Endangered Species Conservation

Congress passed the first Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973, which expanded on the previously existing Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966. However, even more changes have been made to the act since then and there still remain issues with the act today. The primary conservation goals of the Endangered Species Act protect both endangered and threatened species. With the passage of ESA in 1973, endangered and threatened species finally received federal protection in which put in place regulations that could actually be enforced unlike the previous act’s. President Nixon passed the ESA in response to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, or CITIES, which prohibited the trade internationally

Fisheries and Wildlife Service are responsible for the freshwater species. These protections extend to all aspects of the ecosystem including marine plants, mammals, reptiles, invertebrates and other marine living species. Amongst this list, there are 71 listed marine fish species under the jurisdiction of National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA, 2014). Both organizations make sure that aquatic species in danger if becoming extinct are placed on the list of protect species. The process to get one of these species listed involves determining what cause leads to the decline in species’ population. For the many fish species, the cause of population decline falls into the classification of destruction of habitat, overutilization for commercial use, or other man made factors. Once they have gone through the process and have been listed, the species now can not be sold or transported, their habitats can not be purchased without proper authority and wildlife agencies work with the department to help promote the survival of the species at risk (Miller, 2016). The combined efforts of the two departments enforcing the ESA with the wildlife protection agencies help protect the endangered and threatened fish but there still need to be policies in place that limit the causes of population decline in fish

The construction of dams in an area for energy or agricultural purposes blocks the river or channels that fish stocks use to get to reproduction spots. For example, in the Columbia River system, the salmon species are not spawning at their previous rate. Their migration patterns changed with the introduction of dams and hydropower to the area as they force the salmon population to the lakes rather than the channels (Molles, 241). These salmon stocks have been listed as endangered or threatened. Another endangered fish species caused by the construction occurred among the sturgeon and eel lamprey populations. The loss of habitat associated with the dams along with pollution lead to the lamprey population decreasing to less than one percent of the size recorded at 400,000 prior to the installation of dams (International Rivers). Something must be done to stop the decline within fish species’ populations. Listing the fish species in decline on the ESA endangered or threatened species list may not be enough to reverse the effects of fishing and energy practices, but rather other regulations need to be established to aid in the populations stability or growth. Without efforts to change fishing practices and energy solutions now, more and more aquatic species will find themselves on the Endangered Species Act list of protected species. The problems