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 />and thirty to forty species of birds believed to be near extinction. <br />There are now over a thousand species on the federal list of <br />threatened and endangered species-and this only begins to <br />scratch the surface of the problem. Some 3,900 species have <br />been identified as candidates for listing in the United States <br />alone. In tropical countries, extinction rates dwarf these figures. <br />This is the backdrop against which any strategy for species <br />conservation must be evaluated. <br />Yet if the extinction problem is greater than we had ever <br />imagined, so too is the power and scope of the act itself. The act <br />has been criticized for its lack of flexibility. But the absolute <br />mandate, which has proved remarkably resilient, has provided <br />strong incentives for parties involved in species conservation <br />cases to look beyond the courtroom for resolution of conflicts. <br />The initial response of developers, whose plans jeopardize a <br />species' existence, often has been to set up a win/lose battle <br />pitting economic development against species conservation. Yet <br />this sort of adversarial approach, typified by the Tellico Dam <br />case, is increasingly costly-and ultimately self-defeating. In <br />his essay in Part III, Dan Tarlock points out that the judicial <br />decisions favoring species protection in water rights cases have <br />stimulated interest in alternative ways to meet the obligations <br />of the act and still permit water development. In his discussion <br />of pesticide regulations, Jim Serfis reaches a similar conclusion: <br />"Because protection may be achieved in many different ways, <br />there is a tremendous though often untapped potential to devise <br />solutions that protect species while allowing prudent use of <br />certain pesticides." <br />The Section 7 consultation process offers a structure within <br />which diverse groups might pursue creative problem solving. In <br />Part II, Steven Yaffee elaborates on this idea, suggesting that the <br />endangered species problem is principally aland-use problem <br />and that the consultation process has "gotten the endangered <br />species program into land-use planning through the back door." <br />Similarly, in Part I, George Goggins illustrates how the act "has <br />had broad and deep consequences for land use in America." <br />Another theme, although not new, is a pivotal issue. To win <br />philosophical support for endangered species protection as an <br />abstract concept is relatively easy; to garner the necessary re- <br />sources and political support to implement on-the-ground pro- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.