Originally Posted By: cohoangler
[/quote]
I am pretty sure that the ESA mandates that a listed species which has achieved recovery goals must be de-listed. So the delisting of the recovered bald eagle was an action required by the Act rather than a publicity stunt.


Actually not. Delisting is expected but not legally mandated. There are several species that were left on the list for many years after they have achieved recovery, before they were taken off.

The reasons are many and varied. But as Krijack eluded to, the ESA requires a monitoring plan to be in-place before delisting can occur. If there is no plan or no funding for the plan, delisting does not occur. Or if it does, the delisting decision can be challenged in court, and would be overturned if the plan is not in place, and funded. This actually happened with Peregrine falcon. In the mid 1990's, the Feds tried to delist it without a monitoring plan. The decision was challenged in court. The Feds lost. So they went back and developed a national monitoring plan for Peregrines. Subsequently, the falcon was successfully delisted in 1999. Monitoring is still going on today. [/quote]

You are correct that there are additional requirements to include as CM also pointed out to include that States' management plans as part of the delisting need to meet criteria ensuring that the cycle does not repeat. My simplistic point was that if the listed species achieves recovery goals the species must be removed. The rationale I have read is that the ESA does not cover species which are no longer Threatened or Endangered. Also, to maintain those species means the restrictions enacted as part of the recovery continue to be enforced. The process to delist can be problematic especially with certain species such as grizzly or wolf.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)