Endangered Species Act Listing Research Articles

Role of low-impact-factor journals in conservation implementation.

Academic review, promotion, and tenure processes place a premium on frequent publication in high-impact factor (IF) journals. However, conservation often relies on species-specific information that is unlikely to have the broad appeal needed for high-IF journals. Instead, this information is often distributed in low-IF, taxa- and region-specific journals. This suggests a potential mismatch between the incentives for academic researchers and the scientific needs of conservation implementation. To explore this mismatch, we looked at federal implementation of the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA), which requires the use of the "best available science" to list a species as endangered or threatened and thus receive powerful legal protections. In assessing the relationship between academic sources of this "best available science" and ESA implementation, we looked at the 13,292 sources (e.g., academic journals, books, reports, regulations, personal communications, etc.) cited by the second Obama administration (2012-2016) across all ESA listings. We compared the IFs of all 4836 journals that published peer-reviewed papers cited in these listings against their citation frequency in ESA listings to determine whether a journal's IF varied in proportion with its contribution to federal conservation. Most of the peer-reviewed academic articles referenced in ESA listings came from low-IF or no-IF journals that tended to focus on specific taxa or regions. Although we support continued attention to cutting-edge, multidisciplinary science for its ability to chart new pathways and paradigms, our findings stress the need to value and fund the taxa- and region-specific science that underpins actionable conservation laws.

On the productivity and technical efficiency of the Puerto Rican queen conch Aliger gigas fishery

AbstractObjectiveThis study examines the productivity and technical efficiency (TE) of diving operations that target queen conches Aliger gigas in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the largest producer of queen conches in the United States. Currently, there is a proposal to list queen conch as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).MethodsWe use stochastic production frontier methods to investigate the relationship between catch and fishing inputs and the technical performance of diving operations.ResultOur results show that the fleet could increase its catches, on average, by 30% (and, thus, increase its income) by using existing fishing inputs and technology more efficiently. We find that the potential to expand catches was slightly higher from increasing the crew size than from extending the length of the fishing trip. The study also finds considerable heterogeneity across coastal regions and operation sizes. Overall, operations on the east and west coasts and those having three or more crew members were more efficient. Operations that use a single gear and specialize on few species (revenue concentration) were associated with higher levels of TE. We also find that diving operations exhibit decreasing returns to scale.ConclusionThe potential ESA listing of the queen conch poses a dilemma because increasing the efficiency of the fleet may continue to compromise the sustainability of the resource. While a threatened designation does not necessarily result in additional trade or harvest restrictions, further actions may be advisable given the many threats, such as overutilization, habitat loss, coastal pollution, and disruptive environmental change that queen conch populations face. Our model suggests that reducing the size of the crew and/or the length of the trip may increase efficiency, but these restrictions may not be advisable on safety grounds. Thus, management agencies may want to reassess existing trip limits and the length of the closed season and explore the use of closed areas.

Attributes of preemptive conservation efforts for species precluded from listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Preemptive conservation efforts to reduce threats have been credited with precluding the need to list some imperiled species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Such efforts can result in outcomes where species are conserved and regulatory costs associated with ESA listing are avoided. Yet, the extent and type of conservation effort involved in achieving preclusion from listing are not well understood. We quantified the attributes of conservation efforts identified as important for 43 species whose preclusion from listing was attributed to conservation efforts, as described in U.S. Federal Register documents that report the decisions not to list. We considered 2 features of preemptive conservation: effort applied (measured as the number of conservation initiatives) and number of conservation partners involved. We also quantified the type and location of conservation actions. We found a mean of 4.3 initiatives (range 1-22) and 8.2 partners (range 1-31) documented per precluded species; both measures of conservation effort were significantly and positively associated with the species' range area and the proportion of private land across its range. The number of initiatives was also positively related to the number of threats affecting a species. Locations of conservation actions varied; more species had actions on public land than on private land (p=0.003). Numbers of species with restorative actions (e.g., invasive species control) were similar to numbers with prohibitive actions. Our findings highlight relationships between species' context and preemptive conservation activities, providing a first cross-species analysis of conservation efforts for species that were precluded from listing under the ESA due to conservation.

The impact of climate change on endangered plants and lichen

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was a landmark protection for rare organisms in the United States. Although the ESA is known for its protection of wildlife, a majority of listed species are actually plants and lichen. Climate change will impact species populations globally. Already-rare species, like those listed in the ESA, are at an even higher risk due to climate change. Despite this, the risk climate change poses to endangered plants has not been systematically evaluated in over a decade. To address this gap, we modified previously existing qualitative assessment toolkits used to examine the threat of climate change in federal documentation on listed wildlife. These modified toolkits were then applied to the 771 ESA listed plants. First, we evaluated how sensitive ESA listed plants and lichens were to climate change based on nine quantitative sensitivity factors. Then, we evaluated if climate change was recognized as a threat for a species, and if actions were being taken to address the threats of climate change. We found that all ESA listed plant and lichen species are at least slightly (score of 1) sensitive to climate change, and therefore all listed plants and lichens are threatened by climate change. While a majority of ESA listing and recovery documents recognized climate change as a threat, very few had actions being taken in their recovery plans to address climate change directly. While acknowledging the threat that climate change poses to rare plants is an important first step, direct action will need to be taken to ensure the recovery of many of these species.

Factors associated with preemptive conservation under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

In recent decades, there has been an increasing emphasis on proactive efforts to conserve species being considered for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) before they are listed (i.e., preemptive conservation). These efforts, which depend on voluntary actions by public and private land managers across the species' range, aim to conserve species while avoiding regulatory costs associated with ESA listing. We collected data for a set of social, economic, environmental, and institutional factors that we hypothesized would influence voluntary decisions to promote or inhibit preemptive conservation of species under consideration for ESA listing. We used logistic regression to estimate the association of these factors with preemptive conservation outcomes based on data for a set of species that entered the ESA listing process and were either officially listed (n=314) or preemptively conserved (n=73) from 1996 to 2018. Factors significantly associated with precluded listing due to preemptive conservation included high baseline conservation status, low proportion of private land across the species' range, small total range size, exposure to specific types of threats, and species' range extending over several states. These results highlight strategies that can help improve conservation outcomes, such as allocating resources for imperiled species earlier in the listing process, addressing specific threats, and expanding incentives and coordination mechanisms for conservation on private lands.

Multispecies approaches to status assessments in support of endangered species classifications

AbstractMultispecies risk assessments have developed within many international conservation programs, reflecting a widespread need for efficiency. Under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA), multispecies assessments ultimately lead to species‐level listing decisions. Although this approach provides opportunities for improved efficiency, it also risks overwhelming or biasing the assessment process and would benefit from clear guidance for practitioners. We reviewed multispecies assessments conducted between 1993 and 2019 for ESA listing decisions to identify the ecological basis for combining species, the assessment approach used, and the policy factors influencing their efficacy. We identified 42 cases covering 359 species. Most assessments (81%) included two to five species, although the maximum was 82. A common theme involved grouping narrow endemics or habitat specialists based on taxonomic relatedness, similar distributions, and common threats to persistence. All assessments included a combined threats analysis, but few employed a common species' response model or expert elicitation process. Although ESA risk assessments are distinct from policy decisions, most assessments (50%) supported decisions that all species warranted endangered status. Available guidance has generally emphasized ecological similarity as the key attribute leading to successful multispecies assessments. The challenge with consistently selecting species based on qualitative proxies such as common distributions or threats to persistence is that ecological patterns and processes are scale dependent. Focusing instead on the assessment methods and their potential for bias and increased efficiency may provide a stronger basis for developing consistent and transparent guidance.

Potential Futures for Coastal Wolves and Their Ecosystem Services in Alaska, With Implications for Management of a Social-Ecological System

Carnivores across much of the world are declining, leading to loss of biodiversity as well as the ecosystem services carnivores provide. In 2020, the Alexander Archipelago (AA) wolf was petitioned for protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the third time in 30 years. Concerns included habitat alteration from industrial timber harvest and subsequent declines in prey (deer), human-caused mortality, climate change, and genetic inbreeding. However, the underlying biogeography and ecology of these wolves continues to suggest resiliency across the subspecies’ range, even though local populations may go extinct. If local wolf populations go extinct, it will result in loss of their ecosystem services (e.g., interactions of wolves with their prey, which prevents over-browsing and protects carbon sequestration in soils and trees), which will likely have major consequences for the local social-ecological system. Here, we updated a model we constructed for the last ESA listing process (2015) to examine the dynamics of wolf and deer populations on Prince of Wales Island (the primary geographic focus of all three petitions) in response to future environmental and management scenarios developed with stakeholders. Further, we considered how changes in deer abundance impact predation services (prevention of over-browsing by deer). We found that wolf populations generally persisted over 30 years, but dropped below an effective population size of 50 wolves in 10–98% of years simulated. Low wolf abundance resulted in higher deer abundance, which increased hunting opportunity, but also browsing damages (e.g., 19% of areas would be over-browsed if wolf harvest caps are removed, and >30% of areas would be over-browsed if wolves go extinct). Human harvest of wildlife was a key regulator of abundance and ecosystem services within the coastal rainforest social-ecological system; wolf abundance was most affected by wolf harvest regulations; and deer harvest restrictions increased wolf and deer abundances, but also greatly increased browsing impacts (>70% of areas heavily browsed if hunting ceased). Our findings support an integrated approach to management of this social-ecological system, such that social and ecological sciences are both used to monitor important components of the system (e.g., measuring public sentiment and likelihood of poaching, alongside wolf and deer numbers). Integration and adaptive approaches are needed to ensure that the many ecosystem services humans depend on are valued, conserved, and restored, including the cryptic predation services wolves have historically provided to the timber industry via reduced browsing pressure by deer.

Factors Associated with Listing Decisions under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.

Conservation efforts, including authorities outlined in the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, are attempting to slow the decline of species. Opinions on the success of the ESA vary widely, due in part to few species historically recovering to the point of delisting. Uncertainty surrounding the ESA relates to listing decisions and ambiguity of terminology within the ESA itself. Our goal was to evaluate the relationship, if any, of species characteristics, population metrics, threat level, and potential non-biological indicators to listing decisions under the ESA by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). We collected data from 143 ESA listing decisions published in the Federal Register from February 2011 to October 2014. Only 33 and 31% of listing decisions included population or range size estimates, respectively. Factors significantly correlated with ESA listing decision included taxonomic group, primary ownership of the species' habitat (federal or non-federal), whether the species is aquatic or terrestrial, and whether the species was part of a single or multiple-species listing decision. Increasing number of listed threats and time as a candidate species correlated positively with being listed as endangered. We have attempted to broadly identify the role both intrinsic (biological) and extrinsic (non-biological) factors play in listing decisions, and the importance of comprehensive data to understanding species distribution and abundance to facilitate more informed listing decisions.

US imperiled species are most vulnerable to habitat loss on private lands

To stem the ongoing loss of biodiversity, conservation practitioners must distinguish between effective and ineffective approaches for protecting species habitats. Using Google Earth Engine and 31 years of Landsat images, we quantified changes in the habitats of 24 vertebrates listed under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) and on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List across categories of land ownership (eg federal, state, private) in the continental US that are subject to different conservation‐focused legal restrictions. These estimates exclude changes attributable to agricultural conversion and burned areas. The imperiled species we evaluated lost the least amount of habitat (3.6%) on federal lands, whereas losses on private lands without conservation easements were more than twice as high (8.1%). Differences in annual percent loss before and after ESA listing, and between ESA‐listed and Red List species, indicate that the ESA limited habitat loss and was most effective on federal lands. These results underscore the importance of federal lands in protecting habitat for imperiled species and highlight the need to improve habitat protection on private lands for long‐term conservation.

Where’s the beef? Cattle producers’ response to endangered species listings

Agricultural production in the United States relies on extensive land use that sometimes conflicts with federal policies to protect wildlife habitat. A prime example of this conflict is the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which can impose significant penalties on landowners and producers who destroy the habitat of listed species. While prior research has measured the effects of ESA regulations on land values and natural resources, no research has identified the consequences of listing a species on livestock production. In this study, we measure the effect of ESA listings on beef cattle production in the central United States. Results suggest that listing likely has a small positive effect on cattle stocks.

All Hands on Deck: Local Ecological Knowledge and Expert Volunteers Contribute to the First Delisting of a Marine Fish Species Under the Endangered Species Act

The listing of three species of rockfish (Sebastes spp.) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2010 motivated the development of a cooperative research program between government agencies and the local recreational fishing and SCUBA diving communities of Puget Sound (PS), WA, USA. This program has examined rockfish life history characteristics, movement behavior, young-of-year recruitment and the population responses to fishing in PS. Of most significance has been the involvement of the recreational fishing community in testing whether the three ESA-listed rockfish populations in PS were genetically discrete from populations outside of PS. There was considerable uncertainty in the answer to this question during the original ESA listing process due to limited data on these three species in PS. We used the knowledge and expert angling skills of the fishing community to locate these rare species and non-lethally collect tissue samples for genetic analyses. Results showed that yelloweye rockfish (S. ruberrimus) was genetically differentiated between PS and the outer coast, but the boundaries of the population were different than previously assumed. In contrast, canary rockfish (S. pinniger) was genetically similar across PS and the outer coast. Federal managers used these results to expand the ESA-listed boundaries of yelloweye rockfish and to delist canary rockfish – the first delisting of a marine fish species from the ESA. The knowledge and angling expertise of the Puget Sound recreational fishing community were directly responsible for the successful collection of data to test hypotheses that resulted in very specific management decisions.

Temporal analysis of threats causing species endangerment in the United States

AbstractUnderstanding temporal variation of threats that cause species endangerment is a key to understand conservation strategies needed to improve species recovery. We assessed temporal variation in the threats to species listed under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) as identified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Based on initial review of ESA listing decisions and literature, we identified six overarching threat categories: habitat modification, overutilization, pollution, species–species interaction, demographic stochasticity, and environmental stochasticity. We screened listing decision documents to determine threat occurrence (i.e., presence/absence of a given threat in a listing decision) for each threat category for all species listed between 1975 and 2017. We evaluated how the number of threats and specific threat occurrences changed over the past four decades. We found that the number of threats per listing decision increased more than twofold from an average of 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3–1.7) threats in 1975 to 3.7 (95% CI: 3.4–4.0) threats in 2017. Threat occurrence increased for habitat modification, environmental stochasticity and species–species interaction, while it decreased for overutilization since 1975 and for demographic stochasticity and pollution since the mid‐2000s. The documented increase in number of threats at time of listing may be due to a growing human population exerting increased pressure on species persistence, improved scientific advancement in understanding factors influencing species endangerment, or prolonged time taken for more recent species to be listed under the ESA. We believe that key federal and state governmental regulations have resulted in a documented decrease in overutilization, demographic stochasticity, and pollution, and we recommend large‐scale strategies combined with local planning efforts to address the growing threats of habitat loss, environmental stochasticity, and species–species interaction.

Improving conservation policy with genomics: a guide to integrating adaptive potential into U.S. Endangered Species Act decisions for conservation practitioners and geneticists

Rapid environmental change makes adaptive potential—the capacity of populations to evolve genetically based changes in response to selection—more important than ever for long-term persistence of at-risk species. At the same time, advances in genomics provide unprecedented power to test for and quantify adaptive potential, enabling consideration of adaptive potential in estimates of extinction risk and laws protecting endangered species. The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) is one of the most powerful environmental laws in the world, but so far, the full potential of genomics in ESA listing and recovery decisions has not been realized by the federal agencies responsible for implementing the ESA or by conservation geneticists. The goal of our paper is to chart a path forward for integrating genomics into ESA decision making to facilitate full consideration of adaptive potential in evaluating long-term risk of extinction. For policy makers, managers, and other conservation practitioners, we outline why adaptive potential is important for population persistence and what genomic tools are available for quantifying it. For conservation geneticists, we discuss how federal agencies can integrate information on the effect of adaptive potential on extinction risk—and the related uncertainty—into decisions, and suggest next steps for advancing understanding of the effect of adaptive potential on extinction risk. The mechanisms and consequences of adaptation are incredibly complex, and we may never have a complete understanding of adaptive potential for any organism. Nevertheless, we argue that the best available evidence regarding adaptive potential can now be incorporated by federal agencies into modeling and decision making processes, while at the same time conserving genome-wide variation and striving for a deeper understanding of adaptive potential and its effects on population persistence to improve decision making into the future.

Conserving the Greater Sage-Grouse: A Social-Ecological Systems Case Study from the California-Nevada Region

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) continues to serve as one of the most powerful and contested federal legislative mandates for conservation. In the midst of heated debates, researchers, policy makers, and conservation practitioners champion the importance of cooperative conservation and social-ecological systems approaches, which forge partnerships at multiple levels and scales to address complex ecosystem challenges. However, few real-world examples exist to demonstrate how multifaceted collaborations among stakeholders who share a common goal of conserving at-risk species may be nested within a systems framework to achieve social and ecological goals. Here, we present a case study of Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) conservation efforts in the “Bi-State” region of California and Nevada, United States. Using key-informant interviews, we explored dimensions and drivers of this landscape-scale conservation effort. Three themes emerged from the interviews, including 1) ESA action was transformed into opportunity for system-wide conservation; 2) a diverse, locally based partnership anchored collaboration and engagement across multiple levels and scales; and 3) best-available science combined with local knowledge led to “certainty of effectiveness and implementation”—the criteria used by the US Fish and Wildlife Service to evaluate conservation efforts when making listing decisions. Ultimately, collaborative conservation through multistakeholder engagement at various levels and scales led to proactive planning and implementation of conservation measures and precluded the need for an ESA listing of the Bi-State population of Greater Sage-grouse. This article presents a potent example of how a systems approach integrating policy, management, and learning can be used to successfully overcome the conflict-laden and “wicked” challenges that surround at-risk species conservation.

The Regulation Charade

The Regulation Charade

Geographic variation, null hypotheses, and subspecies limits in the California Gnatcatcher: A response to McCormack and Maley

ABSTRACT We interpreted the results of nuclear DNA sequencing to be inconsistent with the recognition of California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) subspecies. McCormack and Maley (2015) suggested that our data did support 2 taxa, one of which was P. c. californica, listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We summarize here how 2 sets of researchers with access to the same data reached different conclusions by including different analyses. We included the southern subspecies' boundary from the taxonomy of Atwood (1991), the taxonomic basis for the ESA listing, which resulted in an Analysis of Molecular Variance that provided no support for subspecies. In contrast, using a novel taxonomic hypothesis without precedent in the literature, McCormack and Maley (2015) found statistically significant FST values for 2 loci, which they suggested supports P. c. californica. We propose that our mitochondrial and nuclear data had sufficient power to capture geographical structure at either the...

Ranch Owner Perceptions and Planned Actions in Response to a Proposed Endangered Species Act Listing

The Gunnison sage-grouse (GUSG) is an iconic species recently proposed for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In Colorado’s Upper Gunnison River Basin, ranchers own the majority of water rights and productive river bottoms as well as approximately 30% of the most important GUSG habitat. This project used mixed-methods interviews with 41 ranch owners to document how ranchers perceive the proposed ESA listing and how they plan to respond to a listing decision. Results show that ranchers support on-the-ground GUSG conservation but are concerned about listing implications. Ranchers are most concerned about their ability to manage public and private lands productively and continue permitted grazing on public lands. If the species is listed, landowners plan to decrease participation in conservation strategies, including plans to adopt conservation easements, participation in conservation programs, and willingness to allow access to private lands for GUSG monitoring. Landowners also express plans for increased sales of land and water, which could have negative consequences for GUSG habitat. This research suggests that changes in the application of the ESA could lead to beneficial conservation outcomes. These changes include increased transparency, ability to exclude stable populations from listing under the ESA, and commitment to work with local bodies if the species is listed. This project demonstrates the importance of qualitative research for understanding the indirect and unintended effects of species protections in an increasingly interconnected world.

The Greater Sage-Grouse Story: Do We Have It Right?

On the Ground Greater sage-grouse were found to be threatened or endangered with extinction in a preliminary assessment in 2010, with a final decision on an Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing due in 2015. ESA criteria regarding endangered status (in danger of extinction), threatened status (likely to become in danger of extinction), the foreseeable future (in which a species will become in danger of extinction), and a significant portion of a species range (without which a species will be in danger of extinction) are not definitive, rely on predictions, and are all concerned with species extinction, not simply population declines. The 2010 ESA determination for sage-grouse relies on observations of declining populations, predictions from models with uncertain assumptions, incomplete population data, and anticipated habitat changes. Prediction of species extinction from this information can be considered speculation, and insufficient for an ESA listing. Wildlife management without the encumbrances of the...

Is habitat restoration targeting relevant ecological needs for endangered species? Using Pacific Salmon as a case study

Conservation and recovery plans for endangered species around the world, including the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), rely on habitat assessments for data, conclusions and planning of short and long‐term management strategies. In the Pacific Northwest of the United States, hundreds of millions of dollars ($US) per year are spent on thousands of restoration projects across the extent of ESA‐listed Pacific salmon—often without clearly connecting restoration actions to ecosystem and population needs. Numerous decentralized administrative units select and fund projects based on agency/organization needs or availability of funds with little or no centralized planning nor post‐project monitoring. The need therefore arises for metrics to identify whether ecosystem and species level restoration needs are being met by the assemblage of implemented projects. We reviewed habitat assessments and recovery plans to identify ecological needs and statistically compared these to the distribution of co‐located restoration projects. We deployed two metrics at scales ranging from the sub‐watershed to ESA listing units; one describes the unit scale match/mismatch between projects and ecological concerns, the other correlates ecological need with need treated by projects across units. Populations with more identified ecological concerns contained more restoration effort, but the frequency of ecological concerns in recovery plans did not correlate with their frequency as restoration targets. Instead, restoration projects were strongly biased towards less expensive types. Many ESA‐listed salmon populations (78%) had a good match between need and action noted in their recovery plan, but fewer (31%) matched at the smaller sub‐watershed scale. Further, a majority of sub‐watersheds contained a suite of projects that matched ecological concerns no better, and often worse, than a random pick of all project types. These results suggest considerable room for gains in restoration funding and placement even in the absence of centralized planning. This analytical approach can be applied to any species for which habitat management is a principle tactic, and in particular can help improve efficiencies in matching identified needs with explicit management actions.

Declining populations of greater sage‐grouse: hunter motivations when numbers are low

AbstractAs a hunted species becomes increasingly rare, the effort required to locate and harvest an individual tends to increase. As rarity increases, governmental oversight, including changes in hunting regulations and protection of habitats and individuals using mechanisms such as the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), can be used to mitigate extinction risks. However, recent research has demonstrated the existence of a feedback mechanism through which increased rarity may increase hunter demand for opportunities to pursue rare species before the opportunity is lost. This phenomenon, referred to as the anthropogenic Allee effect, may exacerbate exploitation, thereby resulting in disproportionally large effects of harvest on vulnerable species. In 2010, the US Fish and Wildlife Service designated greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage‐grouse) as a candidate for listing under the ESA. Although sage‐grouse are a candidate for ESA listing, they are still hunted throughout much of their current range. In 2008, the demand for sage‐grouse hunting permits in Utah exceeded their availability, raising questions about why hunters choose to pursue this species. We hypothesized that the pending ESA listing decision increased hunter demand for permits. We surveyed randomly selected hunters who obtained permits to hunt sage‐grouse in Utah in 2008–2010 (n = 838) to determine their motivations for hunting sage‐grouse and determinants of hunter satisfaction. The most commonly reported reasons for hunting sage‐grouse were to spend time with family, for tradition and meat. Although the potential ESA listing was not a major motivational factor in 2009 or 2010, the percentage of respondents selecting this option did increase by 7%. Hunter awareness of the ESA listing petition also increased by 18% during this period. Our results provide new insights on the sociological importance and potential threats of hunting rare species.