Endangered Species Act

Endangered Species Act
Title	Endangered Species Act
Enacted	1973
Enacted by	93rd United States Congress
Signed by	Richard Nixon
Statute book	United States Code
Citation	16 U.S.C. ch. 35
Purpose	Conservation of threatened and endangered species and their habitats
Administered by	United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service

Endangered Species Act The Endangered Species Act is a United States federal law enacted to protect imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. It establishes processes for listing species, designating critical habitat, developing recovery plans, and prohibiting harm, while assigning primary implementation to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Act has influenced domestic policy debates involving Congressional Budget Office, Supreme Court of the United States decisions, executive actions by administrations such as Nixon administration and Obama administration, and conservation efforts by NGOs like World Wildlife Fund and The Nature Conservancy.

History

The Act was enacted in 1973 amid rising public concern following events such as the passage of the Lacey Act and the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and drew on precedents including the Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966 and the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969. Key legislative actors included members of the 93rd United States Congress and executives such as Richard Nixon. Major early legal interpretations emerged from cases before the Supreme Court of the United States and lower federal courts, while administrative practice evolved under agencies including the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. Subsequent amendments and policy shifts involved actors like the Congressional Research Service, committees such as the House Committee on Natural Resources, and presidents associated with policy changes during the Reagan administration and Clinton administration.

Purpose and Scope

The statute aims to prevent extinctions and promote recovery of species listed as endangered or threatened, applying to taxa across domains recognized by bodies such as the Smithsonian Institution and concepts implemented by agencies like the United States Geological Survey. Its scope covers terrestrial and marine organisms, including examples protected under listings like the California condor, Bald eagle, Pacific salmon, Gray wolf, and numerous plants cataloged by the Botanical Research Institute of Texas. The law interacts with other statutes and programs such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and international agreements including the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Listing and Delisting Process

Species are added through petitions and status assessments conducted by agencies including the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, guided by standards articulated in cases such as Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill. Scientific evaluations draw on data from institutions like the Smithsonian Institution, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and university research programs including those at University of California, Davis and Cornell University. Critical steps involve proposed rules, public comment periods overseen by entities including the Federal Register and judicial review in circuits such as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Delisting requires demonstration of recovery through monitoring by partners like the U.S. Geological Survey and conservation organizations such as Defenders of Wildlife.

Protections and Prohibitions

The Act prohibits certain actions that harm listed species or their critical habitat as interpreted in landmark litigation including Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Greater Oregon and Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill. Protections apply on federal lands managed by agencies such as the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and Bureau of Land Management, and affect federal permitting overseen by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service consultation process under section 7 with federal agencies like the Department of Defense and the Army Corps of Engineers. Private activities intersect with regulatory processes via incidental take permits and habitat conservation plans negotiated with entities such as state fish and wildlife agencies including the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Recovery Planning and Implementation

Recovery planning creates measurable objectives and timelines developed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, informed by science from organizations like the National Academy of Sciences and universities such as University of Washington. Implementation often relies on partnerships with non-governmental organizations including The Nature Conservancy, Audubon Society, and National Wildlife Federation, as well as state agencies and tribal governments like the Navajo Nation. Funding mechanisms include appropriations approved by the U.S. Congress and targeted programs such as recovery grants administered through federal agencies and cooperative agreements with institutions like the Smithsonian Institution.

Enforcement and Legal Challenges

Enforcement involves administrative action by federal agencies and litigation in federal courts including the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and appellate courts such as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Prominent challenges have been litigated by parties including industry groups like the Chamber of Commerce and conservation organizations including Center for Biological Diversity and WildEarth Guardians. Executive-branch policy changes have prompted review by bodies such as the Government Accountability Office and interventions by congressional committees including the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Remedies include injunctive relief, settlement agreements, and consent decrees negotiated with the Department of Justice.

Effectiveness and Controversies

Scholars and agencies including the National Research Council and Government Accountability Office have assessed the Act's effectiveness in preventing extinctions and fostering recoveries, citing successes such as the recovery of the Bald eagle and Hawaiian goose alongside ongoing challenges for species like various Pacific salmon runs and the Kemp's ridley sea turtle. Controversies involve conflicts with economic interests represented by groups such as the National Association of Home Builders and energy companies, disputes over critical habitat designations addressed by entities like state governments including Arizona and Texas, and debates over regulatory interpretations reviewed by the Supreme Court of the United States. Policy proposals for reform have been advanced in forums including the Congressional Research Service and hearings before the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Category:United States federal environmental legislation