A White Paper: Endangered Species Act of 1973

Home Browse Search

Iii. DEBATE ISSUES 01 PO4 NAR 'Z1 ' °2 13:47 Species versus Biodiversity. Do we, as a nation, want to continue attempting to save each species and sub- species, relying on habitat preservation, or do we want to maintain examples of the biodiversity by preserving entire ecosystems? • Can we, as a nation, afford the ESA? Can the nation afford the Endangered Species Act? The full costs - to the federal budget and the social costs to the nation - must be disclosed for an intelligent debate of the impacts of the law. • Use of Public Lands. Since the Act directly affects how national public lands can be used, the people of the United States must participate in that decision. The Act, as currently implemented, has proved to be resoundingly successful in halting development or commercial activities on public and private lands. • Private Property Protection. The Constitutional protection of private property must be affirmed in regards to environmental regulations which restrict use and value of private property. • Flexibility and Management Alternatives. Revisions of the Act must include use of alternatives, including conservation or mitigation measures, to protect a species. a Resource Management Decisions Must Be Taken Out Of The Courts. Judicial review of "negative decisions" made by the Secretary under the Act should be deleted from the law. Practice has defined "negative decisions" as those decisions not to list a species under the Act. An Administrative appeal process must precede any judicial review. • Exemption Procedure. The Exemption Procedure must offer a practical opportunity for appeals when irreconcilable conflicts arise between the demonstrated needs of people and the ecological requirements of threatened species. • Public Participation. The Act itself must provide for full public participation in decisions which significantly affect its social well- being. The decision process must be integrated into a complete package (listing, recovery plans and costs) for public understanding and comment. -2-