The New Endangered Species Act: Who Are We Protecting?
An Animal Rights Article from All-Creatures.org

FROM NHES National Humane Education Society
September 2019

In 1973 when the ESA was enacted, lawmakers foresaw the dangerous influence that commerce could have on listing decisions in order to free up more land for the logging, ranching, and oil industries, so they specified that listing decisions would be based solely on scientific research "without reference to possible economic or other impacts of such determination." The latest revision completely removes this language, opening the door for businesses to persuade rulings in their favor, regardless of the animals' desperate circumstances.

Photo: EarthFirstNewsire

In the early morning on the southern Great Plains, with a lot of luck, one might hear the light warbles of the elusive prairie chicken. With more luck, one might even glimpse the colorful male bird displaying his unique courting dance - with bright red patches of skin billowing around his neck as he sings to his prospective mate, his fiery orange eyebrows protrude atop his grey-feathered head while he taps his feet on the arid ground. Once a normal sight to see - in the early 19th century millions of these birds thrived on the Great Plains - now, one must sit and wait for hours near a led (the chicken' mating grounds) to have an opportunity to view this spectacle of nature.

As their population dwindles to below 40,000, conservationists have been fighting to designate the lesser prairie chicken as a "threatened species" on the Endangered Species List - meaning although the animal is not officially considered an endangered species, they will be granted the same protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) so as to prevent any further degradation of the population. However, now under the Trump Administration's latest revision of the ESA, any species labeled as "threatened" will not receive the same securities as those who are endangered; their protections will only be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Why the change? One need only to delve into the lesser prairie chicken's recent plight to understand the government's motivations. In 2015, just one year after the species was awarded a "threatened" title on the Endangered Species List, a federal judge ruled to de-list the bird after the oil and gas industries complained that it would cost their companies billions of dollars in revenue in order to safeguard the land on which the prairie chicken lives. Under the new rule, the Fish and Wildlife Service (the federal agency that oversees the ESA) could label the lesser prairie chicken as "threatened" but give it no protections whatsoever, thus jeopardizing the species' population to even lower numbers.

In 1973 when the ESA was enacted, lawmakers foresaw the dangerous influence that commerce could have on listing decisions in order to free up more land for the logging, ranching, and oil industries, so they specified that listing decisions would be based solely on scientific research "without reference to possible economic or other impacts of such determination." The latest revision completely removes this language, opening the door for businesses to persuade rulings in their favor, regardless of the animals' desperate circumstances.

Although the changes may seem subtle at first glance, the implications are great. The lesser prairie chicken is the canary in the coalmine for dozens of species who rely on the Great Plains' diverse ecosystem to thrive. Short-changing the environment in the name of business and progress is a temporary triumph with irreversible consequences. The Endangered Species Act has now prioritized industry over the wildlife it was designed to protect... so who is the ESA protecting now, if not the animals?

---

Return to Animal Rights Articles