STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN H. CHAFEE
Habitat Conservation Plans
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Drinking Water
October 19, 1999

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend you for holding these hearings on habitat conservation planning under the Endangered Species Act. These hearings are critical to our understanding of an extremely important issue that is instrumental in the continued success of the ESA.

Before exploring the policies that we should adopt to protect endangered species, we must explore the scientific foundations supporting those policies. With respect to HCPs, the hearings that you chaired in July accomplished exactly that: we heard testimony from a number of witnesses who provided insight into the science underlying HCPs. I was particularly impressed by the general agreement among the academic scientists that HCPs by and large are essential for the conservation of species, and while improvements are needed, the basic principles behind HCPs are sound. I would like to complement you, Mr. Chairman, on holding those hearings, and I anticipate that today's hearing will be equally informative.

The need to protect threatened and endangered species on non-Federal lands could not be greater. (By non-Federal lands I mean those lands that are either privately or state-owned). Consider these facts: two-thirds of all listed species have over 60 percent of their habitat on non-Federal lands, and one-third of all listed species are dependent entirely on non-Federal lands. The conservation of these species thus rests largely, if not entirely, on the ability of non-Federal landowners to take appropriate measures. The primary tool under the ESA for their activities is the HCP.

At the same time, landowners have long criticized the ESA for being inflexible and unworkable. HCPs provide liability coverage against the prohibitions of the ESA, but more importantly, they provide a management tool for landowners. With the new policies instituted by the Administration, HCPs have become economically and logistically feasible for landowners. Since 1994, more than 245 HCPs covering six million acres have been approved, with another 200 under review.

However, there are still numerous questions regarding the development and implementation of HCPs. Conservation groups criticize the HCP initiatives, particularly the no-surprises policy, as undermining species conservation. Landowners complain that they still run into obstacles in both negotiating and implementing HCPs, and that the Administration does not always apply consistent standards.

In addition, critics on both sides believe that the Administration has exceeded its statutory authority in implementing these new policies, and are challenging them in court. This morning, we will hear from two of the lawyers involved in the litigation challenging the no-surprises policy.

As you know, last Congress we attempted to reauthorize the ESA, and our bill included a number of provisions to address HCPs. As we consider new legislative initiatives on HCPs, it is useful to further explore the science and policy behind the current policies. Your leadership on these hearings, Mr. Chairman, is both timely and critical. I look forward to the testimony of our distinguished witnesses this morning.