It doesn't matter what you do for species if you don't protect their habitat.

Any money to protect habitat and species is good but the amount of money here is extraordinarily small relative to the land values,

It hardly matters if you list a species, if you don't take care of their habitat.

It runs counter to the intent of the Endangered Species Act.

The Endangered Species Act has been a roaring success for the grizzly bear in Yellowstone.

Having an endangered or candidate species on your property should be a good thing, something a landowner can be proud of, not something to avoid. With the administrative reforms we have made to the Endangered Species Act, such as safe harbor agreements, habitat conservation plans, and candidate conservation agreements with assurances, ranchers, timber companies and other landowners are able to participate in the conservation of at-risk species without the concern that their future plans may be delayed or halted.