Here's an interesting example from where I work: 2 years ago, 3 species were listed, a butterfly, a bird, and a gopher. It did change a bunch of policies, which I'm more or less done complaining about, and did bloat the F&W group's budget and staff, to the degree where they're having a hard time finding office space and transportation for them all. Yet, there are whisperings now of listing a second butterfly, which lives in the same habitat as the three species listed before. Why do that? The habitat is already protected. I honestly don't understand the need to double down on the protection if habitat is really the issue.