As those of us in the West know, when it comes to the Endangered Species Act, we've got to find ways to replace confrontation with cooperation.
Habitat conseration plans may provide us with a good opportunity to do just that.
In Montana, the Plum Creek timber company and the state of Montana are both working on HCPs to help us recover the Bull Trout.
A few years ago, I worked on a project to restore Bull Trout habitat. It was on a ranch owned by a fellow named Geoff Foote, outside Ovando, which is about 70 miles west of Missoula, along the Blackfoot river. A stream had been straightened, which had the effect of reducing the amount of gravel that Bull Trout need to spawn. We stabilized stream banks, added some streamside cover, and used dirt, stones, and stumps to make the stream meander.
Everybody was working together. Farmers, ranchers, environmentalists. The Montana Departement of Fish and Game. The Fish and Wildlife Service.
HCPs allow us to take the same approach, on a larger scale. Bring folks together, to try and work things out cooperatively.
However, as the use of HCPs increases dramatically, we must address several important issues.
First of all, how do we establish a "no surprises" policy when, as the scientists constantly remind us, nature is full of surprises?
Second, how to we create adequate safeguards, so that the public has a say in the development of large HCPs?
Third, how do we monitor, to make sure that the plan is working, and adapt the plan to changed circumstances or new scientific information?
If we can answer these questions, we may be able to develop a legislative framework that improves the HCP process, and reach the same kind of consensus, in support of that legislation, that we reached a few months ago when we reported legislation that reforms the system for designating critical habitat.