- Top of page
- Mitchell's satyr butterfly case study
- Legal framework and analysis
- Policy options and implications
Assisted colonization could help prevent the extinction of threatened and endangered species by intentionally moving a species to a region where it has not occurred in the recent past, but should survive under future climate scenarios. Where species are naturally localized and confined to patchy habitats, assisted colonization might be the only means for population dispersal across human landscape barriers such as urban and agriculture areas. The major risk associated with assisted colonization is introducing ecologically harmful species. Previous policy papers have described management options for deciding when to move a species to mitigate for climate change. We build on this previous work by examining management options and policy solutions for assisted colonization under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). On its surface, the ESA statutory language appears to provide the legal framework for allowing assisted colonization, as the U.S. Congress gave the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) broad discretion to manage populations of endangered species. However, current USFWS regulations are an impediment to assisted colonization for many endangered animal species, whereas regulations do not necessarily restrict assisted colonization of endangered plants. Because of this discrepancy, we recommend a review of the regulatory language governing movements of endangered species.