Endangered species recovery requires flexibility, not strict regulations

Published June 15, 2021 12:00am ET



Nearly 50 years ago, President Richard Nixon signed the Endangered Species Act into law. It was uncontentious at the time; little did anyone know what was to come. Though intended to protect imperiled species, the law has become an endless source of conflict.

The Endangered Species Act was designed to do two things: prevent species from going extinct and promote their recovery back to health. The good news is only 1% of ESA-listed species have gone extinct. On the other hand, less than 2% of species have recovered and been delisted. The truth is: While strict regulations may provide a backstop against extinction, those same onerous restrictions aren’t always better for species’ recovery, oftentimes making listed species a liability. That is what we are seeing today.

Already a print subscriber? Click here to login/register your account

Trusted reporting.Unlimited access.

Subscribe for full access to Washington Examiner coverage, expert political analysis, and subscriber-only journalism.

Get Unlimited Access

Already a member? Log in

Cancel anytime.