Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(::J, <br />c-::;' <br />~ <br />,-" <br />(,.. <br />Q <br /> <br />CWCS Agenda Item 23e <br />November 24-25, 1997 Meeting <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />6. A draft recovery plan would have to be developed within 18 months after a species is listed, <br />and a final plan within 30 months. Teams that include representatives of the stakeholders <br />and federal agencies would develop the plans. <br />7. Each recovery plan would include a biological recovery goal, specific recovery measures to <br />achieve the stated goal, and benchmarks to measure progress. <br />8. Species would be delisted when the recovery goal is met, allowing property owners to use <br />their property without federal interference. <br />9. States would play a greater role in implementing the ESA, including a role in listing <br />decisions. The Secretary of Interior would have to solicit information from states during the <br />consultation process, and the states would be allowed to assume responsibility for the <br />implementation of recovery plans. <br /> <br />Senator Chafee reported the Bill to the Senate on October 3 I, 1997 with an amendment in <br />the nature of a substitute and written report No. 105-128. Additional and minority views were <br />also filed. The Bill has been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar (General Orders <br />Calendar No. 242). <br /> <br />Apparently Sen. Kempthorne (R-ID) and Sen. Thomas (R-WY) are prepared to offer <br />floor amendments to "restate state primacy over water rights," and recognize the "sanctity of <br />private property rights." <br /> <br />Furthermore, the National Wildlife Federation is strongly opposed to the BilL Their <br />concerns are: <br />1. Long-term habitat conservation plans become locked-in and therefore exempt from <br />further conservation obligations. This makes future land management adjustments <br />nearly impossible. <br />2. It becomes harder for the USFWS and NMFS to hold other agencies accountable for <br />actions that jeopardize species and destroy critical habitat. <br />3. The Bill adds significant burdens to the listing and recovery planning process. <br />4. The Bill allows industry groups a greater role in key ESA decisionmaking, while <br />continuing to exclude others. <br /> <br />Staff will continue to monitor the progress of this legislation. <br />