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
Snail Darters and Pork Barrels Revisited 63 <br />use and related activities in the United States throughout the <br />foreseeable future. [Goggins and Russell, 1982, p. 1525] <br />That conclusion still holds. <br />After recounting some opinions about the nature and context <br />of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), this essay surveys litigated <br />instances of its application to disputes arising on federal public <br />lands. We then descend from the global to the local: Two contro- <br />versies close to my home illustrate how the act has broad and <br />deep consequences for land use in America. <br />THE ESA AS AN ELEME11iT OF WILDLIFE LAW <br />One of the most fascinating aspects of wildlife law is that it <br />concretely expresses changing public attitudes about the natu- <br />ral world-the universe of ecological processes otherwise un- <br />affected by human intervention. Throughout most of human <br />history, animals (like trees) were thought to exist only to sup- <br />port human life in ways that humans determined.l In this coun- <br />try, market hunting and similar forms of wasteful slaughter <br />were the inevitable by-products of this attitude, especially as it <br />was exacerbated by our laissez-faire frontier philosophy. Realiz- <br />ing that greed was killing the. golden goose along with bison and <br />passenger pigeons, people eventually demanded an end to the <br />unregulated commons. The systems of controls developed by the <br />early state fish and game agencies-the bureaucratic reincarna- <br />tions of the Sheriff of Nottingham-were premised on util- <br />itarian ideals. The pioneer wildlife management professionals <br />regarded game animals, fish, and birds as "crops" to be nur- <br />tured during breeding seasons and then "harvested" when ma- <br />ture. These primitive attempts to avert the tragedy of the <br />commons manifested societal common sense: If we kill all the <br />deer, there will be none to hunt next year. <br />Utilitarianism is still the prevailing philosophy in mundane <br />state hunting and fishing regulation. Many people and much law <br />still regard some wildlife species as deserving only of eradica- <br />tion. (See generally Goggins and Evan, 1982.) But the Endan- <br />gered Species Act of 19732 marks both the culmination of a new <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.