The malicious tentacles of a federal “Invasive Species Act” will reach far beyond the comprehension of the uninformed and exhaust the understanding of the casually supportive. Invasive species legislation passed in any form will become the federal government’s “ultimate weapon” to usurp states’ rights, private property rights and the established authority of state fish and wildlife agencies. The authoritative EPA and the feared DEP’s across this country will ultimately administrate any such legislation.

In May 2005 the US Senate will take up consideration of S.732, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005″ known as “SAFETEA”. Within it are a few paragraphs opening Pandora’s Box to the unwelcome world of “invasive species”. This is a six-year package valued at $280 billion riddled with plenty of pork. However, its’ most dangerous component is the establishment of federal “invasive species” language. The “camel’s nose will be under the tent”, so to speak.

If you are thinking “invasive species” is just a fancy way of saying “noxious weeds”, then you are uniformed. In 2004 environmental extremists tried unsuccessfully to pass federal “invasive species” legislation. For example, thanks to the efforts of Senator Larry Craig from Idaho the sensible “Noxious Weed Control and Eradication Act of 2004 was passed. In other words, if noxious plants are your concern, we already have the tools. “Invasive Species” legislation has not been able to withstand the scrutiny of debate as a stand-alone issue.

There are currently some fifty pieces of invasive species legislation floating around Washington. What makes the current SAFETEA bill so pervasive is the powerful leverage the federal government would command over state authority. If a state didn’t comply with the new invasive species mandates, the Federal Highway Authority has already promised to withhold funding.

However, the impact of “invasive species” legislation on our sporting community and the authority of fish and wildlife agencies across this nation is almost unimaginable. Brown trout, ring-necked pheasants, Hungarian partridge, chukars and even the common earthworm are imports to this country. Rainbow trout, largemouth and smallmouth bass, walleyes, muskies, salmon, steelhead and striped bass have all been introduced far beyond their original native range. Equally interesting for the gardeners of this country, baby’s breath and day lilies are currently classified as “invasive species”.

It was only a year ago that the US Fish and Wildlife Service refused to allow rainbow or brown trout to be raised in their Allegheny, PA fish hatchery because these species were not native to PA. Imagine if a federally funded highway project required rebuilding a bridge over a stream, but the stream is stocked with non-native rainbow and brown trout. I can guarantee environmental extremists will demand “species cleansing” to comply with “invasive species” law.

It is interesting that at this very moment the US Senate is considering a total revamping of the “Endangered Species Act” because of the endless lawsuits brought about by this well-intentioned, but misapplied legislation. Can you imagine the lawsuits created by reclassifying many of our fish and wildlife species as “invasive”? Can you imagine the nightmare for our private landowners that have been discovered to have invasive species on their property? NASA is already mapping your private property for “invasive species”. A few proponents have suggested developing lists of good and bad “invasives”. This concept is as intellectually bankrupt as developing lists of good and bad guns.

When you call your Senator and we are successful at removing “invasive species” language from the current SAFETEA bill, the battle is far from over. Next up for federal consideration is the “Aquatic Invasive Species Act”. After that, the “National Invasive Species Council Act” will rise to the top. This legislation elevates “invasive species” to almost cabinet level importance.

No matter how it is packaged or how it is applied, federal “Invasive Species” legislation is trouble for America’s citizens, states’ authority, private landowners and our sporting community. We have federal noxious weed legislation and beyond that, it is a state’s responsibility to mange their ecosystems. We should not give the federal government the “ultimate weapon” to further erode our property rights and fish and wildlife management policies.

President Lyndon Johnson probably said it best. “We should not judge legislation by the good it will do if properly enforced. Rather, we should judge legislation by the harm it will do if improperly enforced”.