A House Divided...

You may have read about a letter that was recently sent to the White House Council on Environmental Quality urging them to intervene in the ongoing pesticide consultations between the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the EPA. This letter claimed that the science behind NMFS’s evaluations of pesticide impacts on endangered salmon was flawed, and that pesticide manufacturers had not received sufficient opportunity to participate in the process. Despite its rhetoric and obvious bias, this letter was endorsed by 18 representatives across both parties. Among them were six members of the House Committee on Natural Resources, led by their Chairman, Doc Hastings (R-WA).

A different kind of letter was issued earlier this month, as three opposing members of the committee, Representatives Markey (D-MA), Napolitano (D-CA) and Garamendi (D-CA) wrote to the EPA insisting that they fulfill their requirements under the Endangered Species Act. They also chastised EPA for failing to implement stronger protections for endangered salmon as recommended by the NMFS and requested that the agency produce a plan for how they will bring pesticide labeling and registration changes (termed Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives or RPAs) into line with NMFS recommendations. Moreover, they demanded that EPA produce a response to the letter by no later than April 22, 2011.

This means the House Committee on Natural Resources now has one faction lobbying the executive branch to step in and protect the pesticide makers from a scientific process they failed to pervert, while at the same time another faction has handed EPA an ultimatum as an attempt to spur them into actually protecting the environment.

Needless to say, it should be interesting to hear EPA’s response if and when it comes tomorrow.