It is estimated that every day we lose 150-200 species from this Earth. Of the 44,838 species that have been assessed, 16,928 are listed as endangered, meaning they are threatened with extinction. The rest of the estimated 8,700,000 species on Earth have yet to be assessed, so the number of threatened species is significantly larger than the current estimate. In the 1970s, many environmental laws were passed to curb the mass extinction of species including the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or ESA. This act has put many laws and regulations in to action to limit and reverse the negative impact that humans have on the environment and countless species. I believe that overall, the ESA is an effective approach to protecting the planet because
…show more content…
Regulations such as a buffer zone around whales are considered by illegitimate by many including a certain captain interviewed. He said that,
“I am going to have to say some of this was just feelings, that the federal government and the process was not about finding out facts, it was more about presuming that things, certain things, needed to be done, and then accumulating commentary and testimony and scientific background to put forth those preconceived notions. I had a distinct feeling that a lot of minds were made up before the process started, without giving weight to people perhaps that were out there. You can’t prove anything like that, it’s just feelings that people have” (Source 6).
Cases such as this, cause environmentalists to question how well the act is being enforced. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 was meant to “halt and reverse the trend towards species extinction, whatever the cost” (Source 12). It has done a very good job at that so far but may need some further revisions to efficiently allocate funds, promote genetic diversity, and enforce regulations among wealth hungry individuals. Without the ESA we would have lost many more species than we already have and the environment would be in an even more disastrous
Regulations such as a buffer zone around whales are considered by illegitimate by many including a certain captain interviewed. He said that,
“I am going to have to say some of this was just feelings, that the federal government and the process was not about finding out facts, it was more about presuming that things, certain things, needed to be done, and then accumulating commentary and testimony and scientific background to put forth those preconceived notions. I had a distinct feeling that a lot of minds were made up before the process started, without giving weight to people perhaps that were out there. You can’t prove anything like that, it’s just feelings that people have” (Source 6).
Cases such as this, cause environmentalists to question how well the act is being enforced. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 was meant to “halt and reverse the trend towards species extinction, whatever the cost” (Source 12). It has done a very good job at that so far but may need some further revisions to efficiently allocate funds, promote genetic diversity, and enforce regulations among wealth hungry individuals. Without the ESA we would have lost many more species than we already have and the environment would be in an even more disastrous