scholarly journals Assisted colonization under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick D. Shirey ◽  
Gary A. Lamberti
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Assisted Colonization

scholarly journals Extinction and the U.S. Endangered Species Act

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Greenwald ◽  
Kieran F Suckling ◽  
Brett Hartl ◽  
Loyal Mehrhoff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
The United States ◽  
Species Extinction ◽  
Number Of Species ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Species Extinctions

The United States Endangered Species Act is one of the strongest laws of any nation for preventing species extinction, but quantifying the Act’s effectiveness has proven difficult. To provide one measure of effectiveness, we identified listed species that have gone extinct and used previously developed methods to update an estimate of the number of species extinctions prevented by the Act. To date, only four species have been confirmed extinct with another 22 possibly extinct following protection. Another 71 listed species are extinct or possibly extinct, but were last seen before protections were enacted, meaning the Act’s protections never had the opportunity to save these species. In contrast, a total of 39 species have been fully recovered, including 23 in the last 10 years. We estimate the Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of roughly 291 species since passage in 1973, and has to date saved more than 99 percent of species under its protection.

Testing Decision Rules for Categorizing Species’ Extinction Risk to Help Develop Quantitative Listing Criteria for the U.S. Endangered Species Act

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 821-831 ◽  
Author(s):  
TRACEY J. REGAN ◽  
BARBARA L. TAYLOR ◽  
GRANT G. THOMPSON ◽  
JEAN FITTS COCHRANE ◽  
KATHERINE RALLS ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Extinction Risk ◽  
Decision Rules ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Species Extinction ◽  
The U.S

The Economics of the U.S. Endangered Species Act: A Review of Recent Developments

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Langpap ◽  
Joe Kerkvliet ◽  
Jason F. Shogren
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The U.S

Allopolyploid Species and the U.S. Endangered Species Act

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 895-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom A. Ranker ◽  
Anna M. Arft
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
The U.S

Incorporating Climate Science in Applications of the U.S. Endangered Species Act for Aquatic Species

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1222-1233 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHELLE M. MCCLURE ◽  
MICHAEL ALEXANDER ◽  
DIANE BORGGAARD ◽  
DAVID BOUGHTON ◽  
LISA CROZIER ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Aquatic Species ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Marine mammals and sea turtles listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act are recovering

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abel Valdivia ◽  
Shaye Wolf ◽  
Kieran Suckling
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Population Change ◽  
Extinction Risk ◽  
Sea Turtles ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Marine Species ◽  
Effective Manner ◽  
The U.S

AbstractThe U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the world’s strongest environmental law protecting imperiled plants and animals, and a growing number of marine species have been protected under this law as extinction risk in the oceans has increased. Marine mammals and sea turtles comprise 36% of the 161 ESA-listed marine species, yet analyses of recovery trends after listing are lacking. Here we gather the best available annual population estimates for all marine mammals (n=33) and sea turtles (n=29) listed under the ESA as species. Of these, we quantitatively analyze population trends, magnitude of population change, and recovery status for representative populations of 23 marine mammals and 9 sea turtles, which were listed for more than five years, occur in U.S. waters, and have data of sufficient quality and span of time for trend analyses. Using generalized linear and non-linear models, we found that 78% of marine mammals (n=18) and 78% of sea turtles (n=7) significantly increased after listing; 13% of marine mammals (n=3) and 22% of sea turtles (n=2) showed non-significant changes; while 9% of marine mammals (n=2), but no sea turtles declined after ESA protection. Overall, species with populations that increased in abundance were listed for 20 years or more (e.g., large whales, manatees, and sea turtles). Conservation measures triggered by ESA listing such as ending exploitation, tailored species management, and fishery regulations, among others, appear to have been largely successful in promoting species recovery, leading to the delisting of some species and to increases in most. These findings underscore the capacity of marine mammals and sea turtles to recover from substantial population declines when conservation actions under the ESA are implemented in a timely and effective manner.

scholarly journals Better Representation Is Needed in U.S. Endangered Species Act Implementation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Malcom ◽  
Andrew Carter
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Interpretation ◽  
Gray Wolf ◽  
Picoides Borealis ◽  
Ecological Communities ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Threatened And Endangered Species ◽  
The U.S

In the United States, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses the concepts of resilience, redundancy, and representation—often known as the “3Rs”—to guide implementation of the Endangered Species Act, which requires the U.S. government to designate imperiled species as threatened or endangered, and take action to recover them. The Service has done little, however, to relate the 3Rs to the statutory requirements of the Act. Here we focus on interpreting the concept of representation given core tenets of science and conservation policy. We show that the Service's current interpretation, which focuses on a narrow set of characteristics intrinsic to species that facilitate future adaptation, falls far short of a reasonable interpretation from the scientific literature and other policy, and has significant consequences for the conservation of threatened and endangered species, including those found in other countries. To illustrate the shortcomings in practice, we discuss the cases of the Lower 48 gray wolf (Canis lupus) delisting, the proposed Red-cockadedWoodpecker (Picoides borealis) downlisting, and the possible downlisting of the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). We then propose an alternative interpretation of representation that accommodates the Service's narrow interpretation and broadens it to include the importance of intraspecific variation for its own sake as well as extrinsic characteristics such as a species' role in ecological communities. We argue that this interpretation better reflects the intent of the Endangered Species Act, the best available science, and policy needs for conserving imperiled wildlife, all of which recognize the importance not only of preventing global extinction but also of preventing ecological extinction and extirpation across significant portions of a species' range.

scholarly journals The Endangered Gray Wolf in Wyoming: Managing Wolf Populations after Endangered Species Act Delisting

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Bryant Jones
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Gray Wolf ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Recovery Plan ◽  
Northern Rocky Mountains ◽  
Gray Wolves ◽  
State Management ◽  
Compensation Program ◽  
The U.S

For over sixty years the distinct howl of the gray wolf has been absent from the Northern Rocky Mountains. The U.S. government successfully exterminated the species from all but Minnesota by the 1930s. With the passage of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 the gray wolf was protected by law. A recovery plan was developed throughout the 1980s and implemented beginning in 1995. Since then, populations of gray wolves in three designated recovery areas consisting of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming have increased annually. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is considering delisting the gray wolf from the endangered list and has begun to devolve management to state governments. Idaho and Montana's recovery plans were approved by USFWS, but Wyoming's plan was rejected. To ensure state management of wolves is achieved, Wyoming should seriously consider implementing a program similar to those of Idaho and Montana and one that will be easily approved by the USFWS. This paper proposes that Wyoming consider several different ways to manage the wolf population, including: developing a new wolf recovery plan using a a diverse group of stakeholders; continuing to keep wolves protected under state protection; developing a comprehensive education program to inform citizens about gray wolves; continuing to utilize the Defenders of Wildlife compensation program to repay ranchers for livestock depredation losses; and leaving the definition of a breeding pair as an adult male and female raising two or more pups until December 31 of the respective year.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document