(http://www.fws.gov/floridapanther/images/floridapanther.jpg).
I discovered an article in Naples Daily News (http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2010/feb/11/florida-panther-critical-habitat-fish-wildlife-/) which discusses a recent rejection of an effort to seek more protection and acquire 3 million more acres of designated "critical habitat" for the panther. The argument against providing "critical habitat areas" is that critical habitat areas would take away resources from other panther protection priorities. Experts believe that a public-private partnership (as opposed to) top-down regulation is the key to removing the symbolic animal off the endangered list.
Although I believe that we need to do something in order to get our state animal off of the endangered species list, I must say that I agree with the rejection of such proposal. There are typically shortcuts with top-down regulations. For example, as discussed in the article, a critical habitat destination would not necessarily restrict development. However, I think plans such as the the one developed for Ave Maria which awards development credits to landowners who agree to set aside land for preservation, would ultimately be much more efficient in the efforts of saving the Florida Panther.
Works Cited
Staats, Eric. "Feds Say No to 3 Million Acres of Panther Critical Habitat in Southwest Florida" . NaplesNews.com. 11 February 2010.

No comments:
Post a Comment