Simple English definitions for legal terms
Read a random definition: resolutive condition
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a law that helps protect animals and plants that are in danger of becoming extinct. It also helps protect the places where these animals and plants live. Only animals and plants that are listed as "endangered" or "threatened" are protected by this law. The law says that no one, including the government and private individuals, can harm or kill these animals or plants or damage their homes. The law also says that the government cannot do anything that might harm these animals or plants or their homes. There are some exceptions to these rules, but they are meant to be used only in special cases.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a law designed to protect species from becoming extinct due to economic growth and development that does not take conservation into account. The ESA aims to protect both the species and the ecosystems they depend on.
The ESA only protects species that are listed as "endangered" or "threatened." A species can be listed in two ways: the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) can directly list a species through its candidate assessment program, or an individual or organization can petition the FWS or NMFS to list a species.
To be considered for listing, the species must meet one of five criteria:
Potential candidate species are then prioritized, with "emergency listing" given the highest priority. Species that face a "significant risk to their wellbeing" are in this category.
Under the ESA, no federal agency may authorize, fund, or carry out any action likely to threaten or harm the existence of an endangered or threatened species (or harm their habitat). This means that federal agencies cannot consider the cost of their actions when making decisions that could harm endangered or threatened species.
Although this aspect does not apply directly to private landowners, large-scale development, logging, and mining projects usually require a federal permit, and so become subject to critical habitat regulation.
Under the ESA, no one, public or private, can "take" an endangered species of fish or wildlife. "Take" has been broadly defined to include "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect." Furthermore, the habitat as well as the endangered animal is protected from private action. This means that private landowners cannot harm or modify the habitat of endangered or threatened species.
Although the ESA appears to provide rigid protection of endangered species, various amendments have created flexibility in the statute, resulting in less protection. Examples of these exemptions and exclusions include:
These exemptions and exclusions provide some flexibility in the ESA's protection of endangered and threatened species, but they also reduce the level of protection.
An example of the ESA in action is the case of TVA v. Hill. In this case, the courts enjoined a dam that was almost complete because opening the dam would have endangered the snail darter perch, a species listed as endangered under the ESA. This case illustrates the ESA's strict protection of endangered species, even if it means halting a project that has already cost millions of dollars.
Another example is the Babbitt v. Sweet Home case, where the Supreme Court upheld the FWS's interpretation of "harm" to include "significant habitat modification or degradation." This interpretation means that private landowners cannot harm or modify the habitat of endangered or threatened species, even if they are not directly harming the animals themselves.