Recent Actions Threaten Endangered Species

A cabinet-level committee authorized to exempt federal agencies from some compliance requirements is among the new provisions of the Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1978 (PL95-632) signed into law on 11 November. The bill also modifies the consultation pro, cess, provides new definitions of "spe- cies" and "critical habitat", and requires that economic as well as conservation factors be considered in the decision to declare a particular area a critical habitat. The net effect of the amendments is seen as a weakening of the 1973 Act which provided the strongest protection and was often cited as a model by other nations.

Congressional momentmn for amend- ment followed the Supreme Court deci- sion in the Tellico Dam case. 1 In fact,

1Gospodarek, Mary, The little fish vs. the big dam, 4 Environmental Policy and L., (4) (1978) p. 178.

the amended law specifically calls for a special review of the Tellico and the Grey Rocks dam projects by the new Endangered Species Committee. It also establishes a much more complex con- sultation and review process for federal projects for which no construction has begun or construction contract signed. No irreversible or irretrievable commit- ment of resources may be made during this process. If a special review board (which is appointed separately for each application) recommends an exception, the project is referred to the Endangered Species Committee. The Committee's final decision is subject to judicial review.

Because Congress failed to appro- priate interim funds (the usual proce- dure) pending passage of the amend- ments, administration of the endangered species program came to a virtual halt on 15 September. For six weeks such

functions as permit processing and the review and listing of species data were stalled. Meanwhile, the Interior Depart- ment quietly proposed the easing of res- triction on international trade of 13 en- dangered species without full public review. According to angered animal protection groups, the US proposal sub- mitted in October to the Washington Convention secretariat may have been prepared during the time the endan- gered species office was not authorized to operate.

Noting that the 18 species proposed for reclassification include such com- mercially valuable species as the bobcat and the perigrine falcon, conservationists obtained the support of the White House's Council on Environmental Qual- ity, whose chairman lodged a complaint with the Interior Department. Three days of public meetings are now sched- uled to discuss US positions, including recommended changes in species protec- tion, in preparation for the March meet- ing of the parties to the Convention.

MPG []

Germany, FR

Antarctic Treaty Now in Force

The Federal Republic became a new party to the Antarctic Treaty of 1 De- cember 1959, when the Bundesrat, in its sitting of 21 December 1978 agreed to accept the law passed by the Federal Parliament on 16 November 1978 to this effect. []

Lower Taxes for Quieter Aircraft

Since 1 November 1978 new landing taxes ranging from 6 - 14% higher than previously are in operation on Federal German Airports which benefit the "quieter" aircraft - i.e., the Jumbo Jet and the new Airbus A 300. As opposed to these, the Boeing 707 and 727, the DC 8, the Trident and Back 1-11 rate as "loud" aircraft.

The German airports are up to now" the only ones having this incentive for airlines to operate quieter machines. Berlin-Tegel, on account of its allied status, is excluded from this regulation and it is interesting to note that it is served only by loud machines. []

Environmental Policy and Law, 5 (1979)

Strict Provisions Ca use Unfair Competition Provisions for controlling foodstuffs

are differently regulated in the EEC Member states. Some countries permit the use of certain types of insecticides which are prohibited in other countries due, in part, to the different geographic and climatic conditions prevailing in the different states. In addition, deposits of these insecticides in marketed food- stuffs is regulated differently from country to country. Agriculture, im- porters and consumers are equally affected.

In the Federal Republic of Germany, this problem is especially confusing. Due to a change in the law on food- stuffs of 1 January 1978, it is forbidden to market foodstuffs containing insecti- cide: deposits either in or on the article for consumption which are not permis- sible in the Federal Republic of Ger- many and for which no maximum fimits have been set.

This results in the import of goods containing deposits of insecticide which are strictly prohibited in the Federal Republic of Germany, e.g., Quintosen, but which are permissible in the ex- porting country. This leads to a situa- tion where goods containing similar insecticide deposits can be rejected on one hand because they are a German

product, and on the other can be per- mitted as imports.

An explanation for this confusion can only be found in the continuing conflict between consumer protection, free trade, and commercial policy, with their varying provisions in the Nine.

This ban on substances dangerous to health is understandable, especially with regard to the lessons learned from DDT. For consumers, it would have been better to extend this ban to all marketed foodstuffs containing deposits of sub- stances whose use is prohibited. Due to commercial policy this was avoided and instead, only maximum limits were set, as a ban would stop the import of a large variety of goods from EEC and third world countries.

A solution to this unsatisfactory situation can only be achieved through uniformity in the different provisions relating to foodstuffs. A proposed EEC directive on insecticides in foodstuffs should be speedily dealt with to avoid further unfair competition to farming and to protect the consumer. However, it is questionable if the strict provisions of the Federal Republic will be included in the EEC directive.

Joachim Kehrhahn []

35