We left Vermont today and drove to the White Mountains in New Hampshire. We set up camp at the Crawford Notch and then went for a hike on a near by trail. Along our hike, we stopped to hear a lecture about the 1973 Endangered Species Act from professor Patrick Hossay.
The purpose of the Endangered Species Act is to protect and recover at risk species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service are the enforcers of the Endangered Species Act. Terrestrial and freshwater organisms are the responsibility of the Fish and Wildlife Service, while marine wildlife is the responsibility of the National Marine Fisheries Service. This Act allows for any person to report a species as being endangered or threatened. Once reported, the federal government must then determine to actually list the animal or not. Their decision to list an animal as endangered or threatened is expected to be based solely on their biological status and threats to their existence.Only the best scientific information available is expected to be used through out this process.
There are five factors to be considered when evaluating a species for listing: 1) damage to, or destruction of, a species’ habitat; 2) overutilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific,or educational purposes; 3) disease or predation; 4) inadequacy of existing protection; and 5) other natural or man made factors that affect the continued existence of the species. If listed, a species' critical habitat must also be defined. Critical habitat is not just a species current location, but anywhere that is essential to its conservation. For example, areas that species use during migration or reproduction could be deemed critical habitat.
Once listed, a recovery plan to return the species to ecological health is composed. A recovery plan identifies the long term conservation strategies and gives detail of the specific actions needed to recover a listed species. Recovery actions may include the reintroduction of a species into formerly occupied habitat, habitat restoration and protection, landowner agreements that preserve or enhance habitat, land acquisition and management, population assessments, and captive breeding.
There are five factors to be considered when evaluating a species for listing: 1) damage to, or destruction of, a species’ habitat; 2) overutilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific,or educational purposes; 3) disease or predation; 4) inadequacy of existing protection; and 5) other natural or man made factors that affect the continued existence of the species. If listed, a species' critical habitat must also be defined. Critical habitat is not just a species current location, but anywhere that is essential to its conservation. For example, areas that species use during migration or reproduction could be deemed critical habitat.
Once listed, a recovery plan to return the species to ecological health is composed. A recovery plan identifies the long term conservation strategies and gives detail of the specific actions needed to recover a listed species. Recovery actions may include the reintroduction of a species into formerly occupied habitat, habitat restoration and protection, landowner agreements that preserve or enhance habitat, land acquisition and management, population assessments, and captive breeding.
Unfortunately, some of the steps in the rehabilitation process are not always carried out with the species' best interest in mind, if they get carried out at all. Defining a species critical habitat and creating a recovery plan is usually interrupted by people or organizations with economic interests in the situation. Two-thirds of federally listed species have a portion of their habitat on private land. This has lead to serious complications with developers and home owners. This can be seen in the case of New England cottontails. Originally found in seven states, the range of this rabbit has now been reduced by more then 75 percent. The New England cottontail's ideal habitat are premature forests, which are now growing old and no longer a good habitat for them. Development of the forests in which New England cottontails reside is also a problem. White-tailed deer have greatly increased in the North East, and consume many of the same foods as the New England cottontail. Invasive shrubs are dominating many of the patches that these rabbits reside in. The most significant threat to New England cottontails are eastern cottontails, which, ironically, look exactly alike.
Image showing how similar the two species of rabbit are.
Eastern cottontails range has now dominated that of the New England cottontails, and has virtually replaced them. As you can see in the picture above, these rabbits are extremely similar in their external characteristics. However, when examining skull morphology or genetic samples, the difference between the two is obvious. So, it is reported that the New England cottontails are in trouble and the Fish and Wildlife Service starts examining the situation. Enough information is gathered to propose the species for listing, but is deemed only 'candidate' status. This means that the Fish and Wildlife Service recognizes the threats facing the New England cottontail, but species of higher listing priority must be dealt with first. Property owners of potential critical habitat areas for the New England cottontail are not in favor of this. No rabbit, especially one with a practically over populated twin in the same area, should stop them from doing what they want on their own property. Developers and property owners who have a stake in the situation will fight viciously to keep that species from being considered endangered.. The Fish and Wildlife Service try to give developers and property owners incentives to cooperate with them and protect endangered or threatened species. For example, in the case of the New England cottontail, the Fish and Wildlife Service are working with state governments to make sure no additional regulatory tasks will be asked of cooperating landowners should the New England cottontail be formally listed as a threatened or endangered species in the future.
Other cases exemplifying the legal problems between property owners and enforcing the Endangered Species Act include...
The Canadian Lynx
Canadian Lynx.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the threat to lynx from trapping reached a new height when their hides became in high demand. The most suitable lynx habitat in is on public land. This includes national and state forests, where logging and recreational development often occur. Torn between industry pressure and science, Fish and Wildlife Service declined to list the lynx, despite the fact that three out of four FWS regional offices favored its listing.
Gray Wolves
Gray Wolf.
Gray Wolves had been absent from the Yellowstone area for 70 years, up until their reintroduction in 1996. Wolves are viewed as a nuisance to some people of the Yellowstone area, which brought controversey to the situation. Ranchers fear large losses of income due to wolf predation. Though many people visiting Yellowstone National Park will never see a free ranging wolf, Ranchers are continually subjected to livestock losses and wolf harrassment. These wolves are currently protected under the Endangered Species Act, however, ranchers of the area still fight to get that changed.
Gray Wolves had been absent from the Yellowstone area for 70 years, up until their reintroduction in 1996. Wolves are viewed as a nuisance to some people of the Yellowstone area, which brought controversey to the situation. Ranchers fear large losses of income due to wolf predation. Though many people visiting Yellowstone National Park will never see a free ranging wolf, Ranchers are continually subjected to livestock losses and wolf harrassment. These wolves are currently protected under the Endangered Species Act, however, ranchers of the area still fight to get that changed.
Although a good piece of legislation, the Endangered Species Act faces so much opposition that it cannot be used to its full potential. The process of listing a species takes incredibly long, and as I discussed above, it is corrupt. Federal, state, and local governments, usually stay true to their word on not providing funding for projects that interfere with endangered species and their critical habitats. For many states, and their inhabitants, hearing the words, "You can't do this on your land because there is an endangered species here, or because this is its critical habitat" does not go over well. They are citizens of America, free to do as they please on their own land. Changing the mind set of people like is probably the only way the Endangered Species Act can be fully utilized. I feel by educating of the people, and our legislators, on the importance of these species is necessary. Then, maybe the Endangered Species Act will face less opposition.
Citations used in this post:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/ESA_basics.pdf
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/indepth/rabbit/pdf/NECottontailfactsheet062011.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment