Endangered_Species_Act

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

question: Which president signed the Act into law?
answers: text: Richard Nixon

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

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

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

question: When was CITES created?

question: What did the Supreme Court sign into law in the 1970s?

question: Who is the President of the FWS?

question: What day did the Supreme Court rule on ESA?

question: Who ruled on which agencies would administer the 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: question: What was the historical range of the whooping crane?
answers: text: central Canada South to Mexico, and from Utah to the Atlantic coast

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

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

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

question: What species is found ranging from Canada to Utah?

question: How many years did it take for the whooping crane to disappear?

question: How many whooping cranes were there in 1890?

question: What was passed in 1941?

question: What year did the whooping crane begin to get attention?
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: question: What was the first federal law that regulated wildlife commerce?
answers: text: Lacey Act of 1900

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

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

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

question: What legislation was considered costly?

question: What was the first federal treaty?

question: What did the first federal law on wildlife allow regarding interstate commerce?

question: What was the name of the 1937 treaty?

question: Which laws faced significant opposition?
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: question: What did the Endangered Species Act authorize the Secretary of the Interior to do?
answers: text: list endangered domestic fish and wildlife

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

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

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

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

question: How much could the Act spend per year?

question: Who runs the United States Fish and Wildlife Service?

question: What commerce did the ESA affect?

question: What animals could not be listed as endangered due to this act?

question: What did the National Wildlife Refuge System preserve?
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: question: What is the nickname given to the first listing of endangered species?
answers: text: "Class of '67"

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

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

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

question: How many species are currently listed?

question: What type of animal was not included in Volume 1?

question: What volume was published in 1969?

question: What threat towards species has been neutralized?

question: What is the Endangered Species Act of 1969 referred to as?
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: question: When was the Endangered Species Conservation Act passed?
answers: text: December, 1969

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

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

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

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

question: What repealed the Lacey Act?

question: What is the identification number for the Lacey Act?

question: Why were mammals added to the protected species list?

question: When was the Lacey Act passed?

question: What was excluded in the 1969 law?
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: question: Who led the team of lawyers and scientists who crafted the Endangered Species Act of 1973?
answers: text: Dr. Russell E. Train

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

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

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: Dr. Earl Baysinger

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

question: What did the 93rd Congress declare inadequate?

question: Who was the 93rd US President?

question: What law did Nixon rewrite?

question: What section of the act did Dr. Train write?

question: What grew out of CEQ?
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: question: How many different ways can a species be added to the endangered list?
answers: text: two ways

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

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

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

question: How many ways FWS list a species?

question: Who does the FWS or NMFS have to petition to list a species?

question: How long does an individual have to petition the FWS?

question: In what case does a distinct population segment not count?

question: What is another name for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)?
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: question: What word was added to the Endangered Species Act in 1982?
answers: text: "solely"

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

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

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

question: When are economic factors considered?

question: When was Executive Order 12291 put into place?

question: Which president added the word "solely" to the ESA?

question: What was Reagan's statement regarding economic considerations in species status?

question: Whose order did President Reagan reject?
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: question: How is public notice given regarding a listing?
answers: text: through legal notices in newspapers, and communicated to state and county agencies within the species' area

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

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

question: How are policy changes communicated to state and counties?

question: How long does a public hearing last?

question: What case took 45 days to be heard?

question: Which court publishes legal notices?

question: What is not given to foreign nations?
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: question: What section of the Endangered Species Act establishes critical habitat regulations?
answers: text: Section 4

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

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

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

question: What section establishes recovery goals?

question: What type of link is formed between identification and protection?

question: What are cataloguing disturbances are not necessary for determining?

question: What are water and air unnecessary for?

question: What does Section 4 separate?
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: question: What does the Endangered Species Act detail about government action regarding critical habitats?
answers: text: federal agencies are prohibited from authorizing, funding or carrying out actions that "destroy or adversely modify" critical habitats

question: How are non-federal government activities that might impact critical habitat often subject to the Endangered Species Act?
answers: text: require a federal permit

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

question: What are federal agencies allowed to do to critical habitats?

question: Which section applies to private landowners?

question: What does not require a federal permit?

question: What requires voluntary actions?

question: Which aspect applies to non-federal landowners?
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: question: What is the time limit for designating a species critical habitat after the species has been added to the endangered list?
answers: text: within one year

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

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

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

question: What has to be designated after a waiting period of 1 year?

question: What entity caused an increase of critical habitats in between 1986 and the 1990s?

question: What did the Reagan regulations invalidate?

question: How many critical habitats were built between 1978 and 1986?

question: Which two states in the Midwest and Eastern states received fewer 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: question: What four topics are required in an Endangered Species Recovery Plan?
answers: text: goals, tasks required, likely costs, and estimated timeline to recover endangered species

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

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

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

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

question: What does FWS require NMFS to create?

question: What length of time does the NMFS policy say plans must be completed by?

question: What was the average completion time for an FWS plan?

question: Who requires the FWS to have a completion policy?

question: What organizations are not required to have a recovery plan?
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: question: What is the primary consideration for determining if projects may be carried out in areas with endangered species?
answers: text: whether a listed species will be harmed by the action and, if so, how the harm can be minimized

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

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

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

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

question: Who does the Endangered Species Committee get an exemption from?

question: How many members must vote against the exemption?

question: How many members must a project agency have?

question: What do project agencies vote on?

question: What happens if the harm can be minimized?
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: question: Who reviews exemption considerations before the Endangered Species committee?
answers: text: the Forest Service, and either the FWS or the NMFS

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

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

question: What considerations are weighed during the consultations?
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: Who is consulted after the Endangered Species Committee?

question: What implications does the Endangered Species Committee consider?

question: What type of consultation is used if harm is not going to occur?

question: What kind of consultation does the Endangered Species use when harm is likely?

question: Who is consulted before going to the FWS and Forest Service?
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: question: How many times has the exemption process been used, as of 2009?
answers: text: six

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

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

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

question: How many exemptions were granted in 2009?

question: What is a key factor for the ESA?

question: What did Donald Baur write in 2009?

question: How many exemptions were withdrawn in 2009?

question: How many exemptions has Donald Baur ruled on?
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: question: Who owns the majority of critical habitat?
answers: text: non-federal property, owned by citizens, states, local governments, tribal governments and private organizations

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

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

question: What fraction of habitat for listed species is owned by citizens?

question: Who created the 1982 amendment?

question: When was it decided species could be taken for scientific purposes?

question: What purpose does the HCP state listed species cannot be taken for?

question: What can economic development not do under HCP?
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: question: An approved HCP results in what being issued for the species?
answers: text: an Incidental Take Permit (ITP)

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

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

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

question: What is issued if an HCP is rejected?

question: How long does an HCP last for?

question: What state is San Bruno in?

question: What do not apply when a permit is issued?

question: What entity publishes the HCP for public comment?
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: question: What location held the first HCP?
answers: text: San Bruno Mountain, California

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

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

question: Who did the US Congress ask to create an exemption?

question: When was the last permit given out?

question: What was the San Bruno plan compared to during its creation?

question: How many of the listed butterfly habitats were in San Bruno?

question: Who ran the biological study for the San Bruno plan?
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: question: What 1981 court decision added to the power of HCPs and ITPs for conservation?
answers: text: Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources

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

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

question: When did private lands start to have more recognition?

question: Who ruled on the Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources?

question: What did Thornton say the role of private lands was like for the development community?

question: When was the Environmental Law magazine started?

question: What case limited ITP power?
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: question: What is the name of the rule that protects the landowner if their conservation efforts fall short?
answers: text: The "No Surprises" rule

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

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

question: Why is the ITP controversial?

question: What policy protects the species from unforeseen circumstances?

question: What is granted after the No Surprises rule comes into play?

question: What is the federal government is not required to pay for?

question: What does the No Surprises rule requires landowners to put aside?
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: question: What two groups are bound by a "Safe Harbor" agreement?
answers: text: the private landowner and FWS

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

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

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

question: What provision is the ITP under?

question: When did FWS create the Safe Harbor agreement?

question: What form of agreement can a landowner no longer have if they acquire an ITP?

question: What provision relies on the Safe Harbor agreement?

question: What administration developed Section §1539(a)(1)(A)?
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: question: How do Candidate Conservation Agreements differ from Safe Harbor agreements?
answers: text: Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances(CCA) are meant to protect unlisted species

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

question: What agreement is the Safe Harbor Agreement primarily different from?

question: How does the Safe Harbor agreement protect unlisted species?

question: What organization can make a landowner do activities beyond those agreed on in the CCA?

question: What does Safe Harbor protect?
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: question: What animal species was delisted in August 2008?
answers: text: the Virginia northern flying squirrel

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

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

question: What animal was added in 2008?

question: When was the gray wolf added to the list?

question: Who delisted the flying squirrel?

question: What did the Secretary of the Interior sign in 2011?

question: What is the latin name for the flying squirrel?
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: question: As of September 2012, how many species had been delisted due to recovery?
answers: text: twenty-eight

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

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

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

question: How many species were delisted in September 2012?

question: How many species have gone from threatened to endangered?

question: How many new populations were lost?

question: How many species have recovered since 2012 due to changes?

question: When was the amendment to the ESA published?
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: question: How many species are currently listed?
answers: text: over 2,000

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

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

question: How did a land owner impact the protected red-cockaded woodpecker species?
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: Less than how many species are still listed?

question: How long has the ESA been using the "Shoot, Shovel, and Shut-up" method?

question: What have studies shown the negative effects outweigh?

question: What is another name for the ESA's practices?

question: What is the success rate of Shoot, Shovel, and Shut-Up?
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: question: What is one particular industry that exploits Endangered Species Act loopholes?
answers: text: exotic pet trade

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

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

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

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

question: When did people begin exploiting ESA loopholes?

question: What organization prevents animals from being sold to zoos or collectors?

question: What is the name of the endangered species specialist that was interviewed?

question: What agency is overstaffed?

question: What named organization has been exploiting loopholes?
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: 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: cotton-top tamarin

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

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

question: What school was running the pet trade?

question: How many cotton-top tamarins were traded out of the US in 1976?

question: Who works for the New England Regional Primate Research Center?

question: What was the official number of the cotton-top tamarins species under the ESA?

question: How many primates did Harvard purchase?
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: question: Section 6 of the Endangered Species Act provided funding for what purpose?
answers: text: development of programs for management of threatened and endangered species by state wildlife agencies

question: What is one notable drawback with state wildlife agencies creating their own lists?
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 states are listing species that are endangered in their own state, but that are not endangered in all other states?
answers: text: Florida, Minnesota, Maine, and California

question: What states do not have their own lists?

question: What defunded the development of programs for managing endangered species?

question: What did Section 6 of the act separate boundaries by?

question: Who funded species within specific states?
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: question: Is the public given incentive to report Endangered Species Act violations?
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: Given that a violator caused wildlife harm, who may provide financial assistance for the care of the harmed wildlife?
answers: text: The Secretary

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

question: What do local employees get if they report information that leads to an arrest?

question: Up to how much is the reward worth?

question: What must the Secretary do if the budget is below $500,000?

question: What three types of employees are allowed to accept a reward?

question: What kind of cost does the Secretary not cover?
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.