Announcements

1
Announcements
A baobab of Madagascar The Royal Botanic
Gardens, Kew, and its partner organisations have
just completed the first vegetation atlas of the
country. This biodiverse island is home to more
than 10,000 plant species, 90 of which occur
nowhere else in the world.
October 12, 2007
2
Gore wins Nobel Prize!!!
3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
Standings

• Bay Area
• San Jose Bush Babies 3
• Berkeley Bowlers 2
• San Francisco Huskies 1
• Oakland Bombers 1
• Lafayette Diablos 1

• Pacific Rim
• Sac Planetiers 3 Alaska Drillers 1
• Sonoma Whiners 1
• Hawaii Treehuggers 0
• Martinez Muirs 0

• So Cal
• Snta Barb Green 3
• Ventura Squid 3
• SLO Moes 2
• LA Ducts 1
• SD Explorers 1

6
Early Wildlife Laws

• Robin Hood
• Lacey Act ,1900, Black Bass Act, 1926
• prohibited interstate commerce of illegally
  killed animals / fish
• Migratory Bird Treaty, 1918 Migratory Bird
  Conservation Act 1929
• Prohibited taking of migratory birds protected
  elsewhere
• Established format for creating Federal Fish and
  Wildlife Refuges and Sanctuaries
• Endangered Species Preservation Act, 1966
  Endangered Species Conservation Act, 1969
• Established the idea of a list for protection

Points to know (1) ESA did not develop in a
policy vacuum several previous wildlife laws
existed (2) History of national jurisdiction over
protection of animals dates back to English land
laws (3) In contrast, the regulation of
harvesting wildlife is mostly under state
jurisdiction

7
History species ownership, management

• What did these precedents establish?
• The Federal government has an interest in
  regulating wildlife when it comes to
  international ownership and trade.
• The Federal government has an interest in
  wildlife with respect to interstate commerce.
• States own wild animals and regulate harvest.
• Private land ownership includes ownership of the
  plants rooted on property.
• Ownership rules extend beyond harvestable species
  to include endangered species.

8
The Endangered Species Act 1973

• Charged the Secretary of Interior with the task
  of listing and species either endangered or
  threatened with extinction
• Agencies USFWS (Dept. Interior) and NOAA
  Fisheries (Dept. Commerce) charged with
  enforcement
• Amended in 1978.
• In 1993 it was supposed to come up for renewal
• Failed to pass any revision since then bills
  submitted every year
• Congress left most of the details to the agencies
  and the courts

Who is the Secretary of the Interior?
9
The ESA Basics

• The Secretary of the Interior lists species as
• Endangered "any species which is in danger of
  extinction throughout all or a significant
  portion of its range." 16 U.S.C. 1532(6).
• Threatened "any species which is likely to
  become an endangered species within the
  foreseeable future throughout all or a
  significant portion of its range." 16 U.S.C.
  1532(20).

U.S.C. US Supreme court CFR Federal
Register
10
Setting the tone of the ESA

• US not allowed to jeopardize a species
• 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 the species." 50 C.F.R. 402.02.
  
• This means preventing take
• "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound,
  kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to
  engage in any such conduct." 16 U.S.C.
  1532(19).

11
ESA Specifics

• Section 1 There isnt one!
• Section 2 Intent
• US Congress finds that species are endangered and
  seeks to conserve endangered species
• Section 3 Definitions (eg, what is wildlife)
• Entities that can be protected are
• Vertebrates
• Invertebrates
• Plants
• Microbes
• Fungi

12
WHAT! Lets see that again.

• Entities that can be listed include
• full species of invertebrates,
• sub-species of plants and vertebrates and
• can include distinct populations of fish or
  wildlife (not plants)
• NOT bacteria, viruses, fungi, etc.

We wont go through definitions of full species,
sub-species, distinct populations but here are
some examples. Full species are things with
different species names. For example Pseudotsuga
menzesii Sub-species share a species name
Dudleya cymosa ssp. marcescens Distinct
populations share the same name, but do not
interbreed. For example, Spring and Fall runs of
chinook salmon Sacramento versus Columbia River
salmon.
Discussion DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?
13
ESA Specifics

• Section 4 sets the process
• Agencies or public can begin an action to list
  species
• Determining agency (USFWS, NMFS) must decide in
  90 days
• Secretary of Interior must approve action
• Listing requires designation of Critical Habitat
• This bit has been problematic political and
  poorly backed up by data
• Listing requires a Recovery Plan
• What will be the criteria by which we will then
  de-list the species?

14
Listing, critical habitat and recovery plans in
more detail

• Proposing a species Candidate
• A petition by any U.S. citizen to the Fish and
  Wildlife Service or NMFS (NOAA Fisheries).
• An agency initiation of review of a species.
• Emergency designation of a species as threatened
  or endangered.
• Decision regulating agency has 90 days
• The 90 day rule is variably enforced

What are the regulating agencies?
15
USFWS recognizes 5 reasons for listing a species

• (1) the present or threatened destruction,
  modification, or curtailment of a species habitat
  or range
• (2) over-utilization for commercial,
  recreational, scientific, or educational
  purposes
• (3) disease or predation
• (4) other natural or manmade factors affecting
  its continued existence (e.g., pollution) or
• (5) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
  mechanisms.

These are pretty much the same things that are
listed as endangering species
16
Critical habitat

• Rationale If we want to protect a species, then
  we should be able to determine what habitat is
  required in order to protect the species.
• Criticisms USFWS is in a cant win situation
• Defining critical habitat invites criticism as it
  is too restrictive
• Defining critical habitat invites criticism as it
  from conservationists as giving away too much.
• FWS has generally only designated critical
  habitat when forced to by the courts.

17
The Geography of Biological Diversity
WOW!
Imperiled Listed
18
US Fish and Wildlife critical habitat mapper
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
Recovery Plans
Nearly all listed species now have recovery plans

• Rationale If we plan on recovering endangered
  species, then we need to have a plan. If we plan
  on delisting a species, then we ought to say what
  criteria would fulfill our expectations of
  recovery.
• Criticism Plans are non-binding and subject to
  political whims
• Result
• For the first 20 years very few recovery plans
  were finished busy making listing decisions.
• New regulations require a timely recovery plan.

As of 10/13/06 1114 of 1351 species are covered
under recovery plans
22
Example
"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Current Species Status This
recovery plan covers two endangered plant
species Astragahis brauntonji (Brauntons
milkvetch), and Pentachaeta lyonji (Lyons
pentachaeta) and four threatened plant species
Dudleya abramsii ssp. Parva (Conejo dudleya),
Dudleya cymosa ssp. marcescens (marcescent
dudleya), Dudleya cymosa ssp. ovatifolia (Santa
Monica Mountains dudleya), and Dudleya verityi
(Veritys dudleya).   Recovery Objectives The
goal of this plan is to stabilize, protect,
and/or restore all populations in current
locations (including seedbanks) of all six plant
species. This will allow for the reclassification
ofAstragalus brauntonji and Pentachaeta lyonii to
threatened status, with the potential for
eventual delisting, and the delisting of all of
the Dudleya species.   Recovery
Criteria Brauntons milkvetch can be considered,
for reclassification when all 20 current
populations are fully protected (including
seedbanks) (see Table 1), and managed with the
primary intention of preserving the populations
in perpetuity seed is securely stored and plants
are successfully germinated from collected seed
and/or historic sites e.g. propagation techniques
for reintroduction are developed. Delisting can
be considered when monitoring shows that the
habitat is secure provisions for ecological
requirements exist and conditions for the
species indicate stability over a minimum of 15
years. This 15 years of monitoring will be
extended by an additional 5 years of monitoring
which is required by the Endangered Species Act
for newly listed species. "
6 species in mountains surrounding LA Basin
Recovery plan, 9/3/99
23
Section 7 Federal Participation

• Interagency cooperation
• Other US agencies must cooperate and abide by the
  ruling of Dept. of Interior agencies on adequate
  protection of species
• Permits Federal agencies apply for permits to
  destroy habitat that may be occupied by
  endangered species
• USFWS / NMFS rules on whether the action would
  place the species at significantly greater
  jeopardy.
• Authorizes GOD Committee,
• consisting of Agency heads that can unilaterally
  over-ride ESA in cases of national interest

24
Section 7

• Section 7
• Complaints from USFWS agency workers
• Lack of time to gain sufficient knowledge
• Political pressure exerted from above
• ESA is criticized for stifling development
• Of 100,000 consultations from 1987 to 1994,
  section 7 stopped 54 projects (World Wildlife
  Fund)
• Not the beast that business makes it out to be.
  Argues that implementation is not sufficiently
  forceful. But is this an accurate view? There may
  by many more projects modified or withdrawn as a
  result of this section 7 consultation.

25
Section 10 Issuing Permits

• allows agencies (mostly USFWS) to grant permits
  for development of private property when it does
  not significantly raise the extinction risk for a
  species
• Stimulus for Habitat Conservation Planning
  (HCPs)

26
ESA in Action

• Plants on private property are not specifically
  protected
• No section 10 permit required, but maybe a
  section 7 permit, if a federal action is
  involved.
• WHY?

- English land laws Property owners dont
own the animals, but do own the plants. VERY
IMPORTANT distinction.
27
Turning to the Courts to decide
28
The exact meaning of vague statements in the ESA
has been solidified in the courts

• The word harm now includes habitat degradation
• Courts have mandated Recovery Plans and
  designation of Critical Habitat
• Courts have been, if anything, more protective
  than the regulatory agencies.
• Courts have generally forced USFWS to be more
  protective
• Stimulating discussion of Act revision

29
Does the ESA Work?

• Are species recovering?
• Are we finishing up listing?
• Does listing get the resources to do the job of
  recovery?

30
Biological Diversity Endangerment
(e.g., 5000 plants)
31
Biological Diversity Taxonomy of threat
32
(No Transcript)
33
2007
2006
34
(No Transcript)
35
Biological Diversity Extinctions
36
Center for Biological Diversity extinction
without listing (67)
extinction after listing (23)
37
De-listed speciesWhat the numbers say

• EXTINCT (7)
• 4 fishTecopa pupfish, Longjaw cisco, Amistad
  gambusia, Blue pike
• 2 birds, Santa Barbara song sparrow, Dusky
  seaside sparrow
• 1 mussell, Sampsons pearly mussell,

• RECOVERED(10)
• American Alligator
• Brown pelican,
• Rydbergs milk vetch,
• Gray whale,
• Peregrine falcon..
• Other (16)
• Scientific revision,
• Better data

Gray wolf endangered to threatened and several
distinct populations delisted. March 2003
Also, of species whose status has changed
Threatened to endangered 9
Endangered to threatened 22
38
2004 Expenditures on behalf of Endangered Species

• Top species Chinook Salmon, Snake River, summer
  run (40.5 million)
• Top Mammal Stellar Sea Lion (3, 31.7 mil.)
• Top Bird R-C. Woodpecker (13, 14.1 mil.)
• Top Reptile leatherback sea turtle (32, 7.2
  mil.)
• Top Amphibian Barton Springs Salamander (78,
  1.9 mil.)
• Top Invertebrate Valley Elderberry Longhorn
  Beetle (87, 1.6 mil.)
• Top Plant Peirsons milk vetch (98, 1.07mil )
  88.8 funds spent.

• Total spending 1,276 mil.
• Top 20 taxa 50 of funds.
• Total spending ( of funds, ofspecies listed)
• Fish 59.9, 10.5
• Mammals 15.4 6.3
• Birds 13.0 , 6.9
• Reptiles 5.2, 2.8
• Plants 2.7, 56.8
• Clams Snails 1.6, 9.8
• Insects and spiders 1.1, 5.3
• Amphibians 1.1 1.8
• 90 of taxa share 10 of funds

39
Discontent and Alternative strategies

• Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs)
• Safe Harbor
• No Surprises
• Shifting Allocation of Protection Funds

40
Safe Harbor

• Safe Harbor
• Facilitates voluntary good stewardship practices
  by eliminating threat of future regulation on
  enhanced habitat.
• Anyone who provides increased protection, or
  increased habitat for endangered species will not
  be held accountable for subsequent losses back to
  previous levels.

41
No Surprises

• No Surprises
• Once the USFWS strikes a deal, they agree to not
  change the rules of the agreement if new
  information on endangered species comes to light.
  
• Additional protection is possible, but will
  require full cost financing of the protection

42
Habitat Conservation Plans

• Section 10 Permitting linked to Habitat
  Conservation Plans (HCPs)
• If private developers (or landowners) provide a
  plan that accounts for the long-term protection
  of listed and non-listed resources, then the
  USFWS will issue section 10 permits for a
  development plan
• Good in theory, mixed in practice
• Yolo county example

43
Cooperation, Collaboration

• Shifting Allocation of Protection Funds
• Not a formal program, just a change in direction
  by agencies.
• Shift allocation from triage of hopeless cases to
  pre-emptive protection of critical ecosystems
• CalFed Bay-Delta program is an example of trying
  to mitigate further losses through good planning
  (see proposition 50 in 2002 election)

44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
IUCN Red List
47
(No Transcript)
48
CITESConvention on the International Trade in
Endangered Species
49
Smuggling is happening all the time Protecting
biodiversity affects many industries.
50
More Wildlife Laws
Lecture Appendix

• Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972
• Prohibited taking ANY marine mammals
• The Endangered Species Act, 1973
• The broadest and most powerful
  wildlife-protection act in U.S. history M.
  Bean (EDF)

- A problem now that some of these species
have become a nuisance. Regulation is
difficult without dismantling the law that
protects other very vulnerable species.
51
Listing Actions
Lecture Appendix
Clinton
Bush
Reagan
Nixon/Ford
Bush
Carter