Book Review

Scholars have only recently begun to embrace public policy history as a critical dimension of American environmental history. This renewed focus on government institutions is well deserved, for the legislators, administrators, and judges who populate them have actively shaped the natural landscape, for better or worse, over the course of the last century. Historian and environmental attorney Shannon Petersen makes an important contribution to this literature by examining the complex interchange of law, science, and politics that has informed federal efforts to protect endangered species. The author sets his analytical sights specifically on the courts, noting that "Since the late 1970s, litigation and judicial decision-making have driven environmental policy in this country more than legislation and administrative rulemaking" (p. xi). Accordingly, the issue of species preservation serves as an important case study of a broader, understudied trend in post-World War II environmentalism.	1
The book opens with an informative survey of wildlife protection as it evolved intellectually, politically, and legally from the nineteenth century to the 1960s, but the fireworks really begin with the passage of the landmark Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. Initially, the seemingly innocuous act generated little congressional scrutiny and no organized interest-group opposition. Legislators assumed that the statute pertained exclusively to protecting "charismatic megafauna" (bald eagles, blue whales) from over-hunting and other direct causes of harm. As Petersen skillfully demonstrates, however, federal courts over the next two decades consistently opted to read updated scientific knowledge about the causes of extinction back into the original act. New emphases on "biodiversity" and "indirect harm" implied new solutions like habitat preservation, which led to a considerably more expansive interpretation of federal regulatory authority than Congress ever intended, along with unforeseen threats to private property and economic development. The remaining chapters recount the infamous snail darter (Tellico Dam) and spotted owl (Northwest old-growth logging) controversies, and demonstrate how judges regularly sided with environmental plaintiffs during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, forcing the hand of reluctant federal administrators under three presidents. At the same time, such actions created considerable backlash among regional economic interests, insuring that the ESA would endure repeated amendment and consistent political controversy.	2
Acting for Endangered Species is a clear, concise study, attentive to the many ironies that pervade this tale of unintended consequences. What is missing is a more systematic attempt to locate the story in a larger context of environmental judicial activism. The political and legal history of the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for example, bears a notable resemblance to that of the Endangered Species Act. Indeed, it is baffling to contemplate why Tennessee Senator Howard Baker, a principal defender of Tellico Dam during the mid-1970s, did not foresee ESA's potential pitfalls; as a member of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, Baker had already observed judges and environmental litigants outstrip congressional intent and transform NEPA into a powerful check on development. But Petersen eschews such comparisons. A more synthetic treatment of environmental litigation during this era would have been enlightening. Nevertheless, Petersen's work is a welcome addition on an important topic, ideal for undergraduates or anyone interested in the law and public policy.	3
Reviewed by Paul Milazzo, assistant professor of history at Ohio University. His current project is entitled, "Legislating the Solution to Pollution: Congress and the Development of Water Pollution Control Policy, 1945–1972."

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.