Accurate Economics to Protect Endangered Species and their Critical Habitats

Federal agencies currently use a methodology that finds negligible benefits of protecting critical habitat for endangered species, despite the prime real estate that is often involved. The Endangered Species Act already calls for economic analysis, but agencies currently treat it as a meaningless hoop to jump through. Agencies justify this hollow exercise by pointing to the difficulty in quantifying the increment of added protection that comes with critical habitat designation. However, the increment of added protection for critical habitat can be measured using methods already employed by agencies in other environmental analyses. Although the central benefits of critical habitat are improvements to the condition of listed species, accurate economic analysis should also consider the broad benefits of ecosystem services that flow from protected areas to human populations. I propose that agencies use a methodology that weighs the estimated burdens on regulated parties against the estimated benefits of designating lands as critical habitat. My proposed—more accurate—analysis can lead to more effective implementation of the Endangered Species Act by allowing agencies to target limited resources to projects that offer high net conservation benefits. I use a recent cost-benefit analysis for loggerhead turtles to demonstrate that the benefits of conserving habitat include increased protection of the species as well as a larger flow of ecosystem services amounting to at least $106 million per year in benefits, not the$0 estimate that federal agencies have arrived at. Accurate economic analysis provides useful information to agencies and the public in a way that can improve discussions that are often one-sided because of an emphasis on regulatory costs with little discussion of regulatory benefits

Antibiotic Resistance and Substrate Utilization by Bacteria Affi liated with Cave Streams at Diff erent Levels of Mammoth Cave

Located in south-central Kentucky, Mammoth Cave is one of the most unique National Parks in the United States. The surface landscape includes complex relationships between the flora and fauna along with human influences. However, the primary ecological focus is concealed below ground. Over four-hundred miles of cave passages, created by fl owing groundwater over millions of years, host a variety of macro and micro organisms. The Green River has cut into the limestone formation over geologic time, creating a complex network of passages that are stacked, one below the other, with the newer levels of cave lying near the bottom. Palmer (2007, 1987) describes 4 main levels of cave passages in the Mammoth Cave system. A detailed discussion of the geology and conditions that formed the cave levels can be found in several reports (Palmer, 1987; Palmer 1989; White and White, 1989; Granger, et al, 2001). Precipitation continues to provide water that traverses from the surface, through the unsaturated vadose levels of the cave, and down to the water table in the lower level. Water enters the cave system through direct recharge at sinkholes and through diff use percolation. The rapid infiltration of stormwater often exceeds the carrying capacity of the upper cave passages and excess water is pushed into void pore-spaces near the top of bedrock. This stored water is slowly released and provides base-fl ow to cave streams that replenish the pools and streams in the lowest level of the cave (Ryan and Meimen, 1996). These perennial cave streams carry many of the organic compounds that provide energy to the cave ecosystem (Barr, 1976)

On Origins and Revelation

This article is a response to Russell Maatman\u27s The Origins of the Human Family , Pro Rege, March 1991