David Bernhardt: Cleaning the Augean Stables

By Rich Kozlovich

In days gone by I would just assume everyone had at least heard of the Greek mythological Twelve Labors of Heracles I doubt that’s true today, but to the point.

The fifth task imposed by his cousin King Eurystheus was to clean the stables of Augeas in one day, which were a disaster since these stables housed 3000 oxen, and had never been cleaned, therefore these stables were full of manure. It was believed Hercules would be incapable of doing it in one day so the king agreed to give a tenth of his herd to Heracles but:

“Hercules………tore a big opening in the wall of the cattle-yard where the stables were. Then he made another opening in the wall on the opposite side of the yard.” (Editor's note:  Heracles or Hercules? either is acceptable.  I used what was presented by the authors. RK)  

"Next, he dug wide trenches to two rivers which flowed nearby. He turned the course of the rivers into the yard. The rivers rushed through the stables, flushing them out, and all the mess flowed out the hole in the wall on other side of the yard.”

 Well, the king didn’t like the fact he accomplished this task since now he had to give up a tenth of his herd. Therefore he reneged and demanded more tasks from Heracles because he was paid to do it.

It was a stupid story, and like all the Green myths is filled with irrational paradigms, but the story is instructive in this way: No matter what you do to appease tyrants, it will never be enough.  The greenies and their acolytes in government, just as corrupt King Eurystheus dealt with Heracles, it will never be satisfied. 

On Feb. 12, 2019 Coral Davenport posted this article: Top Leader at Interior Dept. Pushes a Policy Favoring His Former Client saying:

• "David Bernhardt, the agency’s acting chief, wants to roll back endangered-species protections on a tiny fish, a change that benefits few outside a California group he once represented as a lobbyist."

She then goes on to attempt to cast aspersions on Bernhardt’s integrity saying among other things:

• “Because Mr. Bernhardt’s actions would disproportionately benefit one of his former clients, independent ethics specialists said that, under the terms of the Trump administration’s ethics pledge, which Mr. Bernhardt signed, he should not have been given clearance to act. Its “revolving door” provision requires former lobbyists to recuse themselves for two years from any particular matter or specific issue on which they lobbied in the two years before joining the administration.”

So, apparently it was better that former heads of these departments and agencies worked for their clients, the green movement?   Whether they were ever paid by them or not is immaterial. They were philosophical clients.  They were worked unendingly to attain the goals of the activists over and over again as has been shown by the many “Sue and Settle” articles exposing the conspiracy between green activists and bureaucrats at the EPA, the Wildlife Services, and others.  Constantly twisting and turning simple laws into often times insurmountable and irrational regulations, never intended by Congress. 

So I say good for Trump!!!!!

At least now we know there’s someone in there that actually knows what he’s talking about, and knows first-hand the chicanery they adopt and horsepucky greenies spew out to get their way, and how to overcome it.

The ESA has done little to actually save species but it’s been the “go to law” that allows activists and deep state bureaucrats to overturn Constitutional guarantees regarding private property, one of the goals of all socialist movements.

The Endangered Species Act really is doing what it's supposed to do. Halt human progress. Saving species is just the emotional hook, and the Congress that voted on this had the so-called 'romantic' species in mind, and were shocked when the Tennessee Valley dam project came to a screeching halt over the snail darter.

Congress actually had to pass special legislation to overcome this outrage. The ESA gave individuals standing to sue the government over environmental issues, which is now out of control with the EPA actually helping activists sue them in order to get power the legislature didn't deem appropriate to give to them. Now we're saving microscopic shrimp to the detriment of pesticide users, and it's one of the most prolific species on the planet.

Once again, I find Trump’s insights into these irrational, misanthropic and morally defective laws to be amazing, and no politician running for President would have an iota of the courage he’s demonstrated to bring this to a halt.

Kudos to Trump!!!!!!! We need a Herculean figure to clean out the swamp. I hope he can divert a river of wise decisions that does it.

I’ve posted and written extensively about this. You may wish to peruse some of the articles, including that regarding the Delta smelt.

Let’s start with:

Endangered Species Act: Blast from the Past.

By Rich Kozlovich

For the benefit of those who are new to the pest control industry and new to Paradigms and Demographics - or those who just refused to pay attention: Here are some Endangered Species Act articles that give the history on how outrageous this piece of legislation is.  This will explain TVA vs. Hill. which is fundamental to our battle. 

ESA Outrages, Part I Thursday, September 18, 2008 ESA Outrages, Part II Monday, September 22, 2008 ESA Outrages, Part III Saturday, October 18, 2008

Congress needs to step in to end this game of ‘endangered chicken’ once and for all. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is recklessly driving the taxpayers’ truck on a collision course with our economy, food producers, true species steward landowners and taxpayers.

"Let’s hope Congress takes the keys away before more damage is done." - Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples, in testimony to the United States House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources.  "It is clear the ESA has been used to accomplish the goals of radicals and those seeking to expand the reach of government,” Staples communicated to the Committee in a prepared statement of testimony.

By Rich Kozlovich

ESA Today August 4, 2012

ESA Today Sunday, July 8, 2012

Endangered Species Act

Thirteen Days of ESA

Green Gold

ESA Outrages, Part I

ESA Outrages, Part II

ESA Outrages, Part III

Then please avail yourself of some of my personal choices.

Donald Trump Stopped Democrats from Killing Alaskans

Trump’s Interior Department seeks to end abuse of migratory bird treaty Act

Endangered Species Act: The Frog That Jumped The Shark

Population Doomster Paul Ehrlich’s New Eco-Scare: ‘Biological Annihilation’

Nipping a legal problem in the bud

Are neonicotinoid insecticide seed treatments endangering wild bees?

The Sue-and-Settle Racket

Preserve the habitat of imaginary woodpecker?

Conservation – not more control

Shades of the Old Soviet Union - "Red" Wolf Acolytes of a Dying Ideology

Federal Permits Will Allow Wind Farms to Kill More Bald Eagles

Forgotten (or Expunged?) History - Wolves

The Cock Crows for Rural America

Court expands ESA protections on climate grounds

Improving the Interior Departments Science and Policies

H. Sterling Burnett @ Heartland Insititute

The U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) is taking a page out of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) playbook, to improve the transparency behind the science used to develop regulations on the millions of acres of public lands it controls, and the legal actions it takes in response to lawsuits filed against it.

On September 11, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke signed a Secretarial Order promoting transparency and accountability in consent decrees and settlement agreements, aimed at ending secret “sue and settle” deals with activist plaintiffs.

Zinke’s order comes almost a year after the EPA issued rules ending such agreements at the agency.

DOI reports from January 1, 2012 through January 19, 2017, Interior entered into more than 460 settlement agreements and consent decrees, resulting in the payment of more than $4.4 billion to plaintiffs, while keeping key provisions of these agreements secret. In President Barack Obama’s last year in office, Interior entered into 96 such agreements or decrees, costing taxpayers more than $1.7 billion.

Although consent decrees and settlements may sometimes be a prudent way to avoid costly litigation in cases DOI is likely to lose, Zinke notes, “concerns have been raised” DOI has used secret settlement agreements to undermine the safeguards Congress established to ensure public input into policymaking.

Order 3368 requires DOI to file public notice of all litigation, proposed settlement agreements, and consent decrees in the Federal Register. Another provision establishes a process for public input before Interior can approve a settlement with significant policy implications or large payouts.

The order requires DOI to establish a publicly accessible “Litigation” webpage linked in the federal Office of the Solicitor’s homepage. Entries on this page must include the names of the parties involved in litigation, the case number, the date filed, the court where the complaint was filed, and the statutory or regulatory provisions at issue in the complaint.

By December 11, 2018, the Solicitor’s office must begin compiling, and the Chief Information Officer to begin posting, a searchable list of final judicial and administrative consent decrees and settlement agreements governing DOI’s actions. The summaries must include a brief description of each decree or agreement, details of any attorney fees or costs paid, and a link to the text of the decree or agreement.

Also, within 15 days of receiving service of a complaint or petition for review of a law or regulation, the Solicitor must notify any state or tribe possibly affected by a pending complaint or petition, except when the state or tribe is a party to the petition.

An example of how this may work comes from EPA’s website, which now includes a page titled “Notices of Intent to Sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” providing details of nearly 300 notices of intent to sue, mostly from citizen groups plus a few from state and local governments, with a separate table listing about 380 active environmental cases, and a third table providing details of 15 finalized consent decrees and settlement agreements.

In another pro-transparency, pro-accountability move, in the last week of September, DOI followed EPA’s lead once again, implementing a new policy intended to improve the transparency, integrity, and quality of the science its agencies use to make decisions. Going forward, officials may use only scientific studies or findings the underlying data for which are publicly available and reproducible, with few exceptions. EPA proposed a similar policy earlier in 2018.

DOI’s policy covers the science used by the wide variety of bureaus under its jurisdiction, including the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey, affecting the science used to shape policies ranging from endangered species determinations and protections—such as the decision to list polar bear populations as endangered based on speculative future risks from climate change even while their numbers are increasing—to decisions about grazing, hunting, mining, and oil and gas production on public lands and offshore. Under the new policy, the climate science used to justify any future actions by DOI to close public lands or offshore areas to oil and gas development, or impose more stringent limits on greenhouse gas emissions from those operations, would now be open to review by the public, including outside scientific auditors.

Announcing the policy, Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt said the order is intended to ensure Interior “bases its decisions on the best available science and provide[s] the American people with enough information to thoughtfully and substantively evaluate the data, methodology, and analysis used by the Department to inform its decisions.”

People have a right to know what their government is up to, yet under previous presidents the science used to justify regulations and policies and the terms of settlement agreements at DOI often blindsided local, state, and tribal governments, industries, public land lessors, and private land owners adjacent to public properties, imposing huge costs on them with little or no notice, based on science hidden from public view. This was unfair, amounting to regulation behind closed doors.

These orders should improve the transparency and soundness of DOI’s policies by giving the general public, we who pay DOI’s bills and for whom they are supposed to work, some input into its decisions.

Trump’s DOI is giving the government back to the people, or at least ensuring we have oversight of and influence on it. Only environmentalists and crony capitalists who historically, in secrecy, have wielded inordinate power over government policy could be opposed to that. Every other department and agency should adopt similar policies.