From the Chair - Better Protection for Biodiversity
Over a decade ago, when the California Biodiversity Council formed to address significant endangered species in the northern half of the State, another innovative and cooperative effort to address threats to species also emerged in Southern California: Natural Communities Conservation Plans (NCCPs). NCCPs create a local solution to preserving biodiversity based on the protection of large landscapes. The first plans were developed in Orange and San Diego counties in areas under enormous development pressure. Developers, local governments, and the groups and agencies who participated in creating these pioneering plans were pleased with the results. Elsewhere in the State, however, there was criticism and concern. Conservationists claimed there were insufficient scientific standards, or that species could be threatened by the possibility of arrangements made with landowners not in the best interest of habitat preservation. Others questioned outright the State’s ability to oversee and implement the program. These concerns tended to limit the number of areas that were willing to start on a process that was perceived as contentious, and in some cases, expensive. For the past three years the Resources Agency, and particularly the Department of Fish and Game, have worked hard with Senator Byron Sher to address these issues. The result is SB 107, a bill that passed the California Legislature and was signed by Governor Davis in January. There is no doubt that SB 107 improves NCCPs. It states that the conservation and management of species is equal to a ‘recovery standard,’ providing the highest conservation standard in state law. It enhances species coverage criteria and analysis, assures that independent scientific input provide a sound foundation for plans, and standardizes content for planning agreements. The new law ensures adequate monitoring and adaptive management programs for each plan and provides for more thorough public involvement and review processes. There is more. The new law creates standards for the coverage of species, criteria for issuing permits, and provides clear incidental–take authority. It requires that species impacts and the corresponding conservation measures remain roughly proportional. The bill clarifies mitigation issues and permit suspensions or revocations, supplies program monitoring provisions, and offers a range of defaults and remedies. With the new ‘improved’ process and safeguards in place, we will be looking for ways to encourage the development of broad–scale NCCPs throughout California. The result will certainly benefit the preservation of California’s biodiversity, strengthening an approach that is a classic ‘win–win’ solution. For conservationists, the large–landscape solution offers the best hope for rescuing threatened systems. Developers gain certainty, helping promote a predictable business environment. Local governments retain autonomy over land–use and are better equipped to balance future growth with natural open space. Furthermore, wildlife agencies are no longer burdened by the regulatory and legal quagmire of developing project–by–project mitigation. There are other benefits too: when stakeholders sit down over a period of months—or years—to work out a solution, they inevitably form alliances. In agreeing to lines on a map, no matter what ‘side’ they are on, all the participants discover common ground. This creates community support for a local solution that protects and preserves California’s rich biodiversity and the quality–of–life it supports. California Biodiversity News: Volume 9, Number 1 |