The Trump Administration is changing how the Endangered
Species Act will be implemented, however only Congress can change the
underlying law. Changes are expected to
begin in September. The changes are
significant and there is much uncertainty about how the changes will be
implemented on a day to day basis.
Changes are not expected to affect existing species management programs
and practices.
The changes will provide increased restrictions for
identifying unoccupied critical habitat.
While such a change will reduce burdens on private landowners it may
limit species recovery by allowing irreversible land uses.
It also rescinds the blanket rule under section 4(d) that
provides the same protection to threatened and endangered species. This increased flexibility could help recover
species faster, or it may lead to poor decisions moving species closer to
extinction.
The changes also allow for consideration of the economic
impacts of listing decisions. While this
would greatly limit landowner’s economic burden it will hasten extinction and
prevent the formation of critical mitigation markets.
The new rules also requires the same five criteria for
listing to be used for delisting decisions.
This would increase delisting of species, potentially removing funding
and protections for species whose survival is dependent on active management.
It also allows for a new interpretation of “foreseeable
future” that maybe used to limit the use of climate projection models. Many fear this change will provide a basis
for ignoring the influence of climate change when devising recovery strategies,
mitigation measures and listing decisions.
The mitigation banking industry has been on the front lines of providing
conservation benefits under a changing climate, and is making progress. The new interpretation removes incentives for
this progress and will speed extinction.
Those who are proponents of these changes have a rare opportunity to demonstrate how regulatory relief can improve environmental quality and economic returns. However, we are concerned that many lessons of species conservation are missing from the new rules, decreasing the likelihood of recovery and increasing the list of candidate species for future listing. Lawsuits to prevent the changes have begun and there appears slim hope that Senate oversight procedures will be triggered to overturn the changes.
>Read More
You may also like
The National Environmental Banking Association (NEBA) is a professional organization focused on integrity, transparency, and accountability, promoting the highest standards in the environmental banking industry. Its members include mitigation banking professionals, industry vendors, and government officials, ensuring cost-effective outreach and support. Joining NEBA benefits you and your business, helping to grow the industry and improve
Read More
According to US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) data, there are more than 8 million Advance Mitigation Credits sitting on the ledgers of the many dozens of In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Programs across the United States today, nearly all of which are exempt from any financial assurance that the mitigation projects will actually be performed.
Read More