7749 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Act's History and Framework 17 Despite the alleviation of certain burdensome listing require- ments, an enormous backlog of species has developed in the listing process. By 1988, more than 3,000 species had become stuck in the listing pipeline.$ To prevent candidate species from further population reductions or even extinction, Congress once again amended the listing program in 1988 to require the inte- rior secretary to monitor the status of candidate species and, if necessary, make use of emergency listing powers. Interagency Consultation One of the most far-reaching provisions of the Endangered Spe- cies Act is its requirement that federal agencies and depart- ments through their own actions or actions funded or permitted by them must not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or its habitat.9 To fulfill their duties under Section 7, agencies planning actions in an area used by an endangered or threatened species must consult with either the Fish and Wild- life Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service. The underlying power of this provision was not fully recog- nized until the landmark decision in TVA v. Hill. Plaintiffs sought to stop construction of amultimillion-dollar dam pro- posed by Tennessee Valley Authority by charging that it jeopar- dized the last remaining habitat of the endangered snail darter. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the act, as written, holds endangered species protection above all other considerations. That decision prompted Con- gress to take a second look at Section 7 in 1978. The basic mandate of Section 7, however, survived the political onslaught. A compromise was forged whereby a committee (nicknamed the "God Committee") was established to review applications for exemptions to Section 7. To grant such an exemption, the com- mittee must determine that no "reasonable and prudent" alter- natives exist to the agency's proposed activity-and that the benefits of the action clearly outweigh preservation of the en- dangered species it threatens. To date, few agencies have opted to put a project to this test. In addition to creating the exemption process, the 1978 amendments formalized the consultation process. In response to the TVA controversy, Congress also prohibited the "irrevers-