Good morning, Chairman Crapo and Subcommittee Members. I am Dan Silver, of the Endangered Habitats League (EHL) in Southern California. For the last nine years, I have been "in the trenches" of habitat conservation planning under section 10(a) of the Endangered Species Act. Southern California is the epicenter of extinction in the continental United States. With our rapid growth, the potential for economic conflict is high. In fact, in 1991, the listing of the California gnatcatcher was predicted to cause an "economic meltdown." What occurred was far different. Responsible people from all sectors took a risk- a risk that a cooperative approach would yield greater benefits to all interests than would continued confrontation. This venture is working, but also needs your help.
These cooperative efforts have occurred under the State of California Natural Community Conservation Planning, or NCCP, program. An NCCP is basically a large scale habitat conservation plan for multiple species, organized as a federal-state-local partnership, with stakeholder involvement. With them, we are well on are way to getting ahead of the listing curve, and along the way, found more consensus than anyone thought possible. People from all sides are likely to call these pathbreaking efforts a qualified success, which says a lot. Yet, because lack of land acquisition funds has produced serious flaws in preserve design, Congress should urgently address this problem.
The goals of the NCCP program are various. An NCCP provides streamlined permitting for development, certainty for ecosystem protection, and open space and quality of life for the human population. In fact, the preserves are often touted as "environmental infrastructure" by elected officials - as necessary for the future economic competitiveness of our region as more traditional forms of infrastructure. The obstacles to such planning - multiple jurisdictions, thousands of properties, contentious interest groups - have all been all overcome.
An overview of the Southern California efforts is as follows:
In Orange County, the Central/Coastal NCCP is complete. In this part of Orange County, a single, massive ownership allowed for relatively orderly development and for a reserve system with relatively unfragmented lands. The reserve design process involved a "gap analysis" between already-planned open space (exactions obtained through the land use process and earlier purchases) and maps of overall habitat quality and "target species" presence. The result- a preserve of 37,378 acres "covering" 39 species - combined the pre-existing open space with smaller, though important, new additions. There are also connectivity improvements and new management obligations.
The covered species list of the CentraVCoastal NCCP relies upon umbrella species methodologies, upon variable amounts of survey data, and upon judgments of habitat sufficiency. When planned restoration of agricultural lands is factored in, the result is particularly defensible for coastal sage scrub. As in all the NCCP plans, monitoring and adaptive management are major program components.
Another huge ownership is involved in the Southern Orange County NCCP. An absence of already-planned land uses in this area makes it a test case for the NCCP program. Progress here has been much slower than anticipated due to complex wetlands planning, but there is outstanding conservation potential.
In San Diego, the logistically and politically daunting Multiple Species Conservation Program, or MSCP, involves multiple jurisdictions and hundreds of landowners. After extensive public and stakeholder participation, a 172,000 acre preserve, covering 85 species across a full range of habitats, has been approved at the framework level and by three of the five jurisdictions involved. Included are 90,000 acres of currently private lands, two thirds of which will derive from development exactions, and the remainder acquired at an estimated cost of $300,000,000 (to be shared by local, state, and federal sectors).
The preserve design process appropriately began with the compilation of standards and guidelines for preservation of vegetation communities and for maintaining "viable populations" of 90 target species of plants and animals. Due to incomplete survey data, a habitat quality map was prepared using a matrix of indices, and then a map of "biological core areas and linkages" was produced. After adding in local land use factors, preserve design alternatives were developed, and evaluated for species coverage.
All together, about 3/4's of the best remaining habitat is slated for protection, and maintaining connectivity across an already fragmented landscape is a very significant benefit. The San Diego National Wildlife Refuge has been created in the most intact remaining landscape, and is helping assemble landscape-level units. Large parts of the preserve is to be assembled over time according to pre-deterrnined criteria, such as mitigation ratios.
In the fragmented landscape of northern San Diego County, five cities are finishing work on the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program, or MHCP. This plan will patch together smaller habitat patches and provide connectivity into Camp Pendleton Marine Base.
In Riverside County, county government is leading an ambitious and visionary effort to simultaneously integrate a Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan with comprehensive land use and transportation planning. The habitat plan will provide greenbelts between communities in this rapidly growing county. The multiple species reserve will build upon an earlier, single species preserve which, by limiting its scope to the Stephens' kangaroo rat, did not resolve economic or environmental problems. The stakeholder Advisory Committee is considering market mechanisms to assemble the preserve system and fiscal incentives for agricultural interests.
Progress on an NCCP in the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County has been slow. In San Bernardino County, the local governments unfortunately have not put together a multiple species effort, which could have averted many of the difficulties associated with the endangered Delhi Sands flower loving fly.
I would lilac to summarize the lessons of the Southern California experience:
-- Only a regional scale allows biological objectives to be met.
The goal of the ESA is ecosystem protection and recovery of species. A multiplicity of small, piecemeal HCPs will not meet these objectives. Large scale HCPs should meet recovery objectives, as they will probably define the full extent of conservation which ultimately occurs within their boundaries.
-- A multiple species focus allows proactive conservation and the avoidance of future listings.
Long term certainty for economic and environmental interests alike is provided by a comprehensive scope, covering both rare and common species.
-- Sound science can be demonstrated when the scale is large and multiple species are targeted.
Nature is complex, and it takes a comprehensive approach to truly achieve ecosystem protection. Only at a large scale can the basic scientific tenets of preserve design be realized.
-- HCPs should be tailored to individual, local circumstances.
A large scale HOP in an agricultural area will be far different from that in an urbanizing area, requiring flexible approaches.
-- Partnerships with state and especially local agencies are essential.
The most important yet underappreciated aspect of the NCCP program is its partnership with local government. Only local government has the land use authority necessary to build an interconnected preserve system on private lands. For example, the US Fish and Wildlife Service cannot easily regulate unoccupied habitat on private land, although such habitat may be a crucial wildlife corridor. A critical aspect of the partnership, however, is the provision of federal planning funds to state and local agencies.
-- Listings are necessary to bring the parties to the table.
Without actual listings - the California gnatcatcher in San Diego or quino checkerspot butterfly in Riverside - there is simply insufficient motivation for parties to undertake and carry out multi-year, difficult planning processes. Also, in our experience, delegation to the states, without the federal government as a full partner, will not be successful.
-- The process must be transparent at each step.
If the preserve design process is subject to continual scrutiny from its earliest stages, it can be understood and accepted. Alternative preserve designs and species coverage rationales must all be open to review early in the process, where citizen input can still have an effect. Building-in independent scientific review is extremely important. To this end, Riverside County is contracting with the University of California.
-- Stakeholder involvement is a precondition for success.
Implementing large scale HCPs is challenging, and varies in each unique area. Only the skill and knowledge of the affected stakeholders can shape implementation so that it serves everyone's needs. If you give people of different interests the opportunity, they will rise to the occasion, work together, and solve problems.
-- Assurances to private parties are acceptable if commensurate certainty exists for species.
In order to justify "no surprises" assurances, HCPs should be large scale, multiple species in scope, meet recovery objectives, and have adaptive management and scientific input. In the type of plan we are doing in Southern California - a balance between permanent conservation and permanent loss - it is only the size and quality of the plan on "day one" which will really make a difference 50 years later. This is different, though, from HCPs which consist of managing renewable resources, such as forests or rivers. There, changes in management over time may well be an appropriate responsibility of the private sector.
-- Tie biological goals to related public purposes.
Species protection produces precious open space in developing areas. All the preserve systems in Southern California are open to low-impact recreation, and they have a much greater chance of adoption when tied to such compatible objectives. A large scale HOP can help a region achieve a vision for its future, as is happening in San Diego and Riverside Counties.
The provision of public land Acquisition funds is an urgent priority.
Despite very significant exactions from the private sector, reaching biological goals will require large sums for land acquisition. Some properties simply cannot be split down the middle. Species cannot be "mitigated" into recovery. Particularly damaging has been the lack of early acquisition funds, because timing is often a critical factor. There is local, state, and national benefit to the preservation of America's heritage through HCPs. Funds from each of these levels of government are needed, and must be reliable and adequate.
In conclusion, I urge you to reinvigorate the HCP process in two major ways. First, pursue large scale, multiple species HCPs with the characteristics I have described above. These should be prioritized, and federal planning funds provided to local agencies. Secondly, the public sector must do its share financially. Funding is needed for the federal government's fair share of the multiple species plans. It is also needed for an expansion of the National Wildlife Refuge system, which is another way that biodiversity can be protected before the crisis point is reached.
I cannot stress the funding aspect enough: If you are serious about HCP reform, you will, in my view, fully and permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund on an urgent basis, before this session of Congress is over. I want to tell you the sense of frustration people of all sides feel, people who have worked for years to produce potential solutions which will achieve national conservation objectives and also make their communities better places to live. We have been let down. However, if you fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund, you will provide stakeholders the essential tool for HCP success, and allow our shared values for conservation to flourish.
Thank you for allowing me to testify today.
Dan Silver, MD, is a medical doctor by training, educated at UC Berkeley and Columbia University. In 1989 he led an effort to protect the Santa Rosa Plateau in Riverside County through a "win-win" agreement with the landowner. In 1991 he became Coordinator of the Endangered Habitats League (EHL), a Southern California organization dedicated to ecosystem protection, improved land use planning, and collaborative conflict resolution. Through intensive stakeholder participation, EHL plays a key role in putting in place problem-solving multiple species programs across Southern California. Dan has received awards from the Planning and Conservation League and Sea and Sage Audubon Society.