California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review Sacramento, California April 5, 2016.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Laws & Regulations pertaining to Endangered Species in Wisconsin.

Advertisements

Signed on December 1973 and provides for the conservation of species that are endangered or threatened throughout all or significant portion of their.

Need for Revision to the New York State Endangered Species Regulations

Summary of NEPA and SEPA Coastal Engineering and Land Use Issues in North Carolina Greenville, NC January 13, 2009 Sean M. Sullivan.

NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Fish, Wildlife & Marine Resources Amendments to Part 182: Endangered Species Regulations.

Beyond Fish and the Federal ESA Chris Maguire Terrestrial Biology Program Coordinator Oregon Department of Transportation Local Government Environmental.

NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Fish, Wildlife & Marine Resources Briefing on Proposed Amendments to Endangered Species Regulations.

Introduction to CESA Incidental Take Permits and Consistency Determinations Developed by Jennifer Deleon, Staff Environmental Scientist CESA Permitting.

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Governance/Implementation September 4, 2013 Presentation Jonathan Garcia Senior Planner.

Use of the Endangered Species Act in Alaska Doug Vincent-Lang, Special Assistant Alaska Department of Fish & Game 1.

May 17 th,  Overview of endangered species regulations  Purpose of Habitat Conservation Plans  Review Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Utah Field Office.

NFIP ESA ComplianceImplementing a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative – FEMA Region 10 ESA and the National Flood Insurance Program Implementing a salmon.

Intersection of the Magnuson Stevens Act with the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act Roger Williams University School of Law November.

Endangered Species Act

Endangered Species US Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered Species Endangered Species Act Passed in 1983 Purpose Conserve Endangered and Threatened Species.

Endangered Species Act Overview

Endangered Species Preservation Act Passed by Congress in 1966 Provided a means for listing native species as endangered – Gave them limited protection.

Wetlands Mitigation Policy Sudbury Wetlands Administration Bylaw April 27, 2015.

HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING Charles J. Randel, 1 III, Howard O. Clark, Jr., 2 Darren P. Newman, 2 and Thomas P. Dixon 3 1 Randel Wildlife Consulting,

Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American.

 “ Wildlife conservation is the practice of protecting endangered plant and animal species and their habitats. Among the goals of wildlife conservation.

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Overview Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001.

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultations. The Endangered Species Act Sec. 2:Purpose Sec. 3:Definitions Sec. 4:Listing, Recovery, Monitoring Sec.

The Endangered Species Act’s Section 7 Consultation Requirement: Strategies and Tools Cherise M. Oram Stoel Rives LLP Permitting Strategies May 11, 2006.

The Endangered Species Act 1973, 1982, 1985, 1988 (ESA) Larsen Schlachter Per. 3.

Trista Dillon THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (1973, 1982, 1985, 1988)

Wildlife Management Important & Methods AG-WL-5.  Application of scientific knowledge and technical skills to protect, conserve, limit, enhance, or create.

Building Strong! 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Kimberly McLaughlin Program Manager Headquarters Operations and Regulatory Community of.

Productive SB 18 Consultation Michelle LaPena, Esq. LaPena Law Corporation 2001 N Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA (916)

The Endangered Species Act 1973, 1982, 1985, 1988 By Tristan Armstrong.

BDCP, Interfacing with Conservation Plans Habitat Conservation Planning from Tahoe to the Bay 7 th Annual Workshop November 18, 2009 Carl Wilcox California.

Monica L. DeAngelis Marine Mammal Biologist National Marine Fisheries Service Long Beach, CA The Marine Mammal Protection.

Endangered Species Act of 1973, 1982, 1985, and 1988 By: Nicole Wypychowski Period 6 President Nixon signed the bill December 28, 1973 ESA is administered.

Endangered Species Act 2005 Legislative Action. House of Representatives  On Sept. 29, 2005 the House passed H.R. 3824: Threatened and Endangered Species.

THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT (SARA) CBA/Justice National Section Meeting National Environmental Energy Resources Law Group Ottawa – October 24, 2004.

Why Conserve Swainson’s Hawks?. Two Reasons Endangered Species Act –Section 2080 –Incidental take permit –HCP CEQA –Mandatory finding of significance.

National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Bill 2003 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM.

1 Completing the CEQA Checklist Terry Rivasplata.

Presented by Amaroq Weiss West Coast Wolf Organizer for The Gray Wolf in California Part 2.

THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT & THE FLORIDA BEACHES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Role in Timber Harvest Review.

Take & Incidental Take Permit Take: means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect or attempt to engage in such conduct.

Renewable Energy in California: Implementing the Governors Renewable Energy Executive Order California Energy Commission Department of Fish and Game Fish.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company Scientific Collecting Permit Presentation to the Fish and Game Commission September 24, 2012 Brian Owens, Marine Region.

The Fish and Game Commission has designated the states portion of the South Bay Salt Ponds an Ecological Reserve. Planning for the management of Ecological.

Wildlife Management Importance and Methods. Wildlife Management Application of scientific knowledge and technical skills to protect, conserve, limit,

Overview of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act and Designation Process County of San Luis Obispo Office of the County Counsel January 8, 2015.

Environmental Issues Update - Endangered Species 1.

Russian River Estuary Management.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife Wolf Plan Status DRAFT Gray Wolf Conservation Plan December 2015 Karen Kovacs Wildlife Program Manager Northern.

Endangered Species Act Application in New York State – What’s New? October 4, 2015 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Robyn A. Niver.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife Wolf Plan Status June 4, 2014.

FL Endangered Species Devils Hole Pupfish. FL Manatee atee-endangered-species-feat/

Oil Spill Response and the Endangered Species Act RRT IX Meeting Oakland, California June 28, 2012 Elizabeth Petras- National Marine Fisheries Service,

Overview of Everything You Need to Know About Mitigation.

Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan California Department of Fish and Game Inland Deserts Region Bobcat photo by Gerald and Buff.

Final ESA Listing Determination for Nassau Grouper

Endangered Species Act

Finding the Law: Primary & Secondary Sources in Print

Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Tom Hornseth, Comal County Engineer

Stream Depletion from an Ecological Perspective

One Perspective on an effort to improve the implementation of the Endangered Species Act David Bernhardt.

Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Water Resources Division

The Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Endangered Species Act Update

The Endangered Species Act 1973 ,1982,1985,1988

Endangered Species Act of 1973

Application of Natural Resource Laws

What is OAL? The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) ensures that agency regulations are clear, necessary, legally valid, and available to the public. OAL.

Presentation transcript:

California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review Sacramento, California April 5, 2016

 CDFW “has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species.” (Fish & G. Code, § 1802.)  See also Id., § (“fish and wildlife resources are held in trust for the people of the state by and through the department”); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15386, subd. (a) (identifying CDFW as a trustee agency for purposes of CEQA).

“[I]t is the policy of this state that all state agencies, boards, and commissions shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species and shall utilize their authority in furtherance of the purposes of [the California Endangered Species Act].” (Fish & G. Code, § 2055 (italics added). And see Id., § 2061 (conserve, conserving and conservation defined).)

 Broad prohibition in Section 2080: No person shall import, export, sell, purchase, take, or possess any species listed under CESA.  “Take” is defined under State law to mean “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt” to do such an action. (Fish & G. Code, § 86.)  The take prohibition under CESA extends to candidate species. (Id., § 2085.)

 CESA ITPs are the most common take authorization provided by CDFW.  The current statutes governing the issuance of CESA ITPs took effect in January (Fish & G. Code, § 2081, subds. (b), (c))  CDFW’s CESA Implementing Regulations address the application and review process in detail. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § et seq.)

 Pre-Application Consultation. The CESA Implementing Regulations direct CDFW to consult with applicants to the “greatest extent practicable … to ensure that [the application] will meet the requirements of this article when submitted[.]” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 783.2, subd. (b).)  Initial Non-Substantive Review for Completeness Within 30 days of Application Submittal. (Id., § 783.5, subd. (a).)  Timeframes for CDFW to review and render decision on ITP is days, where CDFW is a responsible agency under CEQA. (Id., § 783.5, subd. (c).)

 Among other things, each application must include all of the following: ◦ An analysis of whether and to what extent the project or activity for which the permit is sought could result in the taking of species to be covered by the permit. ◦ An analysis of the impacts of the proposed taking on the species. ◦ An analysis of whether issuance of the incidental take permit would jeopardize the continued existence of a species. This analysis shall include consideration of the species' capability to survive and reproduce, and any adverse impacts of the taking on those abilities in light of (A) known population trends; (B) known threats to the species; and (C) reasonably foreseeable impacts on the species from other related projects and activities. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 783.2)

 Responses to the application requirements shall be based on the best scientific and other information that is reasonably available. (Id., § 783.2, subd. (b).)

 The authorized take is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 783.4, subd. (a)(1).)  Impacts of the authorized take are minimized and fully mitigated, with impacts of the taking meaning “all impacts on the species” that result from any act that would cause the authorized take. (Id., subd. (a)(2).)  All measures to meet this standard are capable of successful implementation, which may include measures without an established track record of success as long as there is a “reasonable basis for utilization and a reasonable prospect of success.” (Id., subds. (a)(2), (c).)  The applicant has assured funding to implement required measures, and both compliance and effectiveness monitoring. (Id., subd. (a)(4).)  Issuance of the ITP will not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. (Id., subd. (b).) (Fish & G. Code, § 2081, subds. (b), (c).)

Thank you!