Guardian News and Media. (2022, June 16). California delays Joshua Tree protections as
experts say time is running out. The Guardian. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/16/california-joshua-tree-threatened-species-delayed
The Joshua Tree is slowly becoming more and more at risk of extinction, as “Scientists predict that the spiny-crested fixtures of the high desert are unlikely to survive through the end of the century due to global heating.” California has been voting on and considering protection for the Joshua Tree, but recently delayed protections. While the trees are protected conditionally, Brendan Cummings, conservation director for the Center for Biological Diversity, believes they are at immediate risk and need full protection.
This article highlights the potential issue with the state of California failing to provide protection to the Joshua Tree, and why many are frustrated with California’s decision to delay. They believe the matter to be urgent, and that if we do not take necessary action now, then it may be too late for the Joshua Tree. The arguments of those opposed to listing the Joshua Tree as endangered are that they aren’t in low abundance quite yet, and that it interferes with development interests from large companies who may want to expand or build on the land. I see this as just another way large companies are using their power and resources to benefit themselves with little regard to the environment and the damage they are causing by removing these plants and trees. I think the Joshua Tree is quickly heading towards danger and possible extinction, and should therefore be listed as an endangered species.
Daniel- I agree with your sentiments, and I think you understand the issue well. For similar reasons they delayed putting the sockeye salmon on the End. Species list. Once it’s there, it changes everything. Should there be a place for community input on whether a species is listed as end. or not? Or should it just be up to some other criteria- like population size. It sounds like in this case that criteria wouldn’t work… even though the population is not healthy. Should the community (including business) have a voice?
I think having a place for community input would be extremely beneficial and the community should definitely have a voice not just for democracy, but because they provide a more impartial view than large companies who are just looking to expand their businesses. I also believe criteria should not just look at population size, but also population health.