lands or during activities that are funded, permitted, or carried out by a Federal agency and are therefore under Federal jurisdiction, or (2) in the unlikely event that it can be proved that they are destroyed in knowing violation of state law or during trespassing. Logging, housing development, mining, and other activities may all kill unlimited numbers of Federally listed plants, even cause extinction of a species, as long as the destruction does not meet these conditions.
|
|||||
