The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enacted in 1973 to conserve and protect endangered and threatened species and their habitats. Although well intended, the law has been used to block projects and to deter the legal use of privately owned land.

In fact, some environmental organizations have built a business model based on filing “citizen suits”, negotiating settlements with federal agencies and then recovering legal expenses from the agencies they sued.  This litigation often results in diverting attention and resources away from the species the ESA was intended to protect and creating an adversarial relationship with private landowners who are critical to accomplishing the intent of the legislation.

The Alabama Forestry Foundation in conjunction with the Alabama Forestry Association and the Southern Resources Alliance is committed to promoting effective and balanced legislative and administrative improvements to the ESA to support the protection of at-risk fish, wildlife and plant populations as well as wise stewardship and responsible forest management.

Dusky_Gopher_Frog-a.jpg
 

Issues to Address:

 

Best Available Science

The ESA requires that listing decisions be based on the “best available science”; however, there is no definition. As a result, agencies sometimes rely on observations, opinions and, in some cases, lack of data as evidence in making listing decisions.

Issue:

 

  1. Establish minimum standard for what evidence can be used in the listing process.

  2. Eliminate ‘absence of data’ as reason for listing.

  3. Establish provision for a delay in listing decision until population surveys are conducted.

Reforms Needed:

 

Critical Habitat Designation

ESA defines “critical habitat” as a geographic area where a species currently exists and that contains all habitat features essential to a species conservation.  However, federal agencies have designated areas where the species does not currently exist or where active management is required to create some of the needed habitat components.

Issue:

 

  1. Must contain existing populations of the species.

  2. Must contain all habitat features required by a species without any active management by the landowner.

Reforms Needed: