Site Map
|
Search
|
About us
| Revised critical habitat proposed for red-legged frog, based on better mapping and other information |
||||
November 3, 2005Q&A's
| California red-legged frog | |||
| Contacts: Service proposes cooperative rancher protection for portion of frog's habitat Estimate of economic impacts of critical habitat also released The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today published a revised proposal that reduces by more than 80 percent the area proposed to be designated as critical habitat for the threatened California red-legged frog, based on refined information and improved mapping capabilities. This native amphibian is widely believed to have inspired Mark Twain's fabled short story, "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County." The Service also opened a public comment period on the proposal, which ends on Feb. 1, 2006. Seeking to expand its conservation partnerships with private ranchers, the Service also is proposing a special rule that would exempt routine ranching activities on private lands from some prohibitions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The special rule, authorized under Section 4(d) of the ESA, would make it easier for ranchers to maintain man-made stock ponds, which are an increasingly important breeding habitat for red-legged frogs as natural streams and ponds are lost. Routine ranching practices generally have neutral or beneficial effects on California red-legged frogs. The proposed critical habitat of 737,912 acres is about 18 per cent of the 4,138,064 acres the Service proposed as critical habitat in April 2004, which was based largely on the original designation of critical habitat in 2001. The Service issued the proposal in 2004 to meet a court-imposed deadline and indicated at the time that it would be releasing a revised proposal. The new proposal contains 51 units, compared to 31 in the original designation, but the units generally are smaller. The proposed units are in the following 23 counties: Alameda, Butte, Calaveras, Contra Costa, El Dorado, Kern, Los Angeles, Marin, Merced, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Riverside, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Stanislaus, Ventura and Yuba. Of those counties, Calaveras and Yuba did not have units in the 2004 proposal or the 2001 designation. Meanwhile, Fresno, Mariposa, Plumas, San Diego, San Joaquin, Sonoma, Tehama, and Tuolumne counties, which had units in the previous proposal, do not have units proposed this time. The special rule would help ranchers protect California red-legged frogs, benefiting the imperiled species by encouraging ranching practices that provide habitat for the frogs. The rule relaxes prohibitions against harming frogs in the course of routine ranching practices that have been shown to help the species, notably maintaining stock ponds that California red-legged frogs use as breeding sites. Without the special rule such incidental harm could technically violate the ESA. The Service also released a draft economic analysis of the re-proposed critical habitat. According to the study by CRA International, an Oakland-based economic consulting firm, the economic effect over the next 20 years in lost development opportunities could total as much as $497 million. Of the 89,201 housing units projected to be built in the 23 counties over the next 20 years, 760 of them -- or 0.9 per cent -- would not be built as a result of designating critical habitat, according to CRA International. The projected impacts are greatest in following counties: San Luis Obispo ($166 million), Alameda ($91 million), Contra Costa ($88 million) and Santa Barbara ($41 million). Public comments on the proposed rule will be accepted until Feb. 1, 2006. Written comments on the proposal should be submitted to the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W. 2605, Sacramento, CA 95825, or by facsimile to (916) 414-6712. Comments may also be sent by electronic mail to fw1crlf@fws.gov. The Service encourages public input on specific elements of the proposal to help ensure that the final critical habitat is as accurate as possible. It is particularly interested in comments on economic impacts, and on the scientific accuracy of the primary habitat elements defined in this proposal. Requests for public hearings on the proposal must be submitted within 45 days to the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W. 2605, Sacramento, CA 95825. Improved mapping technology enabled the Service to eliminate some areas from the proposed critical habitat because they do not contain habitat features essential to the conservation of the species. These areas include homes, roads, airport runways, and other man-made structures. Mapping is still not precise enough to exclude all such areas, and some of these locations may remain within the final designation. However, even if such developed areas fall within the boundaries of designated critical habitat, they still are not considered actual critical habitat under the provisions of the ESA. This revised proposed rule was prepared pursuant to a court order resulting from a lawsuit filed against the Service by the Home Builders Association of Northern California, California Chamber of Commerce, California Building Industry Association, California Alliance for Jobs, and the Building Industry Legal Defense against a rule designating 4,140,440 acres as critical habitat for the frog in March 2001. The court cited deficiencies in both the final rule establishing the critical habitat designation and in the economic analysis done in anticipation of the rule. The court ordered the Service to conduct a new economic analysis and publish a new critical habitat proposal by March 2004, and a final revised rule by November 2005, a deadline subsequently extended into 2006. In 30 years of implementing the ESA, the Service has found that designation of critical habitat provides little additional protection for most listed species, while preventing the agency from using scarce conservation resources for activities with greater conservation benefits. In almost all cases, recovery of listed species will come through voluntary cooperative partnership, not regulatory measures such as critical habitat. Habitat is also protected through cooperative measures under the ESA, including Habitat Conservation Plans, Safe Harbor Agreements, Candidate Conservation Agreements, and state programs. In addition, voluntary partnership programs such as the Service's Private Stewardship Grants and the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program also restore habitat. Habitat for listed species is provided on many of the Service's National Wildlife Refuges and state wildlife management areas. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the 95-million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System, which encompasses 545 national wildlife refuges, thousands of small wetlands and other special management areas. It also operates 69 national fish hatcheries, 64 fishery resources offices and 81 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and helps foreign and Native American tribal governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance program, which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state fish and wildlife agencies. |
||||
