Comment by Shawn M. Dansky
The Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (the Parties, individually a Party) met in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, in November of 1994, and adopted the most objective criteria that have ever been used in endangered species listing. By doing so, the Parties attempted to remove those subjective pressures (political, economic, social, etc.) that had hampered not only the CITES listing process but also the listing process in most countries' domestic endangered species legislation. The Parties adopted what they believed to be measurable criteria—guidelines that would protect those species which truly needed protection, but would allow for trade in those species that were only being listed because of subjective considerations.
Almost four years later, whether the Parties accomplished this goal with the new criteria remains to be seen. While it is true that larger countries, such as the United States, have lost some of the control that they previously had on the listing process, the criteria are still not completely objective, and have room for improvement. This Comment analyzes these “objective” criteria, and their effects on an animal that has become a symbol of endangered species protection: the African elephant.
About the Author
Shawn M. Dansky. B.S. 1996, Wildlife and Fisheries Science, Pennsylvania State University; J.D. Candidate 1999, Certificate in Environmental Law, Tulane University.
Citation
73 Tul. L. Rev. 961 (1999)