Piping Plover C. Perez, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The peregrine falcon, the grizzly bear, and the whooping crane will make the journey into the 21st century thanks to a modern day Noah's Ark--the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Celebrating its 25th anniversary in 1998, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has provided passage into the next millennium for numerous wildlife species. Although the ESA came too late to save the Carolina parakeet and the passenger pigeon, over the past 25 years it has saved many other species from near certain oblivion.

The National Audubon Society's report, "Ark to the Future: 25 years of the Endangered Species Act," demonstrates that during its 25-year history, the ESA has made a real difference in the protection of species. As well as the ESA has worked, however, Ark to the Future calls for Congress to update the act for its next 25 years and describes the five key improvements needed to take the ESA into the millennium.

The ESA Ark: Twenty-Five Years of Saving Species

When the ESA first became law on December 28, 1973, no other nation had ever taken such a bold step to protect and recover its imperiled wildlife. Scientists estimate that in the 200 years preceding the passage of the ESA, more than 500 species became extinct in the United States. Hundreds of species were sliding towards extinction due to loss and degradation of habitat, misuse and overuse of chemicals and pesticides, wildlife trade abuses, hunting, introduction of exotic species, and disease. The bald eagle, its numbers decimated by DDT contamination, poaching, declines in prey species, and loss and degradation of habitat, was the most visible symbol of our nation's declining wildlife.

In response to this growing crisis of extinction, Congress overwhelmingly passed the ESA. Congress' action was designed to achieve twin goals: to halt the decline of our native wildlife; and to recover imperiled species to a point where the protections of the act no longer would be needed.

In the ensuing 25 years, the act has been highly successful in achieving its first goal--numerous species have been rescued from the brink of extinction. According to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), one of the agencies charged with carrying out the ESA, nearly 60 percent of the species listed in the first years of the ESA are either stable or improving in status. Species that might have vanished forever over the past 25 years have been rescued from that fate. FWS statistics indicate that of the more than 1,500 globally and nationally endangered species listed under the ESA since 1978, only seven, less than one percent of the total, have subsequently become extinct.

Yet, despite noble intentions and these notable successes, the ESA has largely failed to achieve its second goal of recovering listed species. FWS admits that nearly a third of all listed species are continuing to decline in spite of the protections of the ESA. This is due, in large part, to two factors: a lack of funding for implementation of the act; and a lack of political will for full implementation and strong enforcement of the act's protections for endangered and threatened species.

In recent years, shrill rhetoric from private property rights advocates has increased to near-deafening proportions. As a result, both the public, and state and federal legislators have been misled about the economic impacts of endangered species protection, eroding the broad-based political will that made the ESA a reality 25 years ago. In this hostile political environment, the debate over the ESA has become highly polarized, and efforts to renew the act in Congress have ground to a halt. Congress has not reauthorized the ESA for more than five years, and each year providing realistic funding levels for the act has become more contentious. Congress has passed riders on appropriations bills that instituted a year-long listing moratorium in 1996 and placed restrictions on the application of the ESA to flood repairs in 1997, and funding for ESA programs has remained relatively flat for the past five years in the face of ever-increasing need.

Although battered and bruised, the ESA remains the most effective wildlife protection tool we have.

California Condor Noel Snyder, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The ESA Ark -- How it Works

The Endangered Species List -- What's on the Ark?

Under the ESA, a species or subspecies is listed as endangered if it is in danger of extinction. A threatened species is one on the verge of becoming endangered. The list of endangered and threatened species includes both domestic species and globally declining species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). A "species" is a full species, such as the peregrine falcon, a subspecies, like the southwest willow flycatcher, or a distinct population segment of a vertebrate species, such as the grizzly bear, whose lower 48 population is listed, while its Alaska population is not. As of September 1998, the list of threatened and endangered plants and animals included 1,154 domestic species and subspecies of animals and plants.

Most of these species are the responsibility of the FWS, part of the Department of the Interior, which is charged with the conservation of terrestrial species and freshwater fish. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), under the Department of Commerce, is responsible for marine species and anadromous fish, such as salmon, that spend part of their lifecycles in salt water. The complete endangered species list is published in the Code of Federal Regulations and is available from either FWS or NMFS or on the FWS web site at http://www.fws.gov/.

Dusky Seaside Sparrow Bill Leenhauts, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Recovery Plans -- Leaving the Ark

Once a species is listed, a recovery plan is drafted, which outlines steps that must be taken to help a species so that it may be removed from the list. Currently only about 60 percent of listed species have recovery plans.

When a species' status has improved, it may be downlisted or even removed from the list. Since 1973, eight species have been removed from the list due to recovery; 15 species have been downgraded from endangered to threatened. The bald eagle was downlisted from endangered to threatened in 1995, and the brown pelican was removed from the list over most of its range in 1985. In 1998, Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt announced that 22 species, including the bald eagle and peregrine falcon, would be considered for downlisting or delisting over the next two years.

Protecting Listed Species -- Is the Ark Leaking?

The Act prohibits taking of a listed species--this includes not only killing or harming an individual of a listed species, but also destroying its habitat. Habitat destruction is a significant factor in the decline of more than 88 percent of all listed species. Unless the act can halt further loss of habitat and restore additional habitat, the list of endangered species will continue to grow, and few species will achieve recovery. Achievement of this goal will require not only the full participation of all federal and state land management agencies, but also the cooperation of private landowners.

The ESA requires that federal agencies make sure that their actions will not jeopardize the survival or recovery of any listed species. If an agency believes that its actions may affect a listed species, it is required to consult with the FWS or NMFS. This process may result in the modification of an agency's action, or in extremely rare cases, the cancellation of a proposed agency action. According to FWS, it informally consulted on approximately 200,000 projects between 1987 and 1997. Of that number, fewer than 6,000 actions required more formal consultation procedures, and less than one percent of that number could not proceed at all.

A non-federal agency or private landowner may obtain a permit to take a listed species or its habitat in the course of an "otherwise lawful activity," such as development or timber cutting, by submitting a Habitat Conservation Plan, or HCP. The HCP must outline steps that the landowner will take to minimize and mitigate the impacts of the permitted take on listed species. This provision was added to the act in 1982. By 1992 there were only about a dozen HCPs nationwide, but over the past six years, the number of HCPs has exploded. There are now about 250 plans nationwide, with approximately 200 more plans under development.

Numerous problems have accompanied this rapid growth. The agencies charged with carrying out the ESA have minimal funding to ensure that these agreements fulfill their promise. Audubon and many scientists who have studied the issue are concerned that this lack of funding not only leads to low-quality plans but also will prevent the agencies from ensuring that plans are fully implemented. In addition, recent reports indicate that many HCPs are based on inadequate scientific information, and our research indicates that many lack adequate funding and monitoring.

Coastal California Gnatcatcher B. "Moose" Peterson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Funding the Ark

Since its enactment in 1973, the ESA has not received the funding that it needs to achieve its ambitious conservation goals. Lack of money has led to a backlog of species awaiting listing and the development of recovery plans. In addition, the process of approving and monitoring HCPs has not received sufficient funding to ensure that this rapidly growing program functions as intended.

Bald Eagle Don Pfitzer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Building a Better Ark: The Future of the ESA

Congress has reached an impasse over ESA funding battles and debates about whether and how to protect species. For nearly a decade, efforts have been made to raise funding levels and correct legislative problems with the act. No action has occurred because of the intense feelings that this law has engendered.

It is now obvious that Congress needs to revise the ESA, and needs to do it soon. The battle for revising the law--or reauthorization--has gone on too long, and has taken its toll on the ESA program and on the wildlife it seeks to protect. But what should a reauthorization bill include? Efforts to pass a reauthorization bill that would weaken the ESA have failed over the last two Congresses, as the American public has consistently shown its support for a strong ESA.

Audubon supports a strong ESA and will fight for a reauthorization bill that provides effective protections for listed and declining species while also providing incentives to private landowners who help to protect species. The following provisions, if enacted, would accomplish these goals:

• Species should not be permitted to decline to the brink of extinction, a point when conservation and recovery measures may be both difficult and costly, or worse, unsuccessful.
• Reauthorization of the act must include new, more proactive tools to promote the recovery of species on federal lands.
• Requirements for HCPs must be strengthened to ensure that they are consistent with the recovery of listed species.
• Amendments to the act should encourage municipalities and state agencies to engage in large regional planning efforts to conserve the endangered ecosystems that are home to listed species. Such efforts are a more efficient use of scarce resources and offer a better means of dealing with species decline across an entire landscape rather than do piecemeal plans with small, individual landowners.
• The ESA should be amended to provide more incentives to landowners who manage their land to protect and conserve listed and declining species.

Each of these amendments to the ESA was included in a bill introduced in the 105th Congress by Representative George Miller (D-CA). By the end of the session, the Miller Bill had 108 bi-partisan co-sponsors--a clear indication of broad-based political support for a strong ESA. Audubon will be working hard to encourage enactment of this legislation.

A Voyage to the Future

The ESA at 25 is a success story. For example, without the ESA, the California condor might have disappeared forever. With the ESA, the condor population has grown from 30 to 150 in the past decade, and there are now two wild populations of this awe-inspiring bird in California and Arizona.

But the ESA can do more than preserve the status quo. It can do more than save a few charismatic species. The ESA stands as a symbol of our nation's commitment to the future, to ensuring that our children inherit a country that includes the incredible wealth of plants and animals that we were given by our parents.

Reauthorization of the ESA is long overdue. The ESA Ark needs to be strengthened, its focus changed from preventing extinction to promoting recovery. More funding for recovery planning and implementation, and for key programs such as HCPs, is sorely needed. We must ensure that this vital law continues to meet and exceed its goals. We owe it to ourselves and to our future.

Copyright 1998, National Audubon Society