Fern Davies Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 Submit comments as follows: Deadline - comments must bereceived or postmarked on or before May 14, 2012. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Keyword or ID box, enter FWS-R9-ES- 2011-0099, which is the docket number for this notice. You may submit a comment by clicking on ``Submit a Comment.'' By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R9-ES-2011-0099; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments below for more details). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Serfis, Chief, Office of Communications and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203 (telephone 703-358-2171). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339. Full notice attached; relevant excerpts here: We request suggestions and input from the public on how best to establish clear mechanisms to encourage landowners and other potentially regulated interests to fund or carry out voluntary conservation actions beneficial to candidate and other at-risk species by providing assurances that, in the event the species is listed, the benefits of appropriate voluntary conservation actions will be recognized as offsetting the adverse effects of activities carried out after listing by that landowner or others. In addition to the requests above, we specifically request input from the public on the following questions: (1) How can the Service allow for the recognition of conservation credits for voluntary action taken in advance of listing in a manner that is efficient, readily understood, and faster? How can this be accomplished in an expeditious manner? (2) Should credits recognized for voluntary conservation actions taken prior to listing be available for use solely by the person who created them or should they be transferable to third parties? (3) If voluntary conservation actions undertaken prior to listing generate conservation credits that can be used to offset impacts of post-listing activities, should they be based solely on the beneficial actions of the person undertaking them, or should they be based on the net impacts of both beneficial and detrimental actions? (5) What role should the States play in recognizing and overseeing the development of credits from voluntary conservation actions taken for species not yet listed? (6) How can or should the Service specify in advance of listing the manner in which it will quantify the value of voluntarily undertaken conservation actions? (7) How the Service's conservation banking policy could be revised to allow for the use of conservation credits accrued from voluntary actions taken prior to listing? (8) What changes, if any, are needed to the following regulations, policies and guidance (The handbooks and policy are available at http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/index.html.) to clarify mechanisms by which the Service can give ``credit'' for beneficial actions for unlisted species: a. 50 CFR part 13 b. 50 CFR part 17 c. 50 CFR part 402 d. The Service's section 7 Handbook e. The Service's HCP Handbook f. The Service's Conservation Banking Policy (9) How could the Service use pilot projects to demonstrate that the ESA can provide landowners with credits and regulatory assurances for actions intended to benefit candidate species? Are there existing situations where such pilot projects could facilitate conservation for candidate species? (10) How can a landowner use such voluntary ``prelisting mitigation'' activities to satisfy requirements arising from any future section 7 consultation (such as ``conservation measures,'' ``reasonable and prudent measure'' or ``reasonable and prudent alternatives'')? In considering these and other potential changes to the ESA's implementing regulations, we intend to be guided by the following objectives: To improve the effectiveness of the ESA at conserving endangered, threatened, and candidate species; To eliminate unnecessary process requirements and to make as efficient as possible the remaining process requirements; To improve the clarity of, and eliminate the inconsistencies among, our regulations; To engage the States, conservation organizations, and private landowners more effectively as conservation partners; To encourage greater experimentation and creativity in the implementation of the Act; and To reduce the frequency and intensity of conflicts as much as possible. Accordingly, we invite recommendations for changes to our regulations or policy that would further these objectives. ESA-Voluntary conservation.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.