Endangered Species Act

From Freepedia

The Endangered Species Act (7 U.S.C. 136; 16 U.S.C. 460 et seq. (1973)) of 1973 or ESA was the most wide-ranging of dozens of United States environmental laws passed in the 1970s in an attempt to halt or reverse the degradation of the environment. The act is designed to protect critically imperiled species from extinction due to "the consequences of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation." Congress passed its first legislation to protect endangered vertebrates in 1966 and expanded the law again in 1969. In 1973 Congress expanded both the scope and power of species protection by creating the Endangered Species Act. The stated purpose of the Act is not only to protect species, but also "the ecosystems upon which they depend." At the species level, the Act protects all plants and animals, while previously laws protected only vertebrates. If forbids federal agencies from authorizing, funding or carrying out actions which may jeopardize endangered species species. It forbids any government agency, corporation, or citizen from taking (i.e. harming or killing) endangered animals without a permit. At the ecosystem level, the Act requires that endangered species be granted "critical habitats" which encompass all areas necessary for their recovery. Federal agencies are forbidden from authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action which "destroys or adversely modifies" a critical habitat area.

ESA is administered by two federal agencies, the Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries (formerly the National Marine Fisheries Service. NOAA Fisheries handles marine species, and the FWS has responsibility over freshwater fishes and all other species. The FWS has set up an Endangered Species Program that evolves habitat conservation plans intended to coordinate the requirements of species and corporate and private owners of essential habitat.

The Act was passed in the wake of a 1973 conference in Washington DC that led to the signing of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which restricted international commerce in plant and animal species believed to be actually or potentially harmed by trade.

Listing

A species can be listed via two mechanisms. The first is for the FWS or NMFS to take the initiative and directly list the species. The second way is via individual or organizational petition. There are two categories on the list, endangered and threatened. Endangered species are closer to extinction than threatened species. A third status is that of "candidate species". Under this status, the FWS has concluded that listing is warranted but immediate listing is precluded due to other priorities (limited time, perhaps political pressure to delay listing).

It is illegal to kill, buy, sell or trade listed species. The penalties for violating the Endangered Species Act can be as serious as a $50,000 fine and up to a year in jail.

Further, the FWS develops a plan to help the listed species recover, and requires that developers and the government protect "critical habitats," the special places that endangered species need to survive and recover.

The Environmental Protection Agency bases decisions to register a pesticide in part on the risk of adverse effects on endangered species as well as its environmental fate, its effect in the ecosystem.

The Endangered Species Act has been enormously successful at preventing extinctions. Between 98-99% of species protected by the law have been preserved from extinction. Scientists believe that the United States would have experienced an order of magnitude more extinctions but for the protective provisions of the Endangered Species Act.

The Endangered Species Act is a democratic statute in the Jacksonian tradition. The Act contains a citizen enforcement clause, allowing citizens and scientists to sue the government to list a species with dwindling numbers or to comply with the law.

Controversy about the ESA

The first big test of ESA came in the 1970s. The case, TVA v. Hill involved a small, previously unknown endemic species of perciform darter known as the snail darter that was endangered by the Tellico Dam in Tennessee, which would impound the Tellico River, one of the last wild rivers in the state; innundate lands sacred to native Americans; submerge acres of productive farmland; and destroy a productive sport fishery. Thus to many, the snail darter was simply a totem emblemmatic of the larger struggle against special interests.

The case went to the Supreme Court in the first significant test of ESA. In 1978 the Supreme Court ruled, in perhaps the most important and powerful environmental decision ever reached by the Court, that the ESA prevented all actions that threaten the existence of an endangered species. The ruling blocked further work on the dam.

Politicians tried to outflank TVA v. Hill. A 1978 provision (section 7(a)(2)) allowed a cabinet-level Endangered Species Committee convened for this purpose (the "God Squad") to exempt certain federal actions that would jeopardize listed species from the provisions of the Act, if they determine that benefits of the action outweigh the environmental damage.

The God Squad determined that even though 90-95% completed the Tellico Dam was not worth completing— solely on economic grounds. Thus the benefits did not outweigh the costs, and the Dam was "ill-conceived and uneconomical in the first place," according to Cecil Andrus, then Secretary of the Interior and a member of the God Squad.

Failing in its attempt through the God Squad, Congress later specifically exempted the Tellico Dam from the ESA, allowing the project to be completed. Tellico Lake and Tellico Village exist now as legacies of this epic battle. Although the snail darter's principal habitat was destroyed by flooding, other populations were discovered, and the status of the snail darter was downgraded from endangered to threatened in 1984. Unfortunately the arable farm land, sacred indian sites, and fishing grounds were lost forever.

A number of activist groups have been founded to soften the impact of the Endangered Species Act. In 1991 NESARC, the National Endangered Species Act Reform Coalition, was founded, in time to bring pressure to bear on members of Congress when the ESA was due for reauthorization (in September 1992) [1]. NESARC was organized in part to counterbalance the environmental activist and create a more open public dialogue concerning the Act and its applications, advocating a balanced middle ground, retaining the ultimate goal of aiding species recovery, but pressing for more public participation and more flexible application of ESA measures, with proposed legislation in direct competition with the environmental activists. NESARC's pressure helped force the Clinton Administration to make its largest ESA concession: on August 11, 1994, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt announced the creation of the Administration's "No Surprises" and "Safe Harbors" policies. NESARC's broad base includes agricultural irrigators, the American Farm Bureau Federation, forest products trade associations, municipalities, corporate farming associations, and electric utilities.