Why Listing May Be Forever: Perspectives on Delisting under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Editor's note: The following section constitutes a collection of papers regarding various aspects of the U.S. Endangered Species Act. These papers—two “Essays,” four “Contributed Papers,” and one “Conservation in Practice”—were submitted independently but within a relatively short time span. Because they all deal with arguably the most important environmental law in the United States, it seems appropriate to collate them into a “Conservation Focus” to bring more attention to the topic. These papers collectively demonstrate the growing influence conservation scientists are having on policy and management issues and the increased reliance of government institutions on the science behind conservation actions. Abstract: In the more than 30 years that U.S. federal endangered species legislation has been in effect, listings of endangered species have far outpaced delistings. Although it has been used by both advocates and opponents of conservation to criticize the Endangered Species Act, this disparity is neither surprising nor necessarily indicative of failure of the law. Listing typically reflects the effect of ongoing human activity on the species. Delisting therefore requires ongoing protective measures, which under current law are often effectively provided only by the Endangered Species Act itself. Consequently, lengthy and perhaps permanent residence on the list should be expected for the majority of species. Our analysis of the law and review of the limited number of delistings to date leads us to three conclusions: (1) delisting requires evaluation of the regulatory protections that will remain after removal of the species from the protected list; (2) lack of effective protection against important causes of species decline means most species will remain on the list forever; and (3) delisting should be undertaken with caution because the negative consequences of erroneous delisting generally exceed those of erroneous retention on the protected list. Overall, we argue that the limited ability to delist species demonstrates the crucial importance of the Endangered Species Act for species protection.