LEADER 02034nam  2200325   450 
001 9910714599203321
005 20230609113902.0
035   $a(CKB)3710000000295179
035   $a(NjHacI)993710000000295179
035   $a(EXLCZ)993710000000295179
100   $a20230609d2019      uy             0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aur|||||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aEndangered Species Act and Sound Science (RL32992) /$fPervaze A. Sheikh
210  1$aWashington, D.C. :$cCongressional Research Service,$d2019.
215   $a1 online resource (26 pages)
330   $aThe adequacy of the science supporting implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is receiving increased congressional attention. While some critics accuse agencies responsible for implementing the ESA of using "junk science," others counter that decisions that should rest on science are instead being dictated by political concerns. Under the ESA, certain species of plants and animals (both vertebrate and invertebrate) are listed as either endangered or threatened according to assessments of the risk of their extinction. Once a species is listed, powerful legal tools are available to protect the species and its habitat. Efforts to list, protect, and recover threatened or endangered species under the ESA can be controversial. Some of this controversy stems from the substantive provisions of this law, which can affect the use of both federal and nonfederal lands. The scientific underpinnings of decisions under the ESA are especially important, given their importance for species and their possible impacts on land use and development.
606   $aEndangered species$zUnited States
615  0$aEndangered species
676   $a333.950973
700   $aSheikh$b Pervaze A.$01133757
801  0$bNjHacI
801  1$bNjHacl
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910714599203321
996   $aEndangered Species Act and Sound Science (RL32992)$93379622
997   $aUNINA