Why listing may be forever: Perspectives on delisting under the US Endangered Species Act

In the more than 30 years that U.S. federal endangered species legislation has been in effect listings of endangered species have far outpaced delistings. Although it has been used by both advocates and opponents of conservation to criticize the Endangered Species Act, this disparity is neither surprising nor necessarily indicative of failure of the law. Listing typically reflects the effect of ongoing human activity on the species. Delisting therefore requires ongoing protective measures, which under current law are often effectively provided only by the Endangered Species Act itself Consequently, lengthy and perhaps permanent residence on the list should be expected for the majority of species. Our analysis of the law and review of the limited number of delistings to date leads us to three conclusions: (1) delisting requires evaluation of the regulatory protections that will remain after removal of the species from the protected list; (2) lack of effective protection against important causes of species decline means most species will remain on the list forever, and (3) delisting should be undertaken with caution because the negative consequences of erroneous delisting generally exceed those of erroneous retention on the protected list. Overall we argue that the limited ability to delist species demonstrates the crucial importance of the Endangered Species Act for species protection.