My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7887
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7887
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:31 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 6:55:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7887
Author
Fischer, H., (Wendy E. Hudson, ed.).
Title
Building Economic Incentives Into The Endangered Species Act, Third Edition.
USFW Year
1994.
USFW - Doc Type
Washington, D.C.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
128
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
3 THE HABITAT TRANSACTION METHOD: <br />A PROPOSAL FOR CREATING TRADABLE CREDITS <br />IN ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT <br />Todd G. Olson <br />Consultant <br />Olson Policy Consulting <br />Dennis D. Murphy <br />Director <br />Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University <br />Robert D. Thornton <br />Partner <br />Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott <br />Section 10(a) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides the only direct means <br />for private parties to obtain federal permits to "take" endangered or threatened <br />species incidentally to otherwise lawful activities. The Secretary of Interior issues <br />such take permits if an applicant offers to implement a habitat conservation plan <br />(HCP) that the Secretary finds to be incompliance with the standards set forth in <br />Section 10(a) of the ESA. <br />Only a handful of Section 10(a) permits have been issued since the introduction of <br />Section 10(a) into the ESA in 1982. In most cases, the HCPs on which those permits <br />have been based have involved a small number of landowners and have been based <br />on the conservation of habitat in preservation zones in exchange for permission to <br />develop lands in development zones. The preservation program is typically financed <br />either by direct exchanges of land for permission to take habitat, or by fees charged <br />when land is developed in development zones, which are then used to acquire land in <br />preservation zones. <br />This approach works well as long as the owners of land within preservation zones <br />are willing participants. In the case of the one continuing HCP in which the preserva- <br />tion zone includes thousands of private landowners-the short-term HCP for the <br />Stephens' kangaroo rat in western Riverside County, California-many of the <br />landowners in the preservation zone do not see any benefits from the HCP, and <br />hence, oppose it. As a result, those administering that plan now seek an alternative to <br />the strict designation of preservation zones for purposes of the long-term HCP <br />currently under development. <br />A challenge for the ESA and for those who implement it is coming in a new wave of <br />HCPs that deal with multiple listed and unlisted species and, like the Stephens' <br />kangaroo rat HCP, large numbers of landowners. Such efforts include multiple- <br />species plans being developed in Kern, Riverside, and San Diego counties, to offer <br />27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.