I'd like to know if the 1993 tortoise ruling would still hold up in court today based upon common sense evidence.
Of course the truth is usually somewhere in the middle, and unfortunately for both private individuals and the cause of conservation "common sense" usually does not seem to figure into it.
Case in point the Golden-cheeked Warbler here in Texas. Listed endangered in 1990 when an estimated 10,000 pairs remained.
The bird needs woodland, specifically 100 year-old cedars. Only problem is before settlement MOST of Central Texas was prairie. There might have been more of these warblers in Texas in 1990 than there ever was. Got declared endangered anyway, in 1992 Clinton's Secretary of the Interior declares 33 whole counties in Central Texas as "critical habitat".
Ranchers all across the Hill Country immediately cut down every old cedar on their property, and who can blame 'em? Listing prob'ly hurt the bird more than anything, ironic since ranchers were never a previously a threat to the bird, nor the bird a threat to ranchers. The hoopla did launch the political career of George Bush Jr. tho'.
'Nother case point the Concho Water Snake, had to be later UNlisted after halting water development for all of San Angelo when it turned out they were all over the place in the reservoir that was supposed to be a threat.
With the tortoise I'd wanna know how they survived the sort of range abuse that caused the Taylor Grazing Act to be enacted in the first place, and jut how many are left today.
Birdwatcher
"...if the gentlemen of Virginia shall send us a dozen of their sons, we would take great care in their education, instruct them in all we know, and make men of them." Canasatego 1744
