My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7749
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Copyright
>
7749
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:01:46 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 7:19:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7749
Author
Kohm, K. A., ed.
Title
Editor
USFW Year
Series
USFW - Doc Type
1991
Copyright Material
YES
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
320
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Introduction <br />gered species program. They discuss the legal, political, and <br />philosophical ramifications of the act. In Part II, each essay <br />focuses on a particular component of the act, reporting on <br />strengths-and weaknesses and reflecting on problems and poten- <br />tial remedies. Part III considers four areas where implementa- <br />tion of the act has been particularly challenging: water rights, <br />invertebrate conservation, predator protection, and pesticide <br />regulation. Finally, Part IV takes up a theme reiterated through- <br />out the book: If we are to cope with the ever increasing number <br />of endangered species, we must move from the current species- <br />by-species approach to conservation to a broad strategy of <br />protecting ecosystems and conserving biodiversity. Yet the <br />question of what an "ecosystem" approach ought to look like <br />remains open. The essays in Part IV explore these issues as they <br />relate to the future of the federal endangered species program. <br />Each of the essays is a mix of reporting, reflection, and pre- <br />scription. Although they are written from different perspectives <br />and in varying styles, several common themes stand out. First, <br />our increased sensitivity to the plight of a relatively small num- <br />ber of species officially listed as threatened or endangered has <br />opened our eyes to the severity of the extinction crisis. At least <br />some of this awareness has-been stimulated by the Endangered <br />Species Act; it has certainly played a major role in fostering <br />research, debate, and public concern. Yet one of the harshest <br />lessons of the past two decades is that we grossly underesti- <br />mated the magnitude of the problem as well as the resources <br />needed to slow the wave of extinction facing us. In the early <br />years when the. first federal legislation was being developed, the <br />issue of species extinction was primarily defined as a technical <br />problem requiring technical solutions.8 "Solving" the endan- <br />gered species problem was largely viewed as a matter of acquir- <br />ing habitat and funding captive breeding. programs for a select <br />number of species. In his essay in Part I, Lynn Greenwalt recalls <br />that many members of Congress originally "thought they were <br />voting to protect eagles, bears, and whooping cranes and failed <br />to make the connection to questions about irrigation projects, <br />timber harvests, the dredging of ports, or the generation of elec- <br />tricity." Indeed, as William Reffalt points out in Part II, the 1966 <br />version of the Endangered Species Act was passed with the <br />intent of protecting only about thirty-five species of mammals <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.