SAFE HARBOR AGREEMENTS UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: ARE THEY RIGHT FOR HAWAII?
SAFE HARBOR AGREEMENTS UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: ARE THEY RIGHT FOR HAWAII?
复制标题
《濒危物种法》下的安全港协议：它们适合夏威夷吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. K. Chesterton
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Darcy Kishida;G. K. Chesterton
《濒危物种法》被称为“环境法中的斗牛犬”。这个类比对环保主义者来说是恰当的，他们中的许多人认为欧空局是环境保护的“皇冠上的宝石”，因为它经常对私人土地开发进行不妥协的限制。除了为私人土地上的濒危物种提供保护外，ESA还禁止政府机构严重伤害物种本身及其关键栖息地。尽管一些环保主义者认为它做得还不够，但欧空局至少避免了其列出的大多数物种的灭绝。事实上，ESA非常成功，有四个物种的种群被认为足够健康，可以被除名。
The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) has been called “the pit bull of environmental laws.” The analogy is an apt one for environmentalists, many of whom consider the ESA the “crown jewel” of environmental protection because of its often uncompromising restrictions on private land development. In addition to offering protection to endangered species on private land, the ESA forbids government agencies from significantly harming both the species itself and its critical habitat. Though some environmentalists contend it does not go far enough, the ESA has, at the very least, staved off extinction for the majority of its listed species. In fact, the ESA has been so successful that four species’ populations have been deemed healthy enough to be delisted.