Species listing under Canada's species at risk act

Conservation Biology

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1609-1617

  Findlay, C Scott ^a   Elgie, Stewart ^a   Giles, Brian ^a   Burr, Linda ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Endangered species; Legislative amendment; Listing; Responsible authority; Socioeconomic analysis; Species at Risk Act

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; DATABASE; DECISION MAKING; ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT; HARVESTING; MODEL VALIDATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS;

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CANADA; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; LEGAL ASPECT; SOCIOECONOMICS; THEORETICAL MODEL;

BIODIVERSITY; CANADA; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ENDANGERED SPECIES; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA;

EID: 67650352455     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01255.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Burnham, K. P., and D. A. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference. 2nd edition. Springer-Verlag, New York.
2. Clark, J. A., and E. Harvey. 2002. Assessing multi-species recovery plans under the Endangered Species Act. Ecological Applications 12 : 655 662.
3. Elgie, S. 2008. Statutory structure and species survival: how constraints on cabinet discretion affect endangered species listing outcomes. Journal of Environmental Law and Practice 19 : 1 32.
4. Environment Canada. 1996. Task force on endangered species conservation: report on federal endangered species legislation. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
5. Environment Canada. 2005. Species at Risk Act: report to parliament, June 2003 to December 2004. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Available from http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual-sara/files/reports/ ar%5FSARA%5FAnnualReport%5F0304%5Fe%2Epdf (accessed December 2008).
6. Firth, D. 1993. Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80 : 27 38.
7. Government of Canada. 2006. Order amending schedules 1 to 3 to the Species at Risk Act. Canada Gazette 140 (18). Available from http://canadagazette.gc.ca/partII/2006/20060906/html/sor189-e.html (accessed August 2008).
8. Greenwald, D. N., K. F. Suckling, and M. Taylor. 2006. The listing record. Pages 51 67 in D. Gobel, M. J. Scott, and F. W. Davis, editors. The Endangered Species Act at thirty: renewing the conservation commitment. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
9. Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests). 2004. 3 Supreme Court Reports 511.
10. Heinze, G., and M. Ploner. 2003. Fixing the nonconvergence bug in logistic regression with SPLUS and SAS. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 71 : 181 187.
11. Male, T. D., and M. J. Bean. 2005. Measuring progress in US endangered species conservation. Ecology Letters 8 : 986 992.
12. Mooers, A. Ø., L. R. Prugh, M. Festa-Bianchet, and J. A. Hutchings. 2007. Biases in legal listing under Canadian endangered species legislation. Conservation Biology 21 : 572 575.
13. Norris G. 2004. Only 30: portrait of the Endangered Species Act as a young law. BioScience 54 : 288 294.
14. Ontario Endangered Species Act. 2007. Bill 184: an act to protect species at risk and to make related changes to other acts. Available from http://www.ontla.on.ca/bills/bills-files/38-Parliament/Session2/b184.pdf (accessed December 2008).
15. Privy Council Office. 2008. Regulatory impact analysis statement template. Privy Council Office, Ottawa, Ontario. Available from http://www.reglementation.gc.ca/documents/list-liste-eng.asp (accessed November 2008).
16. Rachlinski, J. J. 1997. Noah by the numbers: an empirical evaluation of the Endangered Species Act. Cornell Law Review 82 : 356 389.
17. Regina v. Sparrow. 1990. 1 Supreme Court Reports 1075
18. SARA (Species at Risk Act). 2002. Bill C-5. An act respecting the protection of wildlife species at risk in Canada. Available from http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/frame/cs/S-15.3///en (accessed December 2008).
19. Scott, M. J., and D. D. Goble. 2005. A database for the ESA. Bios 55 : 299.
20. Scott, J. M., T. H. Tear, and L. S. Mills. 1995. Socioeconomics and the recovery of endangered species: biological assessment in a political world. Conservation Biology 9 : 214 216.
21. Stratos. 2006. Formative evaluation of federal species at risk programs. Final report. Stratos, Ottawa, Ontario.
22. Taylor, M. F. J., K. F. Suckling, and J. J. Rachlinski. 2005. The effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act: a quantitative analysis. BioScience 55 : 360 367.
23. Tear, T. H., J. M. Scott, P. H. Hayward, and B. Griffith. 1993. Trend and prospects for success of the Endangered Species Act: a look at recovery plans. Science 262 : 976 977.
24. U.S. ESA (Endangered Species Act of 1973). 1973. Available from http://www.fws.gov/endangered/pdfs/esaall.pdf (accessed December 2008).
25. Venter, O., N. N. Brodeur, L. Nemiroff, B. Belland, I. J. Dolinsek, and J. W. A. Grant. 2006. Threats to endangered species in Canada. BioScience 56 : 903 910.