Projected bobolink losses at +3C from Audubon put its range entirely outside the US.

Scientific evidence like that explored in this vignette has entered federal litigation over the endangered species act (ESA). Synthetic discussion provide background for the debate next week.

Activities today

Follow up on BBS and ebird examples, data analysis and application:
Compare the trends you see in the wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina) and other species to the projection maps of Audubon and PBGJAM.
Do increasers and decreasers tend to have positive or negative interactions htimepre:dist2shore? If so, why or why not? (Recall: positive interaction means that increasing either variable increases the effect of the other. And vice versa).
Summarize research so far: in group discussion, summary for class
Within group preparation

For next class: Debate prep

Context

The 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA) was intended “to provide a means to conserve the ecosystems upon which listed species depend, to develop a program for the conservation of listed species, and to achieve the purposes of certain treaties and conventions.” It focused on individual species.

In 2016, the Obama administration ruled that critical habitat for an endangered species could include places where it does not currently occur. In other words, “endangered species” includes conservation of places. These can include areas viewed as essential to the recovery of a species. In these areas, permitting for activities would be closely regulated. These activities include “a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat for the conservation of a listed species.”

By expanding the reach of the ESA, the Obama administration angered some interest groups, resulting in a lawsuit filed by a number of states in 2016. With the change in administration, the litigation was put on hold in 2017, and the Trump administration agreed to revisit this rule. During the Trump administration, the ESA was weakened in a number of ways. The litigation that followed continued into 2022.

We will debate these issues from the perspectives of environmentalists, land owners, and industry. For next time you will gather background research to defend one of three positions.

Issues to consider

When does preservation of a species depend on preservation of habitat?
When does preservation of habitat impinge on land-owner rights?
When does the broader interest of society at large outweigh individual rights to manage habitat as a land-owner sees fit?
Is there a difference between ‘local extinction’ and ‘global extinction’?
Should a critical habitat designation include places where a species does not now occur? Including changes in distribution that could occur with climate change?

Groups will have different interests

environmentalists
property-rights advocates (land-owners)
private industry

Assignment for each group, prepare today in class

Prepare a one-page outline of research for your interest group, including a bird example, where there is evidence that habitat preservation could be critical for its survival, or not. Your example species does not need to be on the endangered species list, but the circumstances should be relevant to the case. You might consult this database on endangered species.
Prepare a ten-minute position statement.
Prepare to defend your position based on questions from the other group(s).
Post to Sakai a one-page outline and position statement and references.