Endangered_Species_Act

context: The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) is one of the few dozens of United States environmental laws passed in the 1970s, and serves as the enacting legislation to carry out the provisions outlined in The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The ESA was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on December 28, 1973, it was designed to protect critically imperiled species from extinction as a "consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation." The U.S. Supreme Court found that "the plain intent of Congress in enacting" the ESA "was to halt and reverse the trend toward species extinction, whatever the cost." The Act is administered by two federal agencies, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
qas: answers: text: Richard Nixon
question: Which president signed the Act into law?

answers: text: December 28
question: On what day was the Endangered Species Act signed?

answers: text: to halt and reverse the trend toward species extinction, whatever the cost
question: What did the Supreme Court cite as the intent of Congress in enacting the Endangered Species Act?

answers: text: the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
question: Which two federal agencies administer the Act?

answers: text: 1973
question: In what year did the Endangered Species Act become law?

context: One species in particular received widespread attention—the whooping crane. The species' historical range extended from central Canada South to Mexico, and from Utah to the Atlantic coast. Unregulated hunting and habitat loss contributed to a steady decline in the whooping crane population until, by 1890, it had disappeared from its primary breeding range in the north central United States. It would be another eight years before the first national law regulating wildlife commerce was signed, and another two years before the first version of the endangered species act was passed. The whooping crane population by 1941 was estimated at about only 16 birds still in the wild.
qas: answers: text: central Canada South to Mexico, and from Utah to the Atlantic coast
question: What was the historical range of the whooping crane?

answers: text: Unregulated hunting and habitat loss
question: What two issues caused steady decline in the whooping crane population?

answers: text: 16 birds
question: What was the estimated population of the whooping crane in 1941?

answers: text: eight years
question: How many years after the noted absence of the whooping crane from its breeding range did the first law regulating wildlife commerce pass

context: The Lacey Act of 1900 was the first federal law that regulated commercial animal markets. It prohibited interstate commerce of animals killed in violation of state game laws, and covered all fish and wildlife and their parts or products, as well as plants. Other legislation followed, including the Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929, a 1937 treaty prohibiting the hunting of right and gray whales, and the Bald Eagle Protection Act of 1940. These later laws had a low cost to society–the species were relatively rare–and little opposition was raised.
qas: answers: text: Lacey Act of 1900
question: What was the first federal law that regulated wildlife commerce?

answers: text: interstate commerce of animals killed in violation of state game laws
question: What did the first federal wildlife commerce law prohibit?

answers: text: all fish and wildlife and their parts or products, as well as plants
question: What wildlife was covered by the first federal wildlife commerce regulation?

answers: text: Bald Eagle Protection Act of 1940
question: What law passed in 1940 regarding the population of the U.S. national bird?

context: It authorized the Secretary of the Interior to list endangered domestic fish and wildlife and allowed the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to spend up to $15 million per year to buy habitats for listed species. It also directed federal land agencies to preserve habitat on their lands. The Act also consolidated and even expanded authority for the Secretary of the Interior to manage and administer the National Wildlife Refuge System. Other public agencies were encouraged, but not required, to protect species. The act did not address the commerce in endangered species and parts.
qas: answers: text: list endangered domestic fish and wildlife
question: What did the Endangered Species Act authorize the Secretary of the Interior to do?

answers: text: $15 million per year
question: The Endangered Species Act permitted how much annual expenditure by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for habitat purchase?

answers: text: the National Wildlife Refuge System
question: The Endangered Species Act gave the Secretary of the Interior administrative power of what organization?

answers: text: The act did not address the commerce in endangered species and parts
question: How did the Endangered Species Act impact wildlife commerce?

answers: text: Other public agencies were encouraged, but not required, to protect species
question: How did the Endangered Species Act impact other agencies not specifically mentioned in the Act?

context: This first list is referred to as the "Class of '67" in The Endangered Species Act at Thirty, Volume 1, which concludes that habitat destruction, the biggest threat to those 78 species, is still the same threat to the currently listed species. It included only vertebrates because the Department of Interior's definition of "fish and wildlife" was limited to vertebrates. However, with time, researchers noticed that the animals on the endangered species list still were not getting enough protection, thus further threatening their extinction. The endangered species program was expanded by the Endangered Species Act of 1969.
qas: answers: text: "Class of '67"
question: What is the nickname given to the first listing of endangered species?

answers: text: It included only vertebrates
question: How was the first listing limited in what species were listed?

answers: text: habitat destruction
question: What was concluded to be the biggest threat to the listed species?

answers: text: the animals on the endangered species list still were not getting enough protection, thus further threatening their extinction
question: How did being listed initially impact species?

context: The Endangered Species Conservation Act (P. L. 91-135), passed in December, 1969, amended the original law to provide additional protection to species in danger of "worldwide extinction" by prohibiting their importation and subsequent sale in the United States. It expanded the Lacey Act's ban on interstate commerce to include mammals, reptiles, amphibians, mollusks and crustaceans. Reptiles were added mainly to reduce the rampant poaching of alligators and crocodiles. This law was the first time that invertebrates were included for protection.
qas: answers: text: December, 1969
question: When was the Endangered Species Conservation Act passed?

answers: text: by prohibiting their importation and subsequent sale in the United States
question: How did the Endangered Species Conservation Act benefit endangered species?

answers: text: mammals, reptiles, amphibians, mollusks and crustaceans
question: What did the Endangered Species Conservation Act add to the wildlife definition of the Lacey Act?

answers: text: alligators and crocodiles
question: What two reptiles were particularly of interest for the inclusion of "reptiles" in the Endangered Species Conservation Act?

answers: text: This law was the first time that invertebrates were included for protection
question: What important precedent did this set for invertebrates?

context: President Richard Nixon declared current species conservation efforts to be inadequate and called on the 93rd United States Congress to pass comprehensive endangered species legislation. Congress responded with a completely rewritten law, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 which was signed by Nixon on December 28, 1973 (Pub.L. 93–205). It was written by a team of lawyers and scientists, including the first appointed head of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ),an outgrowth of NEPA (The "National Environmental Policy Act of 1969") Dr. Russell E. Train. Dr. Train was assisted by a core group of staffers, including Dr. Earl Baysinger at EPA (currently Assistant Chief, Office of Endangered Species and International. Activities), Dick Gutting (U.S. Commerce Dept. lawyer, currently joined NOAA the previous year (1972), and Dr. Gerard A. "Jerry" Bertrand, a marine biologist (Ph.D, Oregon State University) by training, who had transferred from his post as the Scientific Adviser to the U.S Army Corps of Engineers, office of the Commandant of the Corp. to join the newly formed White House office. The staff, under Dr. Train's leadership, incorporated dozens of new principles and ideas into the landmark legislation; crafting a document that completely changed the direction of environmental conservation in the United States. Dr. Bertrand is credited with writing the most challenged section of the Act, the "takings" clause - Section 2.
qas: answers: text: Dr. Russell E. Train
question: Who led the team of lawyers and scientists who crafted the Endangered Species Act of 1973?

answers: text: the Council on Environmental Quality
question: The team leader was the first appointed head of what organization?

answers: text: Dr. Gerard A. "Jerry" Bertrand
question: Who wrote the most challenged section of the Act?

answers: text: Dr. Earl Baysinger
question: Who was the core staffer to the legislation that worked for the EPA and continued to work in the Office of Endangered Species?

answers: text: the 93rd United States Congress
question: What Congress called for the drafting of the Endangered Species Act of 1973?

context: A species can be listed in two ways. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or NOAA Fisheries (also called the National Marine Fisheries Service) can directly list a species through its candidate assessment program, or an individual or organizational petition may request that the FWS or NMFS list a species. A "species" under the act can be a true taxonomic species, a subspecies, or in the case of vertebrates, a "distinct population segment." The procedures are the same for both types except with the person/organization petition, there is a 90-day screening period.
qas: answers: text: two ways
question: How many different ways can a species be added to the endangered list?

answers: text: candidate assessment program
question: What federal program is used to list a species?

answers: text: 90-day screening period
question: How long is the screening period of an individual's or organization's petition to add a species to the list

answers: text: a "distinct population segment."
question: In the case of vertebrates, what is the most lenient interpretation of "species"?

context: During the listing process, economic factors cannot be considered, but must be " based solely on the best scientific and commercial data available." The 1982 amendment to the ESA added the word "solely" to prevent any consideration other than the biological status of the species. Congress rejected President Ronald Reagan's Executive Order 12291 which required economic analysis of all government agency actions. The House committee's statement was "that economic considerations have no relevance to determinations regarding the status of species."
qas: answers: text: "solely"
question: What word was added to the Endangered Species Act in 1982?

answers: text: the biological status of the species
question: Because of the change to the Endangered Species Act in 1982, what is the only consideration for being listed as endangered?

answers: text: Ronald Reagan
question: Which president issued an Executive Order that required financial consideration of all government actions?

answers: text: Congress rejected
question: What did Congress do to the Executive Order that would have included financial considerations as a factor for a species to be listed?

context: Public notice is given through legal notices in newspapers, and communicated to state and county agencies within the species' area. Foreign nations may also receive notice of a listing. A public hearing is mandatory if any person has requested one within 45 days of the published notice. "The purpose of the notice and comment requirement is to provide for meaningful public participation in the rulemaking process." summarized the Ninth Circuit court in the case of Idaho Farm Bureau Federation v. Babbitt.
qas: answers: text: through legal notices in newspapers, and communicated to state and county agencies within the species' area
question: How is public notice given regarding a listing?

answers: text: 45 days
question: How long after a published notice of the listing may a public hearing regarding the listing be requested?

answers: text: Foreign nations may also receive notice of a listing
question: Do listing notices cross international soil?

context: The provision of the law in Section 4 that establishes critical habitat is a regulatory link between habitat protection and recovery goals, requiring the identification and protection of all lands, water and air necessary to recover endangered species. To determine what exactly is critical habitat, the needs of open space for individual and population growth, food, water, light or other nutritional requirements, breeding sites, seed germination and dispersal needs, and lack of disturbances are considered.
qas: answers: text: Section 4
question: What section of the Endangered Species Act establishes critical habitat regulations?

answers: text: habitat protection and recovery goals
question: Critical habitat regulation links what two topics?

answers: text: the identification and protection of all lands, water and air necessary to recover endangered species
question: What does critical habitat regulation require?

answers: text: seed germination and dispersal needs
question: What is an example of a critical habitat consideration that would apply to plant wildlife?

context: All federal agencies are prohibited from authorizing, funding or carrying out actions that "destroy or adversely modify" critical habitats (Section 7(a) (2)). While the regulatory aspect of critical habitat does not apply directly to private and other non-federal landowners, large-scale development, logging and mining projects on private and state land typically require a federal permit and thus become subject to critical habitat regulations. Outside or in parallel with regulatory processes, critical habitats also focus and encourage voluntary actions such as land purchases, grant making, restoration, and establishment of reserves.
qas: answers: text: require a federal permit
question: How are non-federal government activities that might impact critical habitat often subject to the Endangered Species Act?

answers: text: land purchases, grant making, restoration, and establishment of reserves
question: What are some non-regulation actions that critical habitats encourage?

answers: text: federal agencies are prohibited from authorizing, funding or carrying out actions that "destroy or adversely modify" critical habitats
question: What does the Endangered Species Act detail about government action regarding critical habitats?

context: The ESA requires that critical habitat be designated at the time of or within one year of a species being placed on the endangered list. In practice, most designations occur several years after listing. Between 1978 and 1986 the FWS regularly designated critical habitat. In 1986 the Reagan Administration issued a regulation limiting the protective status of critical habitat. As a result, few critical habitats were designated between 1986 and the late 1990s. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, a series of court orders invalidated the Reagan regulations and forced the FWS and NMFS to designate several hundred critical habitats, especially in Hawaii, California and other western states. Midwest and Eastern states received less critical habitat, primarily on rivers and coastlines. As of December, 2006, the Reagan regulation has not yet been replaced though its use has been suspended. Nonetheless, the agencies have generally changed course and since about 2005 have tried to designate critical habitat at or near the time of listing.
qas: answers: text: within one year
question: What is the time limit for designating a species critical habitat after the species has been added to the endangered list?

answers: text: the Reagan Administration
question: Which presidential adminstration limited the protective status of critical habitat in 1986?

answers: text: Hawaii, California and other western states
question: After the limitations placed on critical habitat were lifted by the courts, where were critical habitats established primarily?

answers: text: primarily on rivers and coastlines
question: Where have the majority of critical habitats in the Midwest and Eastern states been located geographically?

context: Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are required to create an Endangered Species Recovery Plan outlining the goals, tasks required, likely costs, and estimated timeline to recover endangered species (i.e., increase their numbers and improve their management to the point where they can be removed from the endangered list). The ESA does not specify when a recovery plan must be completed. The FWS has a policy specifying completion within three years of the species being listed, but the average time to completion is approximately six years. The annual rate of recovery plan completion increased steadily from the Ford administration (4) through Carter (9), Reagan (30), Bush I (44), and Clinton (72), but declined under Bush II (16 per year as of 9/1/06).
qas: answers: text: goals, tasks required, likely costs, and estimated timeline to recover endangered species
question: What four topics are required in an Endangered Species Recovery Plan?

answers: text: The ESA does not specify when a recovery plan must be completed.
question: What is the time limit for completing an Endangered Species Recovery Plan?

answers: text: completion within three years
question: What Recovery Plan duration the does Fish and Wildlife Service plan for in their policies?

answers: text: approximately six years
question: What is the average time of completion of an Endangered Species Recovery Plan?

answers: text: Clinton (72)
question: Which president had the most completed Recovery Plans during their administration?

context: The question to be answered is whether a listed species will be harmed by the action and, if so, how the harm can be minimized. If harm cannot be avoided, the project agency can seek an exemption from the Endangered Species Committee, an ad hoc panel composed of members from the executive branch and at least one appointee from the state where the project is to occur. Five of the seven committee members must vote for the exemption to allow taking (to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or significant habitat modification, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct) of listed species.
qas: answers: text: whether a listed species will be harmed by the action and, if so, how the harm can be minimized
question: What is the primary consideration for determining if projects may be carried out in areas with endangered species?

answers: text: the Endangered Species Committee
question: If a species may be harmed, who holds final say on whether the project may proceed?

answers: text: seven
question: How many members are on the ad hoc panel that allows project exemptions for cases where a species may harmed?

answers: text: Five
question: How many votes must be in favor of the exemption in order to award the exemption?

answers: text: at least one appointee from the state where the project is to occur
question: What is one specific requirement regarding the make-up of the exmeption panel?

context: Long before the exemption is considered by the Endangered Species Committee, the Forest Service, and either the FWS or the NMFS will have consulted on the biological implications of the timber harvest. The consultation can be informal, to determine if harm may occur; and then formal if the harm is believed to be likely. The questions to be answered in these consultations are whether the species will be harmed, whether the habitat will be harmed and if the action will aid or hinder the recovery of the listed species.
qas: answers: text: the Forest Service, and either the FWS or the NMFS
question: Who reviews exemption considerations before the Endangered Species committee?

answers: text: to determine if harm may occur
question: During informal consultation, what is the goal?

answers: text: if the harm is believed to be likely
question: What prompts the need for formal consultation?

answers: text: whether the species will be harmed, whether the habitat will be harmed and if the action will aid or hinder the recovery
question: What considerations are weighed during the consultations?

context: There have been six instances as of 2009 in which the exemption process was initiated. Of these six, one was granted, one was partially granted, one was denied and three were withdrawn. Donald Baur, in The Endangered Species Act: law, policy, and perspectives, concluded," ... the exemption provision is basically a nonfactor in the administration of the ESA. A major reason, of course, is that so few consultations result in jeopardy opinions, and those that do almost always result in the identification of reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid jeopardy."
qas: answers: text: six
question: How many times has the exemption process been used, as of 2009?

answers: text: one was granted, one was partially granted, one was denied and three were withdrawn
question: What were the results of those exemption petitions?

answers: text: few consultations result in jeopardy opinions
question: Why is this exemption provision often considered a nonfactor?

answers: text: in the identification of reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid jeopardy.
question: How can jeopardy opinions be dissuaded?

context: More than half of habitat for listed species is on non-federal property, owned by citizens, states, local governments, tribal governments and private organizations. Before the law was amended in 1982, a listed species could be taken only for scientific or research purposes. The amendment created a permit process to circumvent the take prohibition called a Habitat Conservation Plan or HCP to give incentives to non-federal land managers and private landowners to help protect listed and unlisted species, while allowing economic development that may harm ("take") the species.
qas: answers: text: non-federal property, owned by citizens, states, local governments, tribal governments and private organizations
question: Who owns the majority of critical habitat?

answers: text: Habitat Conservation Plan
question: What program gives incentives to private landowners to protect species on their land?

answers: text: only for scientific or research purposes
question: Before the amendment in 1982, under what situations could a listed species be displaced?

context: The person or organization submits a HCP and if approved by the agency (FWS or NMFS), will be issued an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) which allows a certain number of "takes" of the listed species. The permit may be revoked at any time and can allow incidental takes for varying amounts of time. For instance, the San Bruno Habitat Conservation Plan/ Incidental Take Permit is good for 30 years and the Wal-Mart store (in Florida) permit expires after one year. Because the permit is issued by a federal agency to a private party, it is a federal action-which means other federal laws can apply, such as the National Environmental Policy Act or NEPA. A notice of the permit application action is published in the Federal Register and a public comment period of 30 to 90 days begins.
qas: answers: text: an Incidental Take Permit (ITP)
question: An approved HCP results in what being issued for the species?

answers: text: allow incidental takes for varying amounts of time
question: How long do ITPs last?

answers: text: A notice of the permit application action is published in the Federal Register
question: How is the public made aware of ITP applications?

answers: text: 30 to 90 days
question: How long does the public have to comment on ITP applications?

context: The US Congress was urged to create the exemption by proponents of a conservation plan on San Bruno Mountain, California that was drafted in the early 1980s and is the first HCP in the nation. In the conference report on the 1982 amendments, Congress specified that it intended the San Bruno plan to act "as a model" for future conservation plans developed under the incidental take exemption provision and that "the adequacy of similar conservation plans should be measured against the San Bruno plan". Congress further noted that the San Bruno plan was based on "an independent exhaustive biological study" and protected at least 87% of the habitat of the listed butterflies that led to the development of the HCP.
qas: answers: text: San Bruno Mountain, California
question: What location held the first HCP?

answers: text: 87%
question: What percentage of the critical habitat was protected for the area that received the first HCP?

answers: text: butterflies
question: What type of animal was being protected in the area that received the first HCP?

context: Growing scientific recognition of the role of private lands for endangered species recovery and the landmark 1981 court decision in Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources both contributed to making Habitat Conservation Plans/ Incidental Take Permits "a major force for wildlife conservation and a major headache to the development community", wrote Robert D.Thornton in the 1991 Environmental Law article, Searching for Consensus and Predictability: Habitat Conservation Planning under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
qas: answers: text: Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources
question: What 1981 court decision added to the power of HCPs and ITPs for conservation?

answers: text: Robert D.Thornton
question: Who wrote the article "Searching for Consensus and Predictability: Habitat Conservation Planning under the Endangered Species Act of 1973."

answers: text: a major headache
question: What did Thornton compare the scientific and legal advances to, from the viewpoint of the development community?

context: The "No Surprises" rule is meant to protect the landowner if "unforeseen circumstances" occur which make the landowner's efforts to prevent or mitigate harm to the species fall short. The "No Surprises" policy may be the most controversial of the recent reforms of the law, because once an Incidental Take Permit is granted, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) loses much ability to further protect a species if the mitigation measures by the landowner prove insufficient. The landowner or permittee would not be required to set aside additional land or pay more in conservation money. The federal government would have to pay for additional protection measures.
qas: answers: text: The "No Surprises" rule
question: What is the name of the rule that protects the landowner if their conservation efforts fall short?

answers: text: the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) loses much ability to further protect a species if the mitigation measures by the landowner prove insufficient.
question: Why is this particular rule so controversial?

answers: text: The landowner or permittee would not be required to set aside additional land or pay more in conservation money
question: If the landowner fails to adequately protect the species, what penalties do they face with the "No Surprises" rule?

answers: text: The federal government would have to pay for additional protection measures
question: Who covers the cost of additional efforts if the ITP holder's efforts fall short?

context: The "Safe Harbor" agreement is a voluntary agreement between the private landowner and FWS. The landowner agrees to alter the property to benefit or even attract a listed or proposed species in exchange for assurances that the FWS will permit future "takes" above a pre-determined level. The policy relies on the "enhancement of survival" provision of Section §1539(a)(1)(A). A landowner can have either a "Safe Harbor" agreement or an Incidental Take Permit, or both. The policy was developed by the Clinton Administration in 1999.
qas: answers: text: the private landowner and FWS
question: What two groups are bound by a "Safe Harbor" agreement?

answers: text: assurances that the FWS will permit future "takes" above a pre-determined level
question: In exchange for altering the property to a more beneficial state, what does the landowner gain from the Safe Harbor agreement?

answers: text: the Clinton Administration
question: Which presidential administration developed Safe Harbor policy?

answers: text: A landowner can have either a "Safe Harbor" agreement or an Incidental Take Permit, or both.
question: Are Safe Harbor agreements and ITPs mutually exclusive?

context: The Candidate Conservation Agreement is closely related to the "Safe Harbor" agreement, the main difference is that the Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances(CCA) are meant to protect unlisted species by providing incentives to private landowners and land managing agencies to restore, enhance or maintain habitat of unlisted species which are declining and have the potential to become threatened or endangered if critical habitat is not protected. The FWS will then assure that if, in the future the unlisted species becomes listed, the landowner will not be required to do more than already agreed upon in the CCA.
qas: answers: text: Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances(CCA) are meant to protect unlisted species
question: How do Candidate Conservation Agreements differ from Safe Harbor agreements?

answers: text: if, in the future the unlisted species becomes listed, the landowner will not be required to do more than already agreed upon in the CCA.
question: How does a CCA help protect a private landowner?

answers: text: enhance or maintain habitat of unlisted species which are declining and have the potential to become threatened or endangered
question: How does a CCA impact unlisted species?

context: Two examples of animal species recently delisted are: the Virginia northern flying squirrel (subspecies) on August, 2008, which had been listed since 1985, and the gray wolf (Northern Rocky Mountain DPS). On April 15, 2011, President Obama signed the Department of Defense and Full-Year Appropriations Act of 2011. A section of that Appropriations Act directed the Secretary of the Interior to reissue within 60 days of enactment the final rule published on April 2, 2009, that identified the Northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolf (Canis lupus) as a distinct population segment (DPS) and to revise the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife by removing most of the gray wolves in the DPS.
qas: answers: text: the Virginia northern flying squirrel
question: What animal species was delisted in August 2008?

answers: text: listed since 1985
question: How long had the squirrel been listed as endangered?

answers: text: President Obama
question: Which president signed an Act directing the delisting of the Northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolf?

context: As of September 2012, fifty-six species have been delisted; twenty-eight due to recovery, ten due to extinction (seven of which are believed to have been extinct prior to being listed), ten due to changes in taxonomic classification practices, six due to discovery of new populations, one due to an error in the listing rule, and one due to an amendment to the Endangered Species Act specifically requiring the species delisting. Twenty-five others have been down listed from "endangered" to "threatened" status.
qas: answers: text: twenty-eight
question: As of September 2012, how many species had been delisted due to recovery?

answers: text: seven
question: Of the ten species removed due to extinction, how many are believe to have already been extinct when listed?

answers: text: Twenty-five
question: How many species have been downgraded from endangered to threatened status?

answers: text: six
question: How many species were delisted due to discoveries of new populations?

context: Opponents of the Endangered Species Act argue that with over 2,000 endangered species listed, and only 28 delisted due to recovery, the success rate of 1% over nearly three decades proves that there needs to be serious reform in their methods to actually help the endangered animals and plants. Others argue that the ESA may encourage preemptive habitat destruction by landowners who fear losing the use of their land because of the presence of an endangered species; known colloquially as "Shoot, Shovel and Shut-Up." One example of such perverse incentives is the case of a forest owner who, in response to ESA listing of the red-cockaded woodpecker, increased harvesting and shortened the age at which he harvests his trees to ensure that they do not become old enough to become suitable habitat. While no studies have shown that the Act's negative effects, in total, exceed the positive effects, many economists believe that finding a way to reduce such perverse incentives would lead to more effective protection of endangered species.
qas: answers: text: increased harvesting and shortened the age at which he harvests his trees to ensure that they do not become old enough to become suitable habitat
question: How did a land owner impact the protected red-cockaded woodpecker species?

answers: text: 1%
question: What is the success rate of the list and the Endangered Species Act initiatives?

answers: text: "Shoot, Shovel and Shut-Up."
question: What is the name given to the act of pre-emptive habitat destruction by landowners fearing a protected species?

answers: text: over 2,000
question: How many species are currently listed?

context: According to research published in 1999 by Alan Green and the Center for Public Integrity (CPI), loopholes in the ESA are commonly exploited in the exotic pet trade. Although the legislation prohibits interstate and foreign transactions for list species, no provisions are made for in-state commerce, allowing these animals to be sold to roadside zoos and private collectors. Additionally, the ESA allows listed species to be shipped across state lines as long as they are not sold. According to Green and the CPI, this allows dealers to "donate" listed species through supposed "breeding loans" to anyone, and in return they can legally receive a reciprocal monetary "donation" from the receiving party. Furthermore, an interview with an endangered species specialist at the US Fish and Wildlife Service revealed that the agency does not have sufficient staff to perform undercover investigations, which would catch these false "donations" and other mislabeled transactions.
qas: answers: text: exotic pet trade
question: What is one particular industry that exploits Endangered Species Act loopholes?

answers: text: no provisions are made for in-state commerce
question: What is one particular loophole that aids roadside zoos and private collectors?

answers: text: the ESA allows listed species to be shipped across state lines as long as they are not sold
question: What allows exploitation of interstate commerce regulations?

answers: text: in return they can legally receive a reciprocal monetary "donation" from the receiving party.
question: How can fake breeding loans be used to sell wildlife?

answers: text: the US Fish and Wildlife Service revealed that the agency does not have sufficient staff to perform undercover investigations
question: Why are there not more arrests from undercover investigations of interstate wildlife commerce?

context: Green and the CPI further noted another exploit of the ESA in their discussion of the critically endangered cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus). Not only had they found documentation that 151 of these primates had inadvertently made their way from the Harvard-affiliated New England Regional Primate Research Center into the exotic pet trade through the aforementioned loophole, but in October 1976, over 800 cotton-top tamarins were imported into the United States in order to beat the official listing of the species under the ESA.
qas: answers: text: cotton-top tamarin
question: The Center for Public Integrity found that 151 of what primate were moved from the New England Primate Research Center into exotic pet trade?

answers: text: over 800 cotton-top tamarins were imported into the United States
question: What happened in 1976 that impacted this primate's classification as Endanger?

answers: text: Harvard
question: What school is affiliated with the New England Primate Research Center?

context: Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act provided funding for development of programs for management of threatened and endangered species by state wildlife agencies. Subsequently, lists of endangered and threatened species within their boundaries have been prepared by each state. These state lists often include species which are considered endangered or threatened within a specific state but not within all states, and which therefore are not included on the national list of endangered and threatened species. Examples include Florida, Minnesota, Maine, and California.
qas: answers: text: development of programs for management of threatened and endangered species by state wildlife agencies
question: Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act provided funding for what purpose?

answers: text: These state lists often include species which are considered endangered or threatened within a specific state but not within all states
question: What is one notable drawback with state wildlife agencies creating their own lists?

answers: text: Florida, Minnesota, Maine, and California
question: What states are listing species that are endangered in their own state, but that are not endangered in all other states?

context: A reward will be paid to any person who furnishes information which leads to an arrest, conviction, or revocation of a license, so long as they are not a local, state, or federal employee in the performance of official duties. The Secretary may also provide reasonable and necessary costs incurred for the care of fish, wildlife, and forest service or plant pending the violation caused by the criminal. If the balance ever exceeds $500,000 the Secretary of the Treasury is required to deposit an amount equal to the excess into the cooperative endangered species conservation fund.
qas: answers: text: A reward will be paid to any person who furnishes information which leads to an arrest, conviction, or revocation of a license
question: Is the public given incentive to report Endangered Species Act violations?

answers: text: The Secretary
question: Given that a violator caused wildlife harm, who may provide financial assistance for the care of the harmed wildlife?

answers: text: $500,000
question: Costs over what balance lead to the Secretary of the Treasury depositing money into the cooperative endangered species conservation fund?