In the United States, at least 80 percent of wildlife in the 48 contiguous states is dependent in whole or in part upon private land. The biggest threat to wildlife is loss of habitat; unfortunately, land use regulations in the U.S. discourage landowners from protecting wildlife.

Specifically, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) severely restricts private land use where listed species are found, encouraging habitat destruction. Landowners bear the costs of preserving wildlife habitat while the public receives the benefits.

If property owners were permitted to own or at least manage the wild animals on their land, the animals would add value -- giving landowners an incentive to practice conservation.

This is the practice in several other countries:

• In the United Kingdom, wildlife either belongs to property owners or is regulated through both private and public management, and public funds are often used to compensate landowners who modify their land to benefit the environment.

• In Australia, Earth Sanctuaries, an innovative environmental organization listed on the Australian Stock Exchange, includes the value of rare animals in its balance sheet so that shareholders will know if the company is really meeting its goal of conservation.

• In South Africa, private game reserves compete with government reserves to provide the best habitat for wild animals -- as a result, local communities now view wild animals as valuable assets worth preserving.

• And in Zimbabwe, groups of ranchers managing endangered black rhinos on private land have eliminated the poaching that threatened the rhino's extinction on public lands.

In the U.S., nonprofit land trusts are taking an active role in wildlife conservation. The five largest national and state land trusts protect over 14 million acres of land (see figure).

Source: Cynthia Stanfield, "Private Wildlife Conservation," Brief Analysis No. 338, August 31, 2000, National Center for Policy Analysis.

For text http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba338/ba338.html