Journal
ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECOLOGY EVOLUTION AND SYSTEMATICS
Volume 39, Issue -, Pages 279-299Publisher
ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173538
Keywords
critical habitat; expenditures; extinction; listing; recovery plan
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Arguably the most notable success of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is that listed species improve in status through time. More species are down-listed thin the converse; more species transition from stable to improving status than the converse. Although Sonic listed Species have gone extinct, this number is smaller thin expected. Given modest recovery funding, the fraction of listed species responding positively is remarkable. Several factors have been linked to improving species status including recovery expenditures, critical habitat listing, and time Spent under protection. The inability of government to fully empower the agencies to implement the law has been the most notable failure of the E SA. Listing of species has not marched need, recovery expenditures do not match need or agency-set priorities, and critical habitat determinations have lagged. Alternative protection strategies to listing may be having a positive effect, but are difficult to assess because of sparse data.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available