 | ||||||||||||||||||
|
The Association of Southeastern Biologists (ASB) is a regional, professional society of biologists. The purpose of this Association is to promote the advancement of Biology as a science by encouraging research, the imparting of knowledge, the application of knowledge to the solution of biological problems, and the preservation of biological resources. This statement expresses the recommendations of the Association concerning proposed legislative changes to the Endangered Species Act (1973). Congress will be considering modifications to the Endangered Species Act (1973) during its 109th session in 2005, and there are specific portions of the Act that are targeted for revision. The House Resources Committee passed two bills during the House.s 108th session in 2004 that would alter Section 4 of the Act. One of these bills, the Critical Habitat Reform Act of 2004 (H.R. 2933, Rep. Dennis Cardoza, CA), was introduced into the House as H.R. 1299 during March 2005. This bill, now called Critical Habitat Enhancement Act of 2005, alters the timing of when critical habitat is designated. It also redefines "critical habitat" for a listed species both in the land and aquatic environment in lakes and within EEZ of the ocean surrounding the coast. When Congress passed The Endangered Species Act (1973), it was to "provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend may be conserved, and to provide a program for the conservation of these species." Congress clearly recognized the role of habitat in conserving endangered and threatened species, and indeed, habitat loss or deterioration is the principal stress to most of these species. Habitat conservation is often the most effective means of protection and recovery for listed species. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) charges the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce (as in coral reefs, shallow and deep-sea) to designate critical habitats at the same time a species is officially listed as endangered or threatened. H.R. 1299 can delay the designation of critical habitat up to 3 years after the date of listing, or ....one year after the final approval of a recovery plan for the species.... For moderately endangered or threatened species, such a delay in designating critical habitats could allow more time for studies to be completed to ensure a more accurate habitat assessment. However, species facing serious habitat loss or degradation might become extinct if the designation of critical habitat were postponed until recovery plans were developed and approved. A number of listed species have low population sizes and are close to extinction. Suitable habitat is often in short supply for these species, and while the ultimate goal of the Act is species recovery, in the short term the Act seeks to maintain their numbers. For highly endangered species, where recovery seems unlikely, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service may never formulate recovery plans. We recommend that the Endangered Species Act retain the provision to designate critical habitats and Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) at the time of listing for those species that are determined to be unable to benefit from a recovery plan. The Endangered Species Act (1973) defines critical habitat as .specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed..." as well as .specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed...such areas are essential for the conservation of the species." Unoccupied areas often represent degraded habitats in the former range of a listed species. H.R. 1299 redefines critical habitat as the ..."specific area currently used by the species for its essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering..." It is vital for the Secretary to be able to designate critical habitat in unoccupied areas and that these areas remain available if endangered or threatened species are to experience recovery. This unnecessary redefinition of critical habitat does nothing to protect and reclaim habitat in the former range of a listed species, and may effectively prevent a species from re-establishing new populations in these areas. We recommend that Congress not change the definition of critical habitat from the original language used in the Act. Another bill introduced and passed by the House Resources Committee was the Endangered Species Data Quality Act of 2004 (H.R. 1662, Rep. Greg Walden, OR). H.R. 1662 seeks to amend the Endangered Species Act (1973) .to require the Secretary of the Interior to give greater weight to scientific or commercial data that is empirical, or has been field tested or peer-reviewed, and for other purposes.. When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973, it contained specific language about the quality of data to be used in listing a species: ..the best scientific and commercial data available.. In addition, amending the Act by giving .greater weight to interpretations of data derived from or verified by timely field work (commonly referred to as empirical data)., would limit the value of predictive modeling. One common method of estimating the long-term probability of a population.s survival is Population Viability Analysis (PVA). PVA permits scientists to identify factors that may threaten the survival of an endangered or threatened species, as well as point to potential solutions that can help the species recover. Such population modeling incorporates empirical data, and is an important tool to help scientists predict how to best prevent extinctions. We recommend that Congress retain the data quality emphasis within the Endangered Species Act that requires "...the best scientific and commercial data available". |
|||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||
