My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
A White Paper: Endangered Species Act of 1973
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
4001-5000
>
A White Paper: Endangered Species Act of 1973
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2010 12:42:51 PM
Creation date
7/16/2010 11:48:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
General Statewide Issues: Endangered Species Act, Fisheries
State
CO
Date
3/31/1992
Author
Nationwide Public Projects Coalition, Frank H. Dunkle, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servicce
Title
A White Paper: Endangered Species Act of 1973
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
M3-277-- E EC <br />IV. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS <br />INTRODUCTION <br />731 POe MAR Z1 ''?3 <br />The following solutions will be developed into specific amendments to the Act, if <br />approved by the Coalition. Note: These may be changed if a Biodiversity bill is <br />passed to reflect conflict between its provisions and those of the Endangered <br />Species Act. <br />• Costs. <br />That a Recommendation to List must incorporate the following: 1. the <br />complete file of scientific data and collection methodology, 2. a detailed <br />recovery plan with its projected cost and budget, 3. if critical habitat <br />designation is recommended all data and collection methodology shall be <br />included, and 4. social impact of designation to the area affected and to the <br />nation. <br />An amendment should require critical habitat designation at the same time as <br />the listing, tied to a requirement that a listing cannot be made until there is <br />sufficient data to designate critical habitat, would effectively require a full <br />economic impact analysis at the time of the listing. <br />Private Property Protection. <br />That the Private Property Act, if not enacted, should be amended to the ESA. <br />The Act should also be amended to declare that the cost of species <br />preservation is a responsibility of the Federal government and should be borne <br />by the society as a whole. Compensation should be provided for land taken <br />out of economic activity, <br />• Flexibility and Management Alternatives. <br />That the Act be amended to permit use of conservation measures to protect <br />a species in lieu of its listing. <br />♦ Reduction of Judicial Involvement. <br />That an alternative method to appeal decisions be provided to take the Act's <br />implementation and management out of the hands of the courts. That an <br />Administrative appeal process must precede any judicial review similar to the <br />process used by the Department of Interior's Board of Land Apogals and the <br />Department of Veterans Affairs. The Veterans Affairs Board of Veterans <br />Appeals hears all cases before they can be brought before the courts. Before <br />listing problems can go to court, all administrative remedies must be exhausted <br />including a Board of Appeals and the ESA committee. <br />W <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.