[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
FWS ESA News Release
This message is from the fws-news listserver. Please DO NOT REPLY
(it just confuses the computers).
Subscribers can't reply or send their own messages to the fws-news
listserver. This listserver is designed mainly as a "one way street" for
the rapid dissemination of information concerning the Service and its
activities, rather than for gathering feedback. To contact us, see the
explanatory note at bottom of the message.
============================================================
TESTIMONY OF JAMIE RAPPAPORT CLARK DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC
WORKS ON S. 1180 THE ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 1997
September 23, 1997
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity
to speak with you today about this very important legislation to
reauthorize the ESA. It is fitting that I would be appearing before you
today at my first legislative hearing after my confirmation to give our
views on the Endangered Species Recovery Act of 1997. Having served as
the lead program manager for the Endangered Species Program, I have,
along with many of you, been deeply involved with the five-year quest for
a reauthorized and strengthened Endangered Species Act. I would like to
pay tribute to you Mr. Chairman and Senators Kempthorne, Baucus, and
Reid and your staffs for the dedication and hard work that made the
introduction of this bill possible.
I am very encouraged that bipartisan legislation has been introduced to
reauthorize one of the nation's premier conservation laws. For too long,
we heard only complaints from parties on all sides of this issue and
there were precious few who offered constructive solutions. Instead of
more of the same, the leadership of the Environment Committee rolled up
their sleeves in a serious effort to address concerns associated with
current implementation of the Act. We appreciated your inviting staff
from the Departments of the Interior, Commerce and Justice to provide
technical assistance and support to the process. We also welcomed the
opportunities the Committee provided to Secretary Babbitt, myself and
other officials to work with you during this process. We are also
pleased that another bipartisan bill, H.R. 2351 has been introduced in
the House by Congressman Miller and that the leadership of the House
Resources Committee has begun tentative, bipartisan discussions in an
effort to seek common ground on reauthorization. All of these events are
positive developments and suggest that at long last, legislative gridlock
on ESA reauthorization is coming to an end.
The result of your efforts in the Senate is legislation that has been
carefully crafted to maintain the essential strengths of the current law
while taking steps to make it work better for species conservation, the
States, and affected landowners. The Administration is very pleased that
the bill maintains as the foundation of the listing process the
requirement that decisions be grounded solely on biological
considerations and sound science; that the essential protections under
Sections 7 and 9 remain intact; that the opportunity for participation
by the States, affected landowners, and the general public is increased;
and foremost, that species recovery receives enhanced recognition as the
centerpiece of the Act.
On balance, we believe that S. 1180 will strengthen our ability to
conserve endangered, threatened and declining species. The Administration
supports enactment of the bill subject to the reconciliation of several
issues set forth in this testimony. Prior to the Committee markup of S.
1180, the Administration will provide the Committee with a list of other
technical and clarifying amendments, as well as suggested report
language to accompany key provisions of the bill. We will also provide
additional technical amendments as the other federal agencies complete
their review.
Reform of the implementation of the Endangered Species Act has been a
major focus of this Administration and we were pleased to see that your
bill contains many of the reforms and policies that the Administration
has proposed and carried out over the past few years to improve the
Act's effectiveness in species conservation and fairness for landowners.
When the Departments of the Interior and Commerce announced our 10 point
plan to improve implementation of the Endangered Species Act in March of
1995, we recognized that the Act needed to be more effective in
conserving species and that we needed to engage landowners as partners
in conservation, not as adversaries. We acknowledge that we must provide
landowners with greater certainty and work with them in a more open,
flexible manner with new incentives to increase their involvement in
conservation actions. After five years of developing a "new ESA" through
Administrative reforms, we would welcome the codification of many of the
reforms we have now established.
We believe S. 1180 will strengthen our ability to conserve threatened
and endangered species by including provisions that:
Enhance Recovery. Twenty-three years of experience has taught us that
conserving multiple species in a comprehensive programmatic fashion is
not only more efficient, it is better for the species. This bill
authorizes and encourages conservation plans that address multiple
species associated with the same habitat such as the Natural Communities
Conservation Planning (NCCP) program currently being implemented in
southern California. Since 1991 this innovative ecosystem based
management program has been successfully balancing the need to preserve
the unique species of the coastal sage scrub ecosystem with the desired
economic development of the area. The bill also: provides for increased
federal, state and public involvement in the recovery planning and
implementation process; clarifies the role of federal agencies in
species recovery efforts; specifies deadlines for the completion of both
draft and final plans; and provides for biological benchmarks to measure
progress on the road to recovery.
Ensure the Use of Sound Science. The use of sound science has been
highlighted by our reforms through the addition of peer review to
listing decisions, new petition management guidelines, and increased
information sharing with states. The bill's incorporation of peer review
and enhanced state involvement recognizes the importance of these
measures in decision making. Although we support the peer review
requirement in the bill for listing decisions, we remain concerned that
requiring that the National Academy of Sciences produce a list from
which qualified experts are chosen is unnecessary and potentially costly
and burdensome. We would suggest requiring that three, independent and
qualified experts be chosen by the Secretary, in keeping with our
current procedure.
Provide incentives and certainty for landowners. Many private interests
are willing to help conserve species, but landowners and businesses need
regulatory certainty upon which they can base long-term economic
decisions. Such certainty is vital to encouraging private landowners to
participate in conservation planning. The bill addresses one of the
major concerns regarding conservation plans and the "No Surprises" policy
by requiring monitoring of conservation plans to better assess their
impacts on species conservation. S. 1180 also adopts a number of
important Administration reforms, including our "No Surprises" policy,
candidate conservation agreement policy and "no-take" agreement program,
thereby providing incentives for public support and involvement in
species conservation.
The Act has been criticized for inadvertently encouraging landowners to
destroy wildlife habitat because they fear possible restrictions on the
future use of their property if additional endangered species are
attracted to improved habitat. S. 1180 incorporates the Administration's
"Safe Harbor" policy, which removes the regulatory disincentive
associated with enhancing habitat for endangered species and thus
encourages pro-active conservation efforts. We interpret the language in
the bill as being consistent with our Safe Harbor policy. This policy
has already generated considerable success in the southeast where 20,000
acres have been improved as endangered red-cockaded woodpecker habitat
under these agreements. Similar agreements are in place in Texas and are
helping to restore the Aplomado falcon to Texas for the first time in 50
years. The bill also authorizes a number of incentive programs to
encourage landowners to participate in species conservation, including
conservation and recovery planning, that if adequately funded could
greatly aid species conservation efforts.
Improve Governmental and Public Involvement. Involvement of other Federal
agencies, states, the tribes, affected public landowners and
environmental and scientific communities is key to endangered species
conservation and has been a cornerstone of our 10 point plan. S. 1180
furthers this goal by enhancing public participation processes and by
emphasizing State-Federal partnerships for endangered species
conservation especially in the areas of recovery and conservation
planning, as well as many others.
Eliminate threats to species. Species are conserved most efficiently and
least expensively when we can remove threats facing them through
conservation measures undertaken before they have declined to very low
numbers. We can act before species require listing and before recovery
options are limited, and sometimes expensive. This bill endorses our
candidate conservation agreement initiative which encourages federal
agencies and our partners to reach agreement on measures to conserve
candidate and proposed species that remove threats to species and that
can preclude the need to list these species in the future. The Department
has a number of these agreements including an agreement in Utah which
removed the threats facing the Virgin River spinedace and avoided the
need to list this fish due to the efforts of local governments working
closely with the Service. In the Midwest, a successful conservation
agreement is bringing together the States of Kentucky, Illinois, and
Indiana with the Farm Bureau and the coal industry to protect the copper
belly watersnake. A key factor leading to our support of this
legislation has been the willingness of the sponsors to make a number of
improvements since the January draft. The Committee leadership is to be
commended for allowing technical comment and discussion upon the January
draft and responding to many concerns that were raised through that
process. For example, the bill no longer includes a water rights
provision, which avoids changing the status quo on the interrelationship
of the Act and state water laws, thereby minimizing conflicts between
the Act and water projects in the West. The recovery section has been
greatly improved by requiring that recovery goals be based solely on
sound science. Then, within this biological context, social and economic
factors will be considered as we work together to find ways to
expeditiously achieve the species' recovery goal. Retaining the current
emergency listing standard is appropriate since this is an extremely
important tool in the very few crisis situations where we may need it.
After thorough examination of the Section 9 take standard by your
Committee, we are pleased to see that the bill has reaffirmed the
current law. Your bill does not waive other environmental statutes and we
commend you for this decision. Finally, the bill contains no
compensation provision or other problematic property rights language; we
would strongly object to such provisions.
These are all very positive parts of a bill that maintains and actually
improves the essential protections and integrity of the Act while also
seeking to make the Act work better for the affected public and
landowners. I would now like to discuss the Administration's
recommendations on the bill, which we believe are important to our
ability to implement a comprehensive ESA.
Securing adequate funding to support this legislation will be the
greatest challenge facing all of us. This legislation calls for an
authorization level that is more than double the current resource
agencies' ESA budgets. Even if this level of increase is realized in
appropriations, we remain concerned that the cost and complexity of some
of the changes, particularly process changes, may actually exceed the
authorized levels. Without adequate appropriations, we will face
significant litigation backlogs, and some species' recovery may be
stalled. In addition, response and technical assistance to landowners,
applicants, and federal action agencies will be delayed. Also, a number
of agencies will require additional funds to adequately implement this
bill because of increased responsibilities for land management agencies
such as the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish
and Wildlife Service. In short, absent adequate funding or a reduction
in the complexity of some of the processes, we can not support this bill.
The greatest strength of this bill is its increased emphasis on
recovery, but this comes with additional requirements that will be
expensive to implement and new deadlines that may be difficult to meet
even with adequate funding. The bill should be amended directing the
Secretary to develop and implement a biologically based recovery
planning priority system using the biological priorities as set forth in
S. 1180 as a template for this system. Also, the Administration would
like to see the recovery process streamlined as explained below.
One method for streamlining the bill's process requirements is to
consolidate the designation of critical habitat with the development of
recovery plans. Although the bill allows for the regulatory designation
of critical habitat at the time of recovery rather than listing, a
significant improvement, we remain concerned that the cost and
administrative burden of designating critical habitat by regulation in
this bill is not warranted. Habitat is "the key" for all species and as
such needs to be thoroughly addressed in all recovery plans. Continuing
to carry out a regulatory critical habitat designation process
simultaneously with the new recovery plan development process is
duplicative and escalates costs for little resource or stakeholder
benefit. Both processes include consideration of economic costs and
provide for public participation. The two should be integrated into one
process. We will be glad to suggest the necessary technical changes that
would better incorporate this process into recovery planning and save
time and money, while ensuring protection of species and habitat.
The bill provides that a Federal agency can go forward with an action if
the agency makes a determination that the action is not likely to
adversely affect the species and the resource agencies do not object.
The bill provides an increased role for Federal agencies in species
conservation by requiring inventories of species present on federally
managed lands, recovery implementation agreements, and increased
responsibility for their decisions under Section 7. We believe we can
work with other agencies to make the new trigger and the plan
consultations work well for the involved agencies, applicants and the
resource. However, an endorsement of our recent practice of working
together with other federal agencies early in the consultation process in
a pro-active manner that is both more efficient and better for species
conservation needs should be codified. Even where early coordination
occurs, the bill could be read to require that action agencies wait an
additional 60 days for resource agencies to object to their findings.
Language that stresses the importance of early proactive coordination
and cooperation among federal agencies and the ability of agencies to
still request and receive expedite concurrence letters would alleviate
these concerns. Finally, I would like to urge that the spirit of
cooperative discussion that produced this bill extend to the development
of the Committee report, so that our mutual understandings of these
complex issues are strengthened, not eroded, as the bill proceeds
through the legislative process. I am very encouraged that the Senate is
moving forward to reauthorize the ESA. We in the Administration stand
ready to continue to assist in any way possible in seeing the process
through to completion. We are optimistic that we can reach closure on
these issues before final consideration of this bill in the Senate so
that the Administration can support its enactment. Together, we can make
the Act work even better for species and people and get on with
conserving our resources for future generations.
====================================================================
News releases are also available on the World Wide Web at
http://www.fws.gov/~r9extaff/pubaff.html They can be reviewed in
chronological order or searched by keyword.
Questions concerning a particular news release or item of information
should be directed to the person listed as the contact. General comments
or observations concerning the content of the information should be
directed to Craig Rieben (craig_rieben@mail.fws.gov) in the Office of
Public Affairs.
============================================================
To unsubscribe from the fws-news listserver, send e-mail to
majordomo@www.fws.gov with "unsubscribe fws-news" (and omit the "quotes")
in the **body** of the message. You should not include anything on the
Subject: line.
For additional information about listserver commands, send a message to
majordomo@www.fws.gov with "info fws-news" (and no "quotes") in the body
of the message.
Received: from dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov by smtp1.irm.r9.fws.gov (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.00)
; Thu, 25 Sep 97 18:19:13 -0700
Return-Path: <owner-fws-news@dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov>
Received: by dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id LAA11594; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 11:52:46 -0600
Message-Id: <199709251752.LAA11594@dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov>
Date: Wed, 3 September 1997 9:40:00 -0600 (MDT)
From: Mitch Snow <mitch_snow@mail.fws.gov>
To: fws-news@dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov
Subject: News Release
Sender: owner-fws-news@dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: fws-news@dataadmin.irm.r9.fws.gov