|
"Beyond
a doubt, the greatest threat today to the Florida panther lies
in the departments of government collaborating to save it….
Lobbying for enabling legislation, and for the provision of
funds, by environmental organizations has been rewarding, but
the resulting aid has outrun the institutional capacity to use
it effectively."
Ken Alvarez, former member of the Panther Advisory
Council, Twilight of the Panther 1993:23
"Poor implementation of the ESA [Endangered Species Act] is
itself a major cause of the continuing decline of species, and
professionals and organizations are significantly responsible
for the quality of implementation."
Tim Clark, Richard Reading, Alice Clarke, Endangered
Species Recovery 1994: 4. |
|
Endangered
species recovery is an organizational, social, political, and economic
process as well as a biological process. Numerous agencies, groups, and
individuals have an interest in the Florida panther and its future.
The
recovery of the Florida panther is generally guided by four agencies:
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, the National Park Service, and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection. Representatives from these agencies make up the Florida Panther
Interagency Committee (FPIC). There is also a FPIC Technical Subcommittee,
composed of representatives from the four agencies, that meets, listens
to reports from field biologists and outside experts, and makes recommendations
to FPIC. It is FPIC that makes the major decisions concerning panther
management. Another group, the Florida Panther Technical Advisory Council
(FPTAC), whose members are appointed by the governor, advises the Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission only.
Decisions
of other agencies and entities, including the South Florida and Southwest
Florida water management districts, the Central, Southwest, and South
Florida regional planning councils, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
the Florida Department of Transportation, the U.S. Forest Service, and
the Seminole and Miccosukee tribes, may be critical to the panther's future.
Local governments (cities and counties), through land use and zoning decisions,
also affect habitat of the panther and many other species.
In
an examination of endangered species recovery nationwide, sociologist Ron
Westum (1994) argues that
existing governmental agencies do not generally function in a way that leads
to successful recovery of endangered species. Agencies have distinct histories,
are accustomed to functioning independently of each other, and their goals
and values may conflict. When they were established, the need for intergovernmental
coordination was not recognized to the extent it is today.
Government
agencies may be notoriously slow in completing tasks, especially when
everything must be reviewed and decisions made through long chains of 
command. Mid-level managers may distort information as it moves up
and down long hierarchies between field biologists and top administrators
(Clark, Reading, and Clarke
1994; Synder 1994).
Clark,
Reading, and Clarke (1994) suggest reorganizing the way the endangered
species recovery process occurs in the United States. They suggest establishment
of teams of experts (social scientists as well as biologists) who are
committed to the goal of species recovery and who are not simply representatives
of governmental agencies or special interest groups. Teams must include
the principal biologists who have worked with the species. Members need
to be free to inquire, to think, and to speak their minds independent
of government agencies. They need to be empowered to make decisions and
to act quickly. They need leaders who are open to new ideas and who are
able to get potential adversaries to "buy in" to species recovery.
 Back
to Top
 Mercury
and Other Contaminants Public
Perceptions
|
