With the introduction of wildlife webcams, anyone with an Internet connection can view real-time, live video feed capturing a variety of species, including endangered species, in their natural habitats from a remote location. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife that a potential citizen plaintiff must have plans to physically visit the species in its natural habitat in order to satisfy the injury-infact requirement. As a result of the development of wildlife webcam technology, and based on the neurological processes that stimulate aesthetic enjoyment of an object, the distinction between physically visiting a species and viewing it in real time from a remote location for purposes of standing makes little sense. Citizens who engage in aesthetic enjoyment of wildlife remotely via wildlife webcam should be able to satisfy the injury-in-fact prong of constitutional standing and should be able to bring suit under the ESA to protect the species that they view.