Consultation Under the Endangered Species Act Garwin Yip, NOAA Fisheries Service, Southwest Region.

Slides:



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

Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy NMFS, USFWS, and CDFG (1991) Effective compensation for impacts (90% success) Basis for consistent recommendations.
1 Environment Canada Environnement Canada Bill C-5, Species at Risk Act November 2002.
Need for Revision to the New York State Endangered Species Regulations
The Endangered Species Act’s Section 7 Consultation Requirement: Strategies and Tools Cherise M. Oram Stoel Rives LLP Land Use in Washington April 17,
1 Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives  By statute and regulation, Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives must: Avoid the likelihood of jeopardy or adverse.
Uncertainty in Pesticide Consultations: The Challenge and Solutions Ya-Wei (Jake) Li Endangered Species Policy Advisor Defenders of Wildlife
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Utah Field Office.
Streamlined Consultation Training Modules
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Regulatory Program Glen Justis Chief, Policy & Administration Regulatory Division Alaska District 2010 Building.
NFIP ESA ComplianceImplementing a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative – FEMA Region 10 ESA and the National Flood Insurance Program Implementing a salmon.
Managing Alaska Groundfish and Steller Sea Lions – at the same time and same place Doug DeMaster Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NMFS Seattle, WA.
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 Act Overview
South March Highlands Blanding’s Turtle Conservation Needs Assessment March 18, 2013.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Section 7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act—Supporting the Mission through Proactive Conservation Planning.
Provisions of the Spotted Owl CHU Rule: How Are We Interpreting What It Says? And How Does it Integrate with the NWFP? Bruce Hollen (BLM) and Brendan White.
Other Environmental Issues U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Noise Endangered and Threatened Species Explosive/Flammable Hazards and Underground.
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.
Module 4 Section 7 Interagency Cooperation. The Subtitle of Section 7: Federal Agency Actions and Consultations Credit: istockphoto.com.
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.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1) Background 2) Sections 1 – 18 3) Section 7 - Section 7(a)(1) - Section 7(a)(2) Informal Consultation Initiating Formal.
Biological Opinions & Endangered Species Act Consultation – A “How To” Guide for Working with Agencies on ESA Issues MATTHEW A. LOVE Partner- Seattle,
The Endangered Species Act The Implications for Electric Utilities Thomas C. Jackson Baker Botts L.L.P. November 2005.
The Endangered Species Act: Species Listings and Implications for Development in Alaska Presented by: Cherise Oram Stoel Rives LLP.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
Endangered Species Act Counterpart Regulations for National Fire Plan Projects Bureau of Land Management Forest Service June 9, 2004.
Strengthening Science Supporting Fishery Management  Standards for Best Available Science  Implementation of OMB’s Peer Review Bulletin  Separation.
The Endangered Species Act Everything you wanted to know and more.
Linking Planning & NEPA Overview Mitch Batuzich FHWA Texas Division FHWA Texas Division April 17, 2007.
ESA Section 7 Requirements & the Caribbean Reef Fish Fishery: Effects on Threatened Acropora and Their Designated Critical Habitat Jennifer Lee Fishery.
Fish and Wildlife : Regulatory Framework and Challenges Cherise M. Oram STOEL RIVES LLP Hydrovision 2008 Ocean/Tidal/Stream Power Track 7D “Environmental.
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.
Interagency Section 7 Consultation Streamlining Training Bureau of Land Management NOAA Fisheries Forest Service Fish and Wildlife Service February 18.
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.
The Endangered Species Act 1973, 1982, 1985, 1988
Puget Sound Salmon Hatcheries April 2003 Puget Sound Salmon Hatchery Management Decision Making ESA & NEPA Processes Independent Scientific Review Process.
Environmental Considerations in Planning
The science of conservation planning Course objective: a free-ranging examination of some key scientific principles and research needs pertaining to conservation.
CHAPTER 4 ALTERNATIVES. --- “The driving impetus for conducting environmental impact studies is to comparatively present the effects of proposed alternatives.
Puget Sound Harvest Status of ESA and NEPA Review Susan Bishop Sustainable Fisheries Division NOAA Fisheries
Endangered Species Act Basics & Section 7 Consultation Strategies for Hydropower Relicensing & License Amendments Cherise M. Oram Stoel Rives LLP Hydropower.
TOWARDS A COMMON GOAL Coordinating actions under the Clean Water Act (FWPCA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Recovery Planning Advances Cherise M. Oram Stoel Rives LLP Northwest Environmental Summit October 20, 2005.
ARE 309Ted Feitshans021-1 Unit 21 Endangered Species Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Director’s Order 12 contains information concerning review of other agency proposals.
Endangered Species Act Overview: Section 7 Process and Biological Opinion West Coast Region U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric.
National Flood Insurance Program ESA Consultation for Online Information Sessions May 11 th and 12 th 2016 Oregon.
PURPOSE & NEED Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
Environmental Issues Update - Endangered Species 1.
Endangered Species Act (Section 7) Consultation In Federal Land Management Agencies American Chemical Society National Meeting Boston, Mass. August 2015.
LMO RISK ASSESSMENT UNDER THE IPPC AND THE CARTAGENA PROTOCOL ON BIOSAFETY Velia Arriagada Rios Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero, Chile.
Oil Spill Response and the Endangered Species Act RRT IX Meeting Oakland, California June 28, 2012 Elizabeth Petras- National Marine Fisheries Service,
California WaterFix Aquatic Science Peer Review Sacramento, California April 5, 2016.
National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act Compliance in the Bureau of Land Management.
Endangered Species Act
One Perspective on an effort to improve the implementation of the Endangered Species Act David Bernhardt.
Endangered Species Act Update
The Endangered Species Act 1973 ,1982,1985,1988
PROVISIONS OF H.R
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives
EPA’S ROLE IN APPROVING BASIN PLAN AMENDMENTS
Presentation transcript:

Consultation Under the Endangered Species Act Garwin Yip, NOAA Fisheries Service, Southwest Region

2  Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires every Federal agency, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary, to insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out, in the United States or upon the high seas, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or results in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.  In fulfilling the requirements of this paragraph, each agency shall use the best scientific and commercial data available. Interagency Cooperation: Section 7(a)(2)

3 Defining the “Jeopardy” Standard Jeopardize the continued existence of: to engage in an action that reasonably would be expected, directly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival and recovery of a listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or distribution of that species.

4 “Destruction or Adverse Modification”  The existing regulatory definition of “destruction or adverse modification” of critical habitat at 50 CFR has been invalidated by several court cases (in 5th, 9th, and 10th Circuit Courts)  The Services use the statutory provisions of the ESA to complete the analysis with respect to critical habitat.

5 “Destruction or Adverse Modification”  The Services evaluate “destruction or adverse modification” of critical habitat by determining if the action results in the direct or indirect alteration that appreciably reduces the conservation value of critical habitat. Such alterations include, but are not limited to, alterations adversely modifying any of those physical or biological features that were the basis for determining the habitat to be critical.

6 Conceptual Model for Jeopardy Analyses Environmental Baseline Assess the Risk to Individuals Assess the Risk to “Species” “Species” Status “Status” of the Individuals Status of the Populations Assess the Risk to Populations Effects’ Analysis Step 1 Step 2 Step 3Step 4 Step 5 Step 6

7 Basic Analytical Model Action Effects ExposureResponse Exposure Response ExposureResponse Individual Non-listed species or element of habitat

8  In fulfilling the requirements of the jeopardy standard and adverse modification standard, each agency shall use the best scientific and commercial data available Best Available Data

9  Generally, data or evidence that are: Reliable Reliable Explicit Explicit Rational Rational Objective Objective  Ranges from peer-reviewed to unpublished empirical information, even tribal information Best Available Data

10 When in Doubt…  To bridge gaps in knowledge, or uncertainties: Clearly state assumptions, including: Clearly state assumptions, including: ReasoningReasoning Available evidence (including available theory, inference from pattern, and appropriate surrogates)Available evidence (including available theory, inference from pattern, and appropriate surrogates) Address counter-evidence or rebuttalsAddress counter-evidence or rebuttals

11 Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives  By statute and regulation, Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA) must: Avoid the likelihood of jeopardy or adverse modification Avoid the likelihood of jeopardy or adverse modification Be consistent with the intended purpose of the action Be consistent with the intended purpose of the action Be consistent with the scope of the action agency’s legal authority and jurisdiction Be consistent with the scope of the action agency’s legal authority and jurisdiction Be economically and technologically feasible Be economically and technologically feasible

12 RPA Development In addition:  Action agency and applicant expertise must be utilized, and  Base RPAs on the key reasons an action is likely to jeopardize or adversely modify.

13 Alternative RPAs  Must meet the regulatory requirements of all RPAs.  Modify the proposed action in a manner that over the short and long term provides habitat conditions for the life history requirements of the species, or does not impede the provision of those habitat conditions.