WSP12675 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

W AIS Document Retrieval u02G93 flycatcher because, as discussed in detail below, critical habitat designation provides little or no conservation benefit despite the great cost to put it in place. The Service's conclusion in this regard is reflected in its Listing Priority Guidance (61 FR 64475}, -under which designation of critical habitat is accorded the lowest priority among the Service's various listing activities. In accordance with the Listing Priority Guidance, since the lifting of the moratorium the Service has spent the scarce resources available to it for listing activities on meeting other requirements of the Act that provide significantly more conservation benefit. Nonetheless, the Service has been ordered to make a final determination witrr regard to critical habitat in an exceedingly short period of time. This final rule is issued to comply with that order. The rule meets the technical requirements of the Act; however, because of the unprecedented time constraints resulting from the court order, the Service was not able to provide the level of analysis and completeness that it has in the past on such rules. The Service is designating critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher as it was proposed in 1993, with the deletion of some minor areas that were found to have been proposed in error because they have little or no potential for flycatcher habitat (see Issue 4 in Summary of Comments and Recommendations). The Service concedes that there may be additional areas that could be excluded because they no longer require special management considerations or protection due to ongoing management agreements, such as that with respect to Camp Pendleton. Similarly, the Service has been unable to consider additional areas for inclusion in this rule in response to the comments received. Even promulgating this rule stripped down to its essentials has placed an enormous burden on the Service. The Service had no option but to disrupt significant work at the Field Office, Regional, and National levels in order to provide the resources to generate this [[Page 39131]] final rule. The Service intends to further articulate its views concerning critical habitat, and to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on those views, in the development of a specific critical habitat policy in the very near future. However, the below analysis is provided to elaborate on why the Service has placed critical habitat designation among the lowest priorities in the Listing Priority Guidance, and therefore why critical habitat for the flycatcher was not designated prior to this time. Critical Habitat Designation of critical habitat for endangered or threatened species has been among the most costly and controversial classes of administrative actions undertaken by the Service in administering the Act. Over 20 years of experience in designating critical habitat and applying it as a tool in conserving species leads the Service to seriously question its utility and the value it provides in comparison to the monetary, administrative, and other resources it absorbs. Although the Service is, in this case, designating critical habitat pursuant to a Court order that requires the Service to make a final determination, the Service believes that critical habitat is not an efficient or effective means of securing the conservation of species., An analysis supporting this conclusion is presented below. The Designation Process When the Service lists a species as threatened or endangered, the Act requires that it specify, "to the maximum extent prudent and determinable,' I the species' critical habitat. If critical habitat is not considered determinable at the time a final rule is adopted to list Tuesday, July 22, 1997 Page 4 of21 2:0S PM