We searched the statutory codes of all 50 states to locate provisions applicable to endangered and threatened species. The state statutes were compared to 6 components of the US Endangered Species Act: (1) coverage; (2) listing procedures and requirements under section 4; (3) habitat designation and protection procedures and criteria under sections 4 and 7; (4) prohibitions on commerce and taking under section 9; (5) exceptions to the prohibitions on commerce and taking and (6) conservation planning under section 4. State endangered and threatened species legislation is far less comprehensive than the federal act. Only 15 states have statutes that cover all plants and animals. Similarly, only 11 states offer any protection for taxa below the subspecific level. 45 states have provisions for listing species independently of the federal act but only 8 authorize emergency listings. 43 states have no provisions authorizing the designation of critical habitat; 39 states offer no protection against habitat destruction on either private or publicly owned lands. Most states prohibit commercial transactions and taking of listed animal species; plant species receive less protection. Only 3 states include any requirements that the wildlife management agency engage in recovery planning processes. In the absence of a federal statute to protect endangered and threatened species, we question whether current state protection is either adequate or would be maintained. We briefly examined legislation on endangered species in two other countries with federal systems of government, Australia and Canada. Canada lacked a federal statute. Assessment of national, state and territorial legislation in Australia revealed several similarities and differences with the United States endangered species legislation. Differences suggested an alternative to the top down approach embodied in the United States Endangered Species Act.