Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.136.2005A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO, OPPOSING H.R. 3824, THE THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 2005 Resolution Recitals 1. Since it was signed into law by President Nixon in 1973, the Endangered Species Act has been a strong, science-based conservation statute designed to prevent extinction of species, in part by protecting critical wildlife habitat. 2. H.R. 3824, known as the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act of 2005 ("TESRA"), has been introduced in Congress and has already passed in the House of Representatives. 3. TESRA would: a. eliminate critical habitat. Instead, "recovery plans" for species, including designation of habitat, would have to be developed within two years. The recovery plans would not have regulatory force and the habitat would not be protected from federal actions. b. specify that landowners with development plans are due answers from the Secretary of the Interior within a set time frame about whether the development would harm protected species. If the government fails to respond in time, the development could go forward. If the government blocks the development, the landowner would be paid the fair market value of the proposed development. c. give the Secretary of the Interior thejob of determining what constitutes appropriate scientific data for decision-making under the law. 4. The Board of County Commissioners oppose TESRA because it; a. eliminates the ability to designate critical habitat without any assurance that critical habitat will be protected; b. eliminates the ability for wildlife experts to determine whether federal agency actions might jeopardize the continued existence of listed plants and animals; c. limits the types of science that can be used to determine endangered species recovery; and d. requires payments to landowners for not violating the law, creating a dangerous precedent and a financial windfall to developers, thus increasing federal spending at a time when budget cuts are being considered to reduce an out-of-control budget deficit; 2 Resolution No. }~2005. page 2 of 2 5. The Endangered Species Act has effectively protected endangered species, including the Colorado greenback cutthroat trout, and TESRA would effectively gut the existing lasv. 6. While revisions based on the 30-plus years of experience under the Endangered Species Act may be appropriate, TESRA goes too far in protecting people over animals. 7. Rather than allowing Congress to weaken the Act, steps can be taken to strengthen it while advancing the recovery of endangered species and making the Act more landowner friendly, including the following: · Expand conservation incentives for landowners; · Cut the red tape that keeps landowners from helping species; · Reward states that proactively conserve species; · Target existing resources toward recoverable species; · Build ties between the United States Department of Agriculture and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service(FWS); and · Recognize the species that have recovered to demonstrate success. Therefore, be it resolved by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, that the Board of Commissioners opposes TESRA, H.R. 3824, for the reasons stated above. Staff is directed to send copies of this resolution to each member of Pitkin County's Congressional Delegation, via facsimile, with an appropriate cover letter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED ON THE 12th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2005. ATTEST: f~I1 ette Jones, De7 Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Patti Kay-Clapper, Chair · y FleXOr Smith, 1Madager - 3