Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Endangered species need protection
Protecting endangered animals
Endangered species need protection
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Endangered species need protection
Boom! Bang! The sound of animals being shot is unbearable. Animals all over the world are being slaughtered for meat, fur, and more. The animals that need the most protection at the moment are endangered and threatened species. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was passed in 1973 to protect and recover imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend (U.S. 1). The Endangered Species Act includes native plants and animals identified as “endangered” and “threatened” (U.S. 1). With this act in place, there is an astonishing opportunity to save these affected species and eventually remove them from the endangered and/or threatened species list. Although there are people who see the ESA as an opportunity to save these plants and animals, …show more content…
The ESA protects them by making it illegal to destroy their living environment and killing the species. It is encouraged to help save these animals by protecting their ecosystem. “It’s unacceptable to see lives, human or animal, being lost because of legislative roadblocks and political rivalries” (Carmichael 1). Think about it this way, if we put ourselves in their shoes, we would not appreciate someone destroying our home and killing our family members to develop an area. Recently there has been a case about whether or not to repeal the ESA. Some arguments include that the ESA has barely changed the living environments of endangered and threatened species. In an article by Matt Kettmann, he states, “For species that took centuries to decline, 40 years is probably not enough time to recover. But based on the data that’s out there right now, the take home message is that the Endangered Species Act has done a pretty good job, a really good job actually, of preventing extinctions. But it’s done a really poor job promoting the recovery of species that are on the list” (Kettmann 1). Change does not happen overnight. The debate started because the ESA is restricting careers from working to their fullest potential. The ESA prevents anyone from disrupting an
Familiarize yourself with the ESA (Endangered Species Act). Find two credible sources that reflect on the success of the ESA in the US compared to efforts by the European Union. Compare those efforts and provide one example of species successfully protected in the US and one in the European Union. 1-2 pages Arial, 12 point, double spaced. Must be APA format, and include a APA title page and reference page. Include at least on in-text citiation from each source in APA format.
...protected by AWA, so these animal could go through extreme pain and suffering. The AWA is not enough to protect animal rights.
Conservation is needed, particularly in Orange County, because of the large-scale development of homes, businesses, and roads. The listing of the California Gnatcatcher as a "threatened" species and the dwindling numbers of other CSS dependent species are a testament to the need for whole-habitat preservation. For instance, CSS habitat includes other birds and organisms in need of protection, including the Coastal Cactus Wren and the Orange-throated Whiptail Lizard. The single species approach moves very slowly and often species go extinct before any listing is allowed. In the meantime, other species require protection and are placed as a last priority. The ESA, many conservationists argue, was always meant to be an act aimed at supporting multi-species preservation. With the leisurely pace at which legislation moves and with the single-species ...
Mr. Middleton, a journalist, compiled an article describing, in his opinion, the flaws of the Endangered Species Act. He then attempts to back his opinion with studied analyses, researched facts, and testimonies. To summarize Middleton’s (2011) perspective, “Rather than provide incentives for conservation and environmental stewardship, the Endangered Species Act punishes those whose property contains land that might be used as habitat by endangered and threatened species” (p. 79). This quote is broad and generalized yet draws in readers and forces Middleton to spend the rest of the article backing this statement with more logic based facts.
Extinction is no longer just a natural process. It is an enemy, slowly changing our world into a barren wasteland where life is as rare as a flower in the Arctic Circle's winter. The wolf, the tiger, the caribou, the elephant, the bison, the cheetah, the sequoia cactus, the redwood tree – all of these and so many more things are on the verge of disappearing from our planet forever. Extinction is the most pressing environmental issue of our time, because if it continues the way it is going without anything being done to counteract its causes and consequences, there will soon be no environment left for there to be debates about.
Thirty years ago, congress passed a law to protect animals that are at risk of becoming extinct. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 outlined the responsibilities of the government and citizens concerning these animals. It requires that every five years, species are evaluated, and it is decided whether they are okay, endangered, whose population is so low that it is in danger of becoming extinct, or threatened, who are not in as much danger, but whose population is small enough for concern. Threatened and endangered species are then placed on a list, the “red list,” and closely monitored until conditions improve and population numbers increase enough that they can be removed. But how are these animals monitored and how is it possible to get them to the point that they can be removed from the “red list”? To find the answers, many conservationists and scientists have turned to technology. Technology has enabled scientists to help animals reproduce, improve their habitat, and protect them. There are a few disadvantages and opposing viewpoints to this issue. Is it worth the money to use these technologies to save a species from becoming extinct? And more importantly, is it right for humans to intervene with nature? From cloning to satellites, technology has helped save many species from extinction, but is it worth it?
The Endangered Species Act Introduction: Long-term survival of a species depends on its ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions (Murphy, 1994). Genetic diversity within a species, which has taken 3.5 billion years to evolve, makes adaptations to these changing environments possible. Unfortunately, the rate of extinction of genetically diverse organisms is rapidly increasing, thus reducing this needed biodiversity, largely due to the human impacts of development and expansion. What was an average of one extinction per year before is now one extinction per hour and extinct species numbers are expected to reach approximately one million by the year 2000 (WWW site, Bio 65). As a result governmental and societal action must be taken immediately!
are at a very high risk of extinction. There are over 3000 endangered species around the world due to many factors including over-fishing, hunting, destruction of habitat, climate change and a decrease in food supply. As the number of endangered species are increasing quickly it is very important that action is taken to preserve them for a number of reasons. If endangered species are not preserved it could easily lead to the species becoming extinct which could upset the food chain and lead to further extinction of other species. This could have not only negative effects on there predators but would eventually lead to having negative effects on species further up the food chain including the human species. Over the years researches have come to discover and find that all species play an important part in looking after our ecosystem and extinction could cause a big hole in the system.
Modern-day genetic technology has granted mankind with the opportunity to bring back extinct species from the dead. If humans have come to possess the DNA from an extinct animal population, it is possible to create an identical clone of the animal in question, effectively “bringing it back from the dead”. Many ethical dilemmas surround the practice of de-extinction, and rightfully so. Recreating an extinct species could produce groundbreaking scientific breakthroughs, generating exciting opportunities for future genetics-based research. However, there could also be monumental consequences: the newly revived, once-extinct species might destroy the ecological equilibrium of modern Earth
Hello United Nations! I am going to start off by telling you a little bit about us and our organization. We are the Organization for African Endangered Animals. We are a private agency in Africa who protect the welfare of endangered animals. We are the voice of the animals. They cannot speak for themselves so we speak for them. We do our best to protect our animals but we have limited sources and funding. Our focus right now is one of the most endangered species in the world, the Dama Gazelle.
Having considered both sides of the argument surrounding the Endangered Species Act, it seems logical to conclude that, despite the fact that they Endangered Species Act could stand some improvement in terms of the speed of the bureaucracy that governs it, the Act itself is quite sufficient as is as long as it is administered to the full extent of its power. There is a growing tendency in government, however, to undermine the strength of the Endangered Species Act by making decisions on when and where to apply it a political matter rather than an ecological matter (Munro, 2010). To do this is to insure that ultimately it will not just be the environment and the wile organisms that live in it that will lose, it will be mankind as well.
Certain animals need more protection than others because they don’t particularly need to be on the list. Animals like the Bangle Tiger or the Siamang are the most threatened besides others because they are loved for their skins or they are wanted as pets. They go through the pet trade there whole life because they are so rare and beautiful. Just because the animals are a prize kill or to have doesn’t mean people should harm or endanger them.
The Earth is far and away the most biodiverse planet in our solar system, with about 8.7 million more unique species than the other 8 planets (UNEP). However, the Earth’s commanding lead is shrinking; not because the other planets are increasing biodiversity, but because Earth’s is decreasing. According to the World Wildlife Fund, we as a planet are losing 1,000 to 10,000 more species than the natural rate. Since the total number of species is hard to pin down, this can mean anywhere from 200 to 10,000 species going extinct per year (World Wildlife Fund). This obscenely high extinction rate is dangerous not just to ecosystems directly affected by the loss, but also creates a domino effect that circles around the globe and up and down the food
Although it may not seem saving or protecting endangered animals is important, it actually and truly is important because animals around the world are being killed for wildlife market goods which is illegal and destroys the species population in that environment. Citizens should take more concern with taking care of these endangered animals before they become totally extinct and will no longer be seen on the face of the earth. Recently researchers have found that poachers (hunters who hunt animals for their value with trading illegal merchandise) are killing thousands of animals a day, and they are doing so even to this day. These species should be treated with more responsibility and care. They are even being killed by human interactions
Critically endangered species are somewhat different from just endangered species; they face an extremely high risk of extinction in the immediate future. Unlike regular endangered species who only face a high risk of becoming extinct. In 1973, the United States passed the Endangered Species Act, this act is one many of United States environmental laws that were passed in the 1970. Simply, the act was passed to protect critically risked species from extinction.