Critical Habitat Protection of Hellbender Salamanders

Teaching Guide

Topic: Critical Habitat Protection of Hellbender Salamanders

Host: Zen Pisani

Guests: Trisha Crabill and Brain Segee

Listen in to learn more about Hellbenders, the subspecies of Giant Salamanders in North America, and different views as to why the subspecies having a Critical Habitat Designation along with their classifications under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Objectives:

I can define what a critical habitat designation is.
I can explain two positive and two negative consequences of designating critical habitat protection to Hellbender Salamanders.
I can use critical thinking to form my own opinion as to why critical habitat designation would be beneficial or consequential to a species.

Pre-Viewing Questions:

List four things you know about what is means for a species to be threatened or endangered.
What is your current opinion of the ESA?
What do you think a Critical Habitat Designation is? 
Why do you think this could be a controversial topic? 

Guided Questions:

What is the main difference for classifying an animal as either threatened or endangered?
What are the two protections given to a species under section 7 of the ESA?
What are the three reasons listed as to why the populations of Hellbenders have decreased in the past half century?
One protection of the ESA is the prohibition “to take” a species, aside from physically taking an animal, what are some examples provided that fall under this prohibition?
What does it mean if a person gets critical habitat designated on their private property?
What could be a possible downfall of designating Hellbenders a Critical Habitat?

Post-Listening Questions:

What does it  mean for a species to have a critical habitat designation?
What are two positive and two negative consequences of not providing critical habitat protection to Hellbenders?
Do you believe it would be beneficial or consequential for the Hellbender subspecies to be designated critical habitat protection?

Scoring Rubric

Categories

Level 1: 1 points

Level 2: 2 points

Level 3: 3 points

Knowledge

Level 1: Student cites either one positive or one negative consequence.

Level 2: Student lists at least 1 positive and 1 negative consequence.

Level 3: Student lists multiple positive and negative consequences. 

Synthesis

Level 1: Student responses do not incorporate relevant viewpoints from the podcast.

Level 2: Student incorporates information related to one viewpoint presented in the podcast.

Level 3: Student incorporates information from both viewpoints.

Reasoning

Level 1: Student does not back up reasoning or show why they have a certain opinion.

Level 2: Student supports some statements with facts and evidence.

Level 3: All or most opinions are backed up by facts from the podcast or other credible sources.