Critical habitat

Last updated

Critical habitat refers to specific geographic areas essential to the conservation of a listed endangered species, though the area need not actually be occupied by the species at the time it is designated. Critical habitat is a legal designation of land use defined within the U.S. Endangered Species Act-ESA. Contrary to common belief, designating an area as critical habitat does not preclude that area from development. A critical habitat designation only affects federal agency actions. Such actions include federally funded activities or activities requiring a federal permit that may negatively affect the quality of habitat for a listed species. This law also defines that there may be no "take" of a listed species from the designated area. This land designation aims to protect vital habitat for endangered species by preserving areas that are able to meet the identified needs for the target species. This is a key feature of conservation as outlined in the ESA. [1]

Contents

Designation process

Critical habitat must be designated for all threatened species and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, with certain specified exceptions. Designations of critical habitats must be based on the best scientific information available and follow the procedure as outlined in the ESA. Areas under consideration must contain biological or physical features necessary for the target species survival. These factors may include things such as food, shelter and breeding sites. Before adoption these areas must include a review that is open to public input from all stakeholders within specific time frames. Unless deemed necessary for the species' continued existence, critical habitat does not include the entire geographical area occupied by a species. Department of Defense (DOD) lands are also exempt from being designated as critical habitat. Both public and private land can be specified as critical habitat.

A critical habitat designation does not set up a preserve or refuge; it applies only when Federal funding, permits, or projects are involved. Under Section 7 of the ESA, all Federal agencies must ensure that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species, or destroy or adversely modify its designated critical habitat.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service share the responsibility for designating and implementing critical habitat for listed species.

Challenges

Before designating critical habitat, careful consideration must be given to the economic impacts, impacts on national security, and other relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. An area may be excluded from critical habitat if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of designation, unless excluding the area will result in the extinction of the species concerned.

In addition to these concerns the process of finding an area to designate as critical habitat, scientific, biological and economic data is needed. This includes detailed population and ecological data. If this information is not readily available then the lead agency must conduct studies to obtain it. [2] This data is used to guide the selection of critical habitat as inadequate knowledge can cause a poor selection of habitat that may not best provide for the species survival. Effective critical habitat designations require vast scientific knowledge of the target species and compromise between stakeholders that balance the needs of environmental protection and economic needs. [3]

Considerations

Conservation and economic views of land use are often in conflict and are taken into account when designating critical habitat. Activities like mining, logging, and transportation infrastructure can have a large impact on the surrounding habitat. [4] Critical habitat requirements do not apply to citizens engaged in activities on private land that do not involve a Federal agency. However, if an activity on private property requires an action by a Federal agency (such as a loan, increasing irrigation flows, permits from a federal agency, etc.), then the Federal agency must ensure that the action will not adversely modify the designated critical habitat.

Relevant Court Cases

Tennessee Valley Authority v Hill (1978)

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992)

Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon v. Babbitt (1995)

United States Fish and Wildlife Service v. Sierra Club (2021)

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Wildlife Refuge</span> United States protected area designation

National Wildlife RefugeSystem (NWRS) is a system of protected areas of the United States managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), an agency within the Department of the Interior. The National Wildlife Refuge System is the system of public lands and waters set aside to conserve America's fish, wildlife, and plants. Since President Theodore Roosevelt designated Florida's Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge as the first wildlife refuge in 1903, the system has grown to over 568 national wildlife refuges and 38 wetland management districts encompassing about 856,000,000 acres (3,464,109 km2).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Endangered Species Act of 1973</span> United States law

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 is the primary law in the United States for protecting and conserving imperiled species. Designed to protect critically imperiled species from extinction as a "consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation", the ESA was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on December 28, 1973. The Supreme Court of the United States described it as "the most comprehensive legislation for the preservation of endangered species enacted by any nation". The purposes of the ESA are two-fold: to prevent extinction and to recover species to the point where the law's protections are not needed. It therefore "protect[s] species and the ecosystems upon which they depend" through different mechanisms. For example, section 4 requires the agencies overseeing the Act to designate imperiled species as threatened or endangered. Section 9 prohibits unlawful ‘take,’ of such species, which means to "harass, harm, hunt..." Section 7 directs federal agencies to use their authorities to help conserve listed species. The Act also serves as the enacting legislation to carry out the provisions outlined in The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The Supreme Court found that "the plain intent of Congress in enacting" the ESA "was to halt and reverse the trend toward species extinction, whatever the cost." The Act is administered by two federal agencies, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). FWS and NMFS have been delegated by the Act with the authority to promulgate any rules and guidelines within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to implement its provisions.

Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hiram Hill et al., or TVA v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978), was a United States Supreme Court case and the Court's first interpretation of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. After the discovery of the snail darter fish in the Little Tennessee River in August 1973, a lawsuit was filed alleging that the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)'s Tellico Dam construction was in violation of the Endangered Species Act. Plaintiffs argued dam construction would destroy critical habitat and endanger the population of snail darters. It was decided by a 6-3 vote, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hill, et al. and granted an injunction stating that there would be conflict between Tellico Dam operation and the explicit provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hine's emerald</span> Species of dragonfly

The Hine's emerald is an endangered dragonfly species found in the United States and Canada. Populations exist in Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Ontario, and Wisconsin. Larvae are found in shallow, flowing water in fens and marshes, and often use crayfish burrows. Major threats to the species include habitat loss and alteration, and the species is legally protected in both the United States and Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Wilderness Preservation System</span> Protection of wilderness areas in the U.S.

The National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS) of the United States protects federally managed wilderness areas designated for preservation in their natural condition. Activity on formally designated wilderness areas is coordinated by the National Wilderness Preservation System. Wilderness areas are managed by four federal land management agencies: the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Land Management.

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) of the United States was enacted March 10, 1934 to protect fish and wildlife when federal actions result in the control or modification of a natural stream or body of water. The Act provides the basic authority for the involvement of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) in evaluating impacts to fish and wildlife from proposed water resource development projects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">California species of special concern</span>

A species of special concern is a legal designation by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for native wildlife facing significant risks. This label is applied to species that:

  1. Have vanished from California, or for birds, no longer play their primary roles in the ecosystem
  2. Are deemed threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act but lack state listing
  3. Meet the state Endangered Species Act criteria for threatened or endangered status but await formal listing
  4. Have experienced or are currently undergoing substantial declines in population or habitat range, potentially leading to consideration for threatened or endangered status under the state Endangered Species Act if these declines persist
  5. Possess naturally small populations that are exposed to various threats, such as habitat loss or human interference, which could result in declines meeting the criteria for threatened or endangered status under the state Endangered Species Act
<span class="mw-page-title-main">Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1978</span> United States law

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was first passed in 1973 and forms the basis of biodiversity and endangered species protection in the United States. The original purpose of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 was to prevent species endangerment and extinction due to the human impact on natural ecosystems. The three most powerful sections of the ESA are Sections 4, 7 and 9. Section 4 allows the Secretaries of Interior and Commerce to list species as threatened or endangered based on best available data. Section 7 requires federal agencies to consult with Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) before taking any action that may threaten a listed species. Section 9 forbids the taking of an endangered species. The first amendment to the ESA was passed by the 95th United States Congress in 1978 to "introduce some flexibility into the Endangered Species Act".

<i>Canada Wildlife Act</i>

The Canada Wildlife Act is a statute of the Government of Canada. It specifies the requirements for a geographic area in Canada to be designated a National Wildlife Area by the Canadian Wildlife Service division of Environment Canada.

<i>Allium munzii</i> Species of flowering plant

Allium munzii, also known by its common name, Munz's onion, is a bulb forming perennial herb endemic to Western Riverside County, California. This flower is characterized by its umbrella-like shape and flower clusters. Allium munzii is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act as of 1998. There are thirteen known populations in existence, and the latest population count stands at 20,000-70,000 individuals, counted in 1998. Major threats to this flower include urbanization, agriculture, clay mining, and other human activities. A recovery plan for Allium munzii is not in motion but there are steps being taken to protect this species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Endangered species</span> Species of organisms facing a very high risk of extinction

An endangered species is a species that is very likely to become extinct in the near future, either worldwide or in a particular political jurisdiction. Endangered species may be at risk due to factors such as habitat loss, poaching, invasive species, and climate change. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List lists the global conservation status of many species, and various other agencies assess the status of species within particular areas. Many nations have laws that protect conservation-reliant species which, for example, forbid hunting, restrict land development, or create protected areas. Some endangered species are the target of extensive conservation efforts such as captive breeding and habitat restoration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation-reliant species</span>

Conservation-reliant species are animal or plant species that require continuing species-specific wildlife management intervention such as predator control, habitat management and parasite control to survive, even when a self-sustainable recovery in population is achieved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incidental take permit</span>

An incidental take permit is a permit issued under Section 10 of the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) to private, non-federal entities undertaking otherwise lawful projects that might result in the take of an endangered or threatened species. Application for an incidental take permit is subject to certain requirements, including preparation by the permit applicant of a conservation plan.

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) was defined by the U.S. Congress in the 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, or Magnuson-Stevens Act, as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity." Implementing regulations clarified that waters include all aquatic areas and their physical, chemical, and biological properties; substrate includes the associated biological communities that make these areas suitable for fish habitats, and the description and identification of EFH should include habitats used at any time during the species' life cycle. EFH includes all types of aquatic habitat, such as wetlands, coral reefs, sand, seagrasses, and rivers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Habitat Conservation Plan</span>

A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is a required part of an application for an Incidental Take Permit, a permit issued under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) to private entities undertaking projects that might result in the destruction of an endangered or threatened species. It is a planning document that ensures that the anticipated take of a listed species will be minimized or mitigated by conserving the habitat upon which the species depend, thereby contributing to the recovery of the species as a whole.

<i>Sierra Club v. Babbitt</i> United States District Court case

Sierra Club v. Babbitt, 15 F. Supp. 2d 1274, is a United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama case in which the Sierra Club and several other environmental organizations and private citizens challenged the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Plaintiffs filed action seeking declaratory injunctive relief regarding two incidental take permits (ITPs) issued by the FWS for the construction of two isolated high-density housing complexes in habitat of the endangered Alabama beach mouse. The District Court ruled that the FWS must reconsider its decision to allow high-density development on the Alabama coastline that might harm the endangered Alabama beach mouse. The District Court found that the FWS violated both the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by permitting construction on the dwindling beach mouse habitat.

In 1970 California became one of the first states in the U.S. to implement an act that conserves and protects endangered species and their environments. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) declares that "all native species of fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals, and plants, and their habitats, threatened with extinction and those experiencing a significant decline which, if not halted, would lead to a threatened or endangered designation, will be protected or preserved."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation banking</span>

Conservation banking is an environmental market-based method designed to offset adverse effects, generally, to species of concern, are threatened, or endangered and protected under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) through the creation of conservation banks. Conservation banking can be viewed as a method of mitigation that allows permitting agencies to target various natural resources typically of value or concern, and it is generally contemplated as a protection technique to be implemented before the valued resource or species will need to be mitigated. The ESA prohibits the "taking" of fish and wildlife species which are officially listed as endangered or threatened in their populations. However, under section 7(a)(2) for Federal Agencies, and under section 10(a) for private parties, a take may be permissible for unavoidable impacts if there are conservation mitigation measures for the affected species or habitat. Purchasing “credits” through a conservation bank is one such mitigation measure to remedy the loss.

Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 586 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case. It dealt with the designation of 1544 acres of private land in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana as "critical habitat" for the dusky gopher frog by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court vacated the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that upheld the designation and sent the case back for further review.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan</span>

The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan (SCVHCP), also known as the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, is an initiative issued in 2012 by the County of Santa Clara, the City of San José, the City of Morgan Hill, the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). These governmental agencies are collectively called the "Local Partners" in regards to the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan. The plan's goal is to protect and encourage the growth of endangered species in Santa Clara County. It is a 50-year plan, costing an estimated $660 million as of 2012.

References

Footnotes

  1. "87 Stat. 884 - Endangered Species Conservation Act". December 28, 1973.
  2. Ahmadi, Mohsen; Farhadinia, Mohammad S.; Cushman, Samuel A.; Hemami, Mahmoud-Reza; Nezami Balouchi, Bagher; Jowkar, Houman; Macdonald, David W. (July 2020). "Species and space: a combined gap analysis to guide management planning of conservation areas". Landscape Ecology. 35 (7): 1505–1517. doi:10.1007/s10980-020-01033-5. ISSN   0921-2973.
  3. TAYLOR, MARTIN F. J.; SUCKLING, KIERAN F.; RACHLINSKI, JEFFREY J. (2005). "The Effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act: A Quantitative Analysis". BioScience. 55 (4): 360. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0360:teotes]2.0.co;2. ISSN   0006-3568.
  4. Forman, Richard T. T. (February 2000). "Estimate of the Area Affected Ecologically by the Road System in the United States". Conservation Biology. 14 (1): 31–35. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99299.x. ISSN   0888-8892.