When the act passed in 1973, the science of ecology was just branching from its overprotective mother, divide-and-define biology. Since then, humans have had to admit our hubris, as there is no way for us, as a species, to fully comprehend the life cycle and interactions of any other species, let alone all of the others with which every species interacts.
Because we don’t fully understand any species, we have a difficult time arguing for protection — and restored habitat more closely resembles what we think the species needs. The ESA’s single-species emphasis has preserved habitat, but quickly loses its efficacy in the face of a dynamic political situation. We risk putting all our passenger pigeon eggs in one legislative basket if we defend an ecosystem with one species. Let’s take Pombo’s impetus and really protect ALL species.
- Deb Dedon on Should the president of the Navajo Nation speak Navajo?
- Deb O'Neill on Wyoming grapples with how to fund wildlife conservation
- Bill Williams on Wyoming grapples with how to fund wildlife conservation
- Nathan Johnson on Wyoming grapples with how to fund wildlife conservation
- Jim Scarborough on For climate activists, a bright spot in a dismal election