Most Americans support the Endangered Species Act

It’s politicians — not citizens — who want to gut protections for threatened species.


This article was originally published on and is republished here with permission.

The , or “the Act,” is arguably the most important law in the United States for conserving biodiversity and arresting the extinction of species.

with strong bipartisan support (the House voted 355-4 in favor of the law) at the behest of a Republican president, Richard Nixon. Nixon had come to believe existing protections for threatened and endangered species were insufficient.

Since its passage, the Act has helped  — from to  — and served as a model for similar laws around the world.

The San Joaquin kit fox, which once lived throughout California’s San Joaquin Valley, is listed as endangered — in other words, the species is in immediate danger of extinction.

Nevertheless, criticism of the law has been a persistent feature of debates about whether and how to protect imperiled species. That criticism often comes from and interests, who argue that the Act’s provisions excessively limit their ability to develop and manage private property.

Such criticisms led to  last week to severely curtail the scope of the Act. And they have prompted and raised concern that support for the law may be waning.

We are and whose work often intersects with the Endangered Species Act. We wanted to know: Is public support for the Act declining? And if so, why?

Arrested development

Some members of Congress have proposed legislation to weaken the Act’s protections — and these proposals appear to be increasing. , an advocacy group that supports protections for endangered species, analyzed congressional voting records and found that from the 1990s until 2010, a typical year saw roughly five proposals to amend the Act or otherwise .

Then, in 2011 the number of proposed bills to amend the Act jumped to 30 and has . In the past two years there have been nearly 150 such efforts aimed at weakening the Act. Sponsors of such legislation have not been shy about the goals of their efforts. As Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, , their intent is to “invalidate” the Act.

But threats to the Act are not limited to congressional actions. The Act has also been weakened by rule changes (which prescribe how to carry out the Act) adopted by the agencies charged with administering it, the and . effectively in a way that could dramatically lower the standard for what measures are required to recover endangered species.

Some say these changes are needed to prevent widespread public backlash against the Act, which could lead to its unraveling.

For example, in 2015 the Obama administration concerning the listing of endangered species. The proposal effectively made it harder for citizens to petition to list a species (only listed species are entitled to ESA protections). NewTowncarShare News characterized the proposal as a “preemptive strike” that was “aimed at warding off a GOP overhaul of the law.”

Similarly, some conservation professionals worry that continuing protections for controversial species such as gray wolves could “” ultimately, undermining the effectiveness of the law.

Decades of support

In 2014, we conducted a survey of 1,287 Americans, gathering data on a variety of topics related to wildlife conservation, including support for the Act. We also gathered data from previously published studies and public polls. We found four studies or polls that assess support for the ESA spanning roughly two decades, and combined them to about the Act over time.

Collectively, results indicate support for the Act has been remarkably stable over the past 20 years.

Average support in the three most recent studies, conducted in 2011, 2014 and 2015, was statistically indistinguishable from the earliest study, conducted in 1996. The data show that more than 4 in 5 Americans support the Act, while roughly 1 in 10 oppose it.

In contrast to the that the Act is controversial, these data suggest that support for the law among the general population is robust and has remained so for at least two decades.

Furthermore, while some issues — for example, and  — have become increasingly partisan, our data indicate that both self-identified conservatives as well as liberals strongly supported the ESA. Though liberals (90 percent) were more supportive of the Act than conservatives (74 percent), we found nearly 3 in 4 conservatives supported the Act, and only 15 percent opposed the law.

These results are mirrored in polls conducted and . Those polls found that 73 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of self-identified conservatives supported the Act, respectively. Those same polls found that 93 percent of Democrats and 96 percent of liberals supported the Act.

Agricultural and property rights advocates have long criticized the ESA, but our results show support for the ESA transcended interest groups, including agriculture (71 percent) and property rights (69 percent). This result may be explained, in part, by sometimes hold more extreme views than their members.

Who influences policy?

Some conservation professionals believe that continued protections for could erode support for the Act and the species the law protects.

If that were so, one might anticipate less support for the Act in places where such species were listed over long periods.

However, our results show that support for the Act, trust in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that administers the Act and attitudes toward wolves are equivalent in places where wolves are protected by the Act and places where wolves don’t live, and hence, are not protected.

Our results raise the question: If support for the Act transcends political ideology, party, region of the country, and even interest group — why are congressional efforts to weaken the Act increasing?

Some insight may come from political scientists who that “average citizens and mass-based interest groups” have little to no influence on a wide range of policy issues.

Rather, the research suggests, policy outcomes in America are heavily influenced by “economic elites” and business interests who, by virtue of their considerable financial resources, have greater clout with, and access to, policymakers.

This “legislators in the U.S. Congress routinely defect from their campaign promises in environmental protection, undermining the link between citizen preferences and policy choice.”

compiled by the Center for Biological Diversity, as of late April 2018 there are more than 50 bills that would, if passed into law, weaken the Act in one form or another. Whether such legislation can be passed in the face of overwhelming public support remains to be seen.

The ConversationThe new study, published in the journal Conservation Letters, can be found .

 is an associate professor of environment and natural resources at The Ohio State University.  is a professor at Michigan Technological University.  is an associate professor in environmental and natural resources policy at The Ohio State University. 

NewTowncarShare News Classifieds
  • Assistant Editor, NewTowncarShare News, Telecommute. Edit, write and help shape digital strategy for one of the best magazines in the country. Committed to inclusivity....
  • Associate Editor, West-north Desk, NewTowncarShare News, Telecommute. Dream job. Write, edit and contribute to the vision and strategy of one of the best magazines...
  • Take over the reins of a dynamic grassroots social justice group that protects Montana's water quality, family farms and ranches, & unique quality of life....
  • EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - Winter Wildlands Alliance seeks an experienced and highly motivated individual to lead and manage the organization as Executive Director. Visit for...
  • Background: The Birds of Prey NCA Partnership is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization based in Boise, Idaho, which was established in 2015 after in-depth stakeholder input...
  • Southwest Borderlands Initiative Professor of Native Americans and the News Media The Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University is...
  • AWF seeks an energetic Marketing and Communications Director. Please see the full job description at
  • The Southwest Communications Director will be responsible for working with field staff in Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico to develop and execute detailed communication plans...
  • An intentional community designed for aging in place. Green built with Pumice-crete construction (R32), bamboo flooring, pine doors, T&G ceiling with fans, and maintenance free...
  • (CFROG) is a Ventura County, CA based watch-dog and advocacy non-profit organization.
  • Take your journalism skills to the next level and deepen your understanding of environmental issues by applying for the 2019-2020 Ted Scripps Fellowships in Environmental...
  • The San Juan Mountains Association is seeking a visionary leader to spearhead its public lands stewardship program in southwest Colorado. For a detailed job description...
  • The Cascade Forest Conservancy seeks a passionate ED to lead our forest protection, conservation, education, and advocacy programs.
  • Mountain Pursuit is a new, bold, innovative, western states, hunting advocacy nonprofit headquartered in Jackson, Wyoming. We need a courageous, hard working, passionate Executive Director...
  • The Draper Natural History Museum (DNHM) at the Buffalo Bill Historical Center of the West in Cody, WY, invites applications for the Willis McDonald, IV...
  • Couple seeks quiet, private, off-grid acreage in area with no/low cell phone service and no/low snowfall. Conservation/bordering public lands a plus. CA, OR, WA, ID,...
  • Former northern Sierra winery, with 2208 sq.ft. commercial building, big lot, room to expand.
  • The dZi Foundation is seeking a FT Communications Associate with a passion for Nepal to join our team in Ridgway, Colorado. Visit
  • Available now for site conservator, property manager. View resume at
  • Stellar seed-saving NGO is available to serious partner. Package must include financial support. Details: