Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOlG36 <br /> <br />Survey (NBS) in distancing data gathering and sharing functions funher from state agencies. <br />However. they also recognized that a central data repository might assist in ensuring greater <br />integrity in the scientific basis of listings decisions and recovery plans and assist in implementing <br />the recently announced ecosystem approach, provided that the NBS incorporates relevant data <br />from state agencies. Some members believed we should take the position that the primary data <br />gathering responsibility for ESA biology assessments should lie with state agencies. Others <br />countered that the burden might be excessive given that listings can be proposed by any <br />interested person, or that the national interest in species preservation might be perceived as <br />subject to manipulations by local political or economic pressures under this process. There was <br />general agreement that USFWS and NMFS should be required to consult with state fish and <br />wildlife agencies whenever state agencies have data on candidate or listed species. <br /> <br />C. Proposed Amendments to the Endangered Species Act <br /> <br />The third group discussed proposed amendments to the Endangered Species Act and <br />developed a number of recommendations regarding ESA reauthorization. <br /> <br />Listing Process <br /> <br />Federal lead agencies should be required to consult with states prior to listing. <br /> <br />~ Recoverv and De-listing <br /> <br />Recovery goals and de-listing criteria should be established at the time oflisting to the <br />extent feasible utilizing best available science and peer review. A draft recovery plan should be <br />developed within one year. A final recovery plan should be completed within two and one-half <br />years. Funding should be provided for its implementation. <br /> <br />If an intrastate species (i.e., its range or critical habitat wholly within one state) is <br />involved, opportunity should be provided for state delegation, assuming that the state program <br />meets appropriate criteria. <br /> <br />Multi-SpecieslHabitat Approach <br /> <br />The group endorsed the NGA resolution language, which provides: "Increasingly, state <br />and federal agencies and private conservation organizations have recognized the limitations of <br />the 'single species approach' to conservation and have taken commendable steps to utilize <br />Section 4(d) rules and habitat conservation plans to move toward multi-species planning. <br />Further embracing of habitat-based planning should be strongly encouraged in any <br />reauthorization legislation." <br /> <br />This approach should cover candidate and potential candidate species, as well as listed <br /> <br />5 <br />