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

2.  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., § 711.7 (“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).

3. “[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).)

4.  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.)

5.  CESA ITPs are the most common take authorization provided by CDFW.  The current statutes governing the issuance of CESA ITPs took effect in January 1998. (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, § 783.0 et seq.)

6.  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 90-150 days, where CDFW is a responsible agency under CEQA. (Id., § 783.5, subd. (c).)

7.  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)

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

9.  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).)

10. Thank you!