|
Post by pfsc on Jun 24, 2013 18:41:29 GMT -5
HB 1576 - (PLS Summary) (PN 2133) An Act standardizing a state process for listing of threatened or endangered species by formalizing existing resource agency authority via rulemaking, consolidating the listings into a centralized database managed by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, granting access to information in the database to planners required to consider the impacts that a project could have or to those involved in conservationist efforts, and protecting sensitive data by prohibiting the disclosure of the information to anyone not involved in a development or conservation project. - Jun 24, 2013 - Referred to House Game and Fisheries
PRINTER'S NO. 2133 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE BILL No. 1576 Session of 2013 INTRODUCED BY PYLE, GERGELY, MALONEY, MILLARD, MULLERY, KAUFFMAN, D. COSTA, BLOOM, HELM, HARHAI, RAPP, GOODMAN, CUTLER, GIBBONS, AUMENT, MARSHALL, C. HARRIS, REED, PICKETT, MATZIE, HEFFLEY, EVERETT, MASSER, M. K. KELLER, SWANGER, KNOWLES, METCALFE, DUNBAR, SONNEY, GROVE, KRIEGER, REESE, STEVENSON, NEUMAN, SANKEY, CAUSER, SACCONE, ROCK, GODSHALL, TOBASH, MURT, R. BROWN, SCHLEGEL CULVER, P. COSTA, DAVIS, BURNS, P. DALEY, ENGLISH, TALLMAN, BAKER, BARRAR, CHRISTIANA, ELLIS, EVANKOVICH, KORTZ, JAMES, KULA, MAJOR, METZGAR, MOUL, MUSTIO, OBERLANDER, TOOHIL, SNYDER, PASHINSKI, READSHAW, ROAE AND SAYLOR, JUNE 24, 2013 REFERRED TO COMMITEE ON GAME AND FISHERIES, JUNE 24, 2013 AN ACT 1 Providing a process for the designation of certain species. 2 The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 3 hereby enacts as follows: 4 Section 1. Short title. 5 This act shall be known and may be cited as the Endangered 6 Species Coordination Act. 7 Section 2. Definitions. 8 The following words and phrases when used in this act shall 9 have the meanings given to them in this section unless the 10 context clearly indicates otherwise: 11 "Acceptable data." Current, best available scientific and
1
1 commercial, empirical data as evidenced in supporting 2 documentation, statistics, reports, studies or research. As it 3 pertains to wild trout stream designation, such data that is 4 replicable and testable. 5 "Action." Any of the following activity: 6 (1) Promulgation of regulations. 7 (2) Designations or listing of species. 8 (3) Enforcement of rules and regulations. 9 "Acts." Any of the following: 10 (1) The Endangered Species Act of 1973, (Public Law 93- 11 205, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.); 12 (2) The act of June 23, 1982 (P.L.597, No.170), known as 13 the Wild Resource Conservation Act. 14 (3) 30 Pa.C.S. (relating to fish). 15 (4) 34 Pa.C.S. (relating to game). 16 "Centralized database." The database of listed species and 17 critical habitat maintained in accordance with this act. 18 "Commonwealth agency." Any of the following: 19 (1) The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 20 of the Commonwealth. 21 (2) The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. 22 (3) The Pennsylvania Game Commission. 23 "Critical habitat." The specific areas within the geographic 24 area occupied by a listed species designated in accordance with 25 the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-205, 16 U.S.C. 26 § 1531 et seq.). 27 "Department." The Department of Conservation and Natural 28 Resources of the Commonwealth. 29 "Listed species." Species of fish, wildlife or plants 30 designated under the acts as "endangered," "Pennsylvania
2
1 endangered," "threatened" or "Pennsylvania threatened" and 2 included in the centralized database. 3 "Persons." The term includes: 4 (1) Persons, including any natural person, partnership, 5 association, corporation or other legal entity, including 6 associated consultants, scientists and planners, involved in 7 commercial activities involving potential land disturbances 8 or other activity for which a permit is required by Federal 9 or State law and which may impact listed species or their 10 critical habitats, as defined by the Endangered Species Act 11 of 1973 (Public Law 93-205, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) or this 12 act. 13 (2) Persons with a bona fide interest involved in 14 conservation planning or involved in resource management as 15 determined by the Department of Conservation and Natural 16 Resources. 17 "Wild trout stream." A wilderness trout stream, a Class A 18 wild trout stream or any other stream or stream segment 19 designated by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission as a 20 wild trout stream. 21 Section 3. Coordination of designation. 22 No Commonwealth agency may take action to designate or 23 consider fish, wildlife or plants as threatened or endangered 24 unless the fish, wildlife or plants are designated under the 25 Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-205, 16 U.S.C. § 26 1531 et seq.) or pursuant to this act. 27 Section 4. Designation process. 28 (a) Applicable law.--Any action by a Commonwealth agency to 29 designate fish, wildlife or plants as threatened or endangered 30 or to designate a stream as a wild trout stream shall be subject
3
1 to the requirements of the act of July 31, 1968 (P.L.769, 2 No.240) referred to as the Commonwealth Documents Law, and the 3 act of June 25, 1982 (P.L.633, No.181), known as the Regulatory 4 Review Act. 5 (b) Detailed reasons and summary of data and methodology.-- 6 The Commonwealth agency shall provide detailed reasons and a 7 summary of the acceptable data and methodology upon which the 8 proposed designation is based, as well as the activities that 9 may be affected by such designation, to the Independent 10 Regulatory Review Commission and to the standing committees of 11 the Senate and the House of Representatives with jurisdiction 12 over the Commonwealth agency for purposes of this act. 13 (c) Inclusion in centralized database.--Upon final 14 promulgation of a regulation designating a fish, wildlife or 15 plant species as threatened or endangered, that species shall be 16 included in the centralized database. 17 (d) Removal.--Any species designated as threatened or 18 endangered pursuant to 30 Pa.C.S. (relating to fish) or 34 19 Pa.C.S. (relating to game) prior to the effective date of this 20 section shall be removed from the centralized database after a 21 period of two years unless the Commonwealth agency redesignates 22 the species as threatened or endangered in accordance with the 23 provisions of this act. 24 Section 5. Designation determination and data. 25 (a) General rule.--All Commonwealth agency actions to 26 designate fish, wildlife or plants as Pennsylvania threatened or 27 Pennsylvania endangered species shall be promulgated as 28 regulations in accordance with this act, solely on the basis of 29 acceptable data. 30 (b) Conditions for designation.--
4
1 (1) Any designation of a Pennsylvania endangered species 2 shall be made only when the species is in danger of 3 extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 4 range. 5 (2) Any designation of a Pennsylvania threatened species 6 shall be made only when the species is likely to become a 7 Pennsylvania endangered species throughout all or a 8 significant portion of its range within the foreseeable 9 future. 10 (c) Wild trout streams.--Any Commonwealth agency action to 11 designate a stream or stream segment as a wild trout stream 12 shall be promulgated as a regulation based solely on acceptable 13 data. The designation of a stream or stream segment as a wild 14 trout stream shall not be effective until the regulation is 15 promulgated as final. 16 Section 6. Permits and approvals. 17 When reviewing applications for permits, approvals or other 18 authorizations or taking actions, State and local government 19 agencies shall consider impacts only to listed species and their 20 critical habitats included in the centralized database. Permits, 21 approvals, authorizations or regulations shall not require 22 persons to conduct field surveys or other activities to 23 determine or evaluate the presence of species or their habitats, 24 unless acceptable data exist indicating the presence of a listed 25 species in the area. 26 Section 7. Centralized database. 27 The department shall develop, maintain and manage the 28 operation of the centralized database. Each Commonwealth agency 29 shall provide the department with all information identified in 30 section 8.
5
1 Section 8. Access to data. 2 (a) General rule.--The department shall provide persons 3 access to data regarding the location of listed species or other 4 designated species, including: 5 (1) Geographic Information System spatial data 6 identifying specific areas in which each listed species or 7 other designated species is known to be present. 8 (2) Geographic Information System spatial data 9 identifying critical habitat areas where listed species occur 10 or sensitive habitat of other designated species. 11 (3) Geographic Information System spatial data 12 identifying buffer areas for listed species or other 13 designated species, along with a description of the 14 acceptable data, rationale and methodology used by a 15 Commonwealth agency to establish the extent of the buffer 16 areas. 17 (4) The names of all political subdivisions within which 18 the listed or other designated species, their habitats and 19 buffer areas are located. 20 (b) List of potential avoidance and mitigation measures.-- 21 The department shall also provide persons a list of potential 22 avoidance and mitigation measures, seasonal considerations or 23 other best practices associated with each of the listed species 24 or other designated species and habitats. 25 (c) Public dissemination.-- 26 (1) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the 27 contrary, the department shall provide the information 28 described in subsection (a), including records identifying 29 the location of endangered or threatened plant or animal 30 species not already known to the general public, to persons
6
1 who request it. 2 (2) Persons receiving the information may only disclose 3 the information to other persons with prior written 4 authorization from the department. 5 (d) Use of information.--Information obtained under 6 subsection (a) shall be used solely for: 7 (1) conservation, development planning, natural 8 resources management; 9 (2) compliance with statutory and regulatory 10 requirements for the protection of listed species applicable 11 to permits, approvals or other authorizations; or 12 (3) voluntary measures to mitigate impacts to other than 13 listed species. 14 (e) Civil penalty.--Any person intentionally violating the 15 provisions of subsection (c) or (d) is subject to a civil 16 penalty of not less than $250 nor more than $5,000. 17 Section 9. Repeal. 18 All acts and parts of acts are repealed insofar as they are 19 inconsistent with this act. 20 Section 10. Effective date. 21 This act shall take effect in 90 days.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jun 24, 2013 19:29:35 GMT -5
Ok, how about a translation?
|
|
|
Post by TusseyMtman on Jun 24, 2013 19:43:09 GMT -5
I would take a guess this is about bats, gas drilling, or both...
|
|
|
Post by melody on Jun 30, 2013 17:15:10 GMT -5
HCO2023 By Pyle. Establishes the Endangered Species Coordination Act.
* June 12, 2013 01:57 PM * Rep. Jeffrey Pyle * Endangered Species Coordination Act * In the near future, I plan on introducing the Endangered Species * Coordination Act to establish a uniform and transparent process for * evaluating; designating and protecting threatened and endangered * species and their critical habitats in the Commonwealth. * * * * The legislation has four main elements: 1) standardizes a state * process for listing of threatened or endangered species by formalizing * existing resource agency authority via rulemaking; 2) consolidates the * listings into a centralized database managed by the Department of * Conservation and Natural Resources; 3) grants access to information in * the database to planners required to consider the impacts that a * project could have or to those involved in conservationist efforts; and * 4) protects sensitive data by prohibiting the disclosure of the * information to anyone not involved in a development or conservation * project. * * * * Another benefit of this legislation is that it places the decisions of * the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and Pennsylvania Game * Commission under the review of Independent Regulatory Review * Commission. As Pennsylvania's last two remaining extra-governmental * promulgated rule making bodies, the right of our concerned citizens to * exercise due process in appealing a decision would, for the first time, * have a forum to do so with the IRRC. The legislation does not, however, * address or direct any establishment of seasons, bag limits, et al.
|
|
|
Post by Dutch on Jun 30, 2013 21:13:29 GMT -5
And there you have the REAL issue.......
|
|
|
Post by melody on Aug 12, 2013 18:08:01 GMT -5
MONDAY - 8/26/13 House Environmental Resources and Energy and House Game and Fisheries (New) 2:00 p.m., Empire Beauty School, Auditorium, 396 Pottsville St. Clair Highway, Pottsville Joint public hearing on: HB 1576 Pyle, Jeff Act re species designation
HB 1576 - (PLS Summary) (PN 2133) An Act standardizing a state process for listing of threatened or endangered species by formalizing existing resource agency authority via rulemaking, consolidating the listings into a centralized database managed by the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, granting access to information in the database to planners required to consider the impacts that a project could have or to those involved in conservationist efforts, and protecting sensitive data by prohibiting the disclosure of the information to anyone not involved in a development or conservation project. Effective in 90 days.
|
|
|
Post by melody on Aug 25, 2013 17:30:32 GMT -5
From Rep. Martin Causer: Tomorrow, I will be co-chairing a hearing with the House Game and Fisheries and the Environmental Resources and Energy committees, on legislation that would standardize the state process for designating species of fish, wildlife or plants as threatened or endangered, and for designating waters as wild trout streams. You can watch the hearing live, beginning at 2 p.m. on my website at RepCauser.com. In the meantime, find out more about the bill and who is testifying at this link. www.repcauser.com/NewsItem.aspx?NewsID=18299
|
|
|
Post by davet on Aug 25, 2013 17:37:10 GMT -5
Come on......the State can't agree with the rest of the firearm specialist that a freaking peep sight isn't really an open sight. Now they are going to attempt to codify that "bat's are bat's" when we all know the State will come out with a definition that "bat's are rat's". Oye-Vey.
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Aug 26, 2013 5:23:51 GMT -5
It's about Belfry Bats..with tooo much Gas...trying to use a helluvalot of paper to basically build a better mouse entrapment.
|
|
|
Post by melody on Aug 26, 2013 16:34:07 GMT -5
Rep. Heffley said during today's hearing that everyone (including sportsmen) that he hears from, thinks there should be more legislative oversight of the agencies, and this legislation is a start. He's also a supporter of shorter commissioner terms as a way to exert more oversight over the commissioners.
Rep. Heffley: Due Process Needed In Endangered Species Listings
8/26/2013
POTTSVILLE – Rep. Doyle Heffley (R-Carbon) attended a House Game and Fisheries Committee hearing on House Bill 1576, also known as the “Endangered Species Coordination Act.” The bill, which Heffley has co-sponsored, establishes due process for appealing decisions made by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and Pennsylvania Game Commission when the decision pertains to endangered species. Currently, no one can appeal these decisions.
“I am very concerned about the regulatory process in agencies such as the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission and the Pennsylvania Game Commission,” Heffley said. “Decisions of this nature can have a large impact on our local workforce.”
In 2009, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission attempted to list five species of freshwater mussels as threatened or endangered. That effort was delayed when dredging companies and their workers protested about the impact the listing would have on their jobs. Regardless of the jobs it would cost, these designations were made and just this month, the last river dredging company and its 50 workers left the Allegheny River in western Pennsylvania. Last year, the Pennsylvania Game Commission proposed listing several species of bats which have been deeply affected by white-nose syndrome (WNS). WNS is exacting a 90 percent mortality rate on Pennsylvania bats. The Pennsylvania Game Commission is considering placing all the state’s bats on endangered status. In Carbon County, similar concerns surround the bog turtle.
“I remain focused on all issues connected to environmental protection and our local economy, and I am currently working on legislation that would further regulate the permitting process for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,” Heffley said. “The legislation would set forth up-front requirements for permits, stemming what can be a long review process.”
For more legislative information, visit Heffley’s website at RepHeffley.com or follow his legislative Facebook at Facebook.com/RepHeffley.
Representative Doyle Heffley 122nd District Pennsylvania House of Representatives Media Contact: Nick Ruffner 717.260.6258 nruffner@pahousegop.com
|
|
|
Post by galthatfishes on Aug 26, 2013 17:07:11 GMT -5
Heard him say it. Apparently, I'm "no one" since "everyone" agrees with him.
|
|
|
Post by davet on Aug 28, 2013 9:56:49 GMT -5
Heard him say it. Apparently, I'm "no one" since "everyone" agrees with him. Really.....everyone agrees with him? Really? Everyone? Send that man to the middle east!!!!
|
|
|
Post by wentzler on Aug 28, 2013 16:52:29 GMT -5
too easy, Davey-T We're worried about religio-crazy lunatics a half world away..when we should be worried about infidels in our own House Or Senate.
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Aug 29, 2013 4:10:54 GMT -5
For those who want to watch... link
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Aug 29, 2013 4:17:30 GMT -5
BTW I thought the Trout Unlimited representative was a little ill prepared to field questions. Made me cringe a bit as it didn't seem to help the cause.
|
|
|
Post by galthatfishes on Aug 29, 2013 13:24:01 GMT -5
I thought he did well, given he didn't know what kind of was going to be thrown on him.
|
|
|
Post by galthatfishes on Aug 29, 2013 13:41:33 GMT -5
www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/mc-pa-endangered-species-0828-20130828,0,5801265.story Hmph. Seems John Organ with US Fish and Wildlife; who knows the law inside and out (he wrote much of it) is being told by some "R"'s that he's wrong. Pennsylvania could lose $27 million over bills to amend endangered species laws
GOP measures would cost two state agencies more than 20% of their budgets, the U.S. Interior Department warns. By Steve Esack, Call Harrisburg Bureau 9:18 p.m. EDT, August 28, 2013 HARRISBURG — Republican-backed bills to give the Legislature more control over the protection of endangered and threatened wildlife could cost the state more than $27 million annually, according to the federal government. If the bills become law, Pennsylvania could lose eligibility in two of the nation's oldest grant programs geared toward preserving, restoring and protecting wildlife and waterways, according to an Aug. 9 letter the state Game Commission got from the U.S. Interior Department's Fish and Wildlife Service. "I have significant concerns with this bill and the risk it presents to the Game Commission relative to loss of federal funding," wrote John F. Organ, chief of the division of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration. But Rep. Jeff Pyle, R-Armstrong, the prime sponsor of the House bill, said the legislation does not strip the Game or Fish and Boat commissions of their authority. Rather, he said, the bill, which was the subject of a public hearing Monday, is meant to check the commissions' authority. Pyle said they are the only state agencies that do not have their policy decisions vetted through the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, which sets up public forums for new government regulations prior to final approval by lawmakers. The bill is needed, Pyle said, because the Game Commission made his local school district spend extra money to preserve Indiana bats, which are endangered, even though the bats were not on the land where a new school was being built. "Those guys are the judge, jury and executioner," he said. The threat of losing federal money is "hollow," Pyle added. House Republican Caucus lawyers, Pyle said, have assured him that the state would not lose federal money because other state agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) also have jurisdiction over environmental protection. "We got a bunch of safety checks built into this thing," said Pyle. Drew Crompton, chief of staff to Sen. Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, who has sponsored a similar bill in that chamber, said the federal government's concerns can "be easily addressed" in the legislative process. But Rep. Steve McCarter, D-Montgomery, a critic of the bills, said the threat of lost federal revenue should be taken seriously. The bills are meant to appease industry at the expense of the environment, he said, because they would create a prolonged, 11-step process to having species listed or delisted as threatened and endangered through the Independent Regulatory Process. "The chance of any species getting through the process would be impossible," McCarter said. In addition to putting the commissions under the scrutiny of the regulatory review process, the bills call for the commissions, plus the state Agricultural Department and DCNR, to create a centralized database to replace the decades-old computerized system of endangered species and fauna. The commissions argue that the database would jeopardize wildlife because it would pinpoint their locations. The bills also would require the agencies to remove species from the endangered or threatened lists within two years if the agencies cannot produce "acceptable data" that the species' numbers remain weak. The agencies also could not define new endangered or threatened species if their numbers are acceptable outside of Pennsylvania, or if they are not already covered under the federal Endangered Species Act. Those changes could make the state ineligible for federal funds, says Organ's letter to Game Commission Executive Director Carl Roe. According to the letter, Game Commission could lose $19 million — or 24 percent of its 2012-13 budget — because it may not be eligible for the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Program. The program dates to 1937 and is used to "restore, conserve, manage and enhance wild birds and mammals" while making their habitats accessible for hunting, shooting and other recreation. The Fish and Boat Commission could lose $8.3 million — 29 percent of its 2012-13 budget — from the federal Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Program. That program, started in 1950 and modeled after Pittman-Robertson, seeks to make fishing and boating more accessible to the public. To be eligible for both grants, state have to have fish and wildlife agencies that have sole discretion over how revenue for fishing and hunting licenses are used. The agencies also have to have the authority to ensure "the conservation of fish and wildlife." steve.esack@mcall.com 717-783-7305 Read more: www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/mc-pa-endangered-species-0828-20130828,0,5801265.story#ixzz2dNviYCIQ Follow us: @mcall on Twitter | mcall.lv on Facebook
|
|
|
Post by melody on Sept 8, 2013 22:52:18 GMT -5
House bill could be a fatal blow to endangered speciestimesleader.com/news/outdoors-sports-venesky/813651/House-bill-could-be-a-fatal-blow-to-endangered-species September 07. 2013 11:08PM By Tom Venesky - tvenesky@civitasmedia.com What’s the real reason behind House Bill 1576? Money. The bill, which was introduced earlier this year by state Rep. Jeff Pyle (R-Armstrong/Indiana) essentially revamps the process in which plant and animal species are listed as threatened or endangered, and it also throws all the work out the window for those species that are already listed. Even the process used to designate waterways as wild trout streams would also be overhauled. Even better, all 73 species currently listed as threatened or endangered in the state - such as the Indiana bat, Northern flying squirrel, peregrine falcon and the osprey, would have to be re-evaluated not by the Pennsylvania Game Commission of Fish and Boat Commission, but by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, which would determine if the listings are accurate and if the species are truly deserving of such a designation. If the bill is passed, the agencies would have two years to prove that the Indiana bat, for example, is truly endangered. If they don’t produce “acceptable data” that particular species can be removed from the list. The politicians supporting the bill have been throwing out “feel good” terms to back the legislation. Pyle stated that the legislators are “simply asking for sufficient burden of proof” that a species is in fact threatened of endangered. State Rep. Dan Moul (R-Adams) said the bill simply asks the state agencies “to provide evidence that backs up their decision.” Burden of proof and evidence? That may be a little hard to do considering we’re talking about species that are endangered, meaning they are few and far between. Hard to find. Disappearing. Vanishing. Is that enough proof? While some politicians contend that the bill would bring transparency to the process that agencies use to designate a species or classify a wild trout stream, that’s just sugar-coating the bitter truth driving the legislation. During a public hearing late last month on the bill, state Rep. Martin Causer (R-Cameron/McKean/Potter) made a few comments that hint at the real reason behind the bill. In my opinion, the bill is all about making it easier for business, industry and land developers to proceed with their projects at the expense of the state’s threatened and endangered species. Here’s what Causer had to say at the hearing: “Listing species as endangered places severe hardship on businesses. We can’t run jobs and businesses out of the state just because species are threatened with extinction.” I don’t believe the endangered species designation is meant to run any business out of the state. It’s designed to help businesses and industries locate their projects in a responsible manner that won’t drive an endangered species to extinction. Causer also mentioned the “hardship” that the endangered designation places on businesses. What about the the hardship that was placed on dozens of species for decades that drove them to the verge of extinction? What about the irresponsible land use, pollution and development that created those hardships in the first place? The PGC and PFBC have done a commendable job of studying, monitoring and protecting our threatened and endangered species to prevent any more from becoming extinct, like the passenger pigeon. At the same time, industry, at least in our area, doesn’t seem to have missed a beat. Take a drive through Noxen and gaze up at the towering wind turbines lining the mountain tops if you need proof. Or go a little further north and look at the drilling rigs and gas well pads dotting the landscape of Wyoming and Bradford counties. And while you’re counting turbines and well pads, pay attention to how many Indiana bats, flying squirrels and peregrine falcons you see, and then decide where the real “hardship” lies.
|
|
|
Post by melody on Sept 9, 2013 20:15:03 GMT -5
Endangered species bill could threaten federal fundswww.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/endangered-species-bill-threatens-federal-funds-702567/#ixzz2eRpwNO8XSeptember 9, 2013 12:09 am By Don Hopey / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Proposed legislation that will make it harder to list and protect endangered species in Pennsylvania and easier to site Marcellus Shale gas wells could also endanger more than $27 million a year in federal funding for the state's fish and game commissions. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the bills recently introduced by Rep. Jeff Pyle, R-Armstrong, and Sen. Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, would curb the authority of the independent commissions to protect threatened and endangered species and give the Legislature more control over the listings. And that might make the state commissions ineligible for federal fish and wildlife restoration grants, said John Organ, chief of the USFWS Division of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration, in an email last week. "This could be a violation of federal regulations and result in loss of eligibility to participate in the grant programs," Mr. Organ said, assessing the impact of the proposed changes. He expressed similar "significant concerns" in an Aug. 9 letter to Pennsylvania Game Commission executive director Carl Roe. This year, the Game Commission received a federal wildlife restoration grant of $19 million, or 24 percent of its budget. The Fish and Boat Commission got federal fish restoration funding of $8.3 million, approximately 29 percent of its budget. The federal grant program rules require the commissions to have independent authority over species conservation programs and how federal species restoration grant money and license revenue is spent. Both commissions have strongly signaled their opposition to the legislative proposals. "It's certainly got my attention knowing that a quarter of my budget is at risk," said John Arway, state Fish and Boat Commission executive director. "We believe the bills would stop our ability to list species, and that goes to the very heart of our mission as an independent commission of state government." In addition to requiring that all endangered species designations by the two commissions be approved by House and Senate committees and a joint legislative regulatory review committee, the Republican-proposed bills would require that plants, fish or animals on the endangered and threatened listings be delisted and reconfirmed every two years by those legislative committees. The bills also would prohibit the designation of species as state threatened or endangered if they are already federally listed; shift the burden and financial costs of proving the presence of endangered species to government agencies instead of developers or industries applying for permits to operate in a specific area; and create a centralized publicly accessible endangered species database that would enable individuals, developers or industry to identify their locations. The fish and game commissions say pinpointing locations where endangered species can be found could result in habitat disruption and public collecting or poaching, that could jeopardize the species. Mr. Pyle, whose bill has 67 cosponsors in the 203-member House, said he introduced the legislation after a school district in his legislative district was required to pay thousands of dollars to mitigate the impact of a new school construction project on the habitat of the Indiana bat, a federal and state endangered species, even though no bats were found on the school property. "We're not trying to be mean to the animals," Mr. Pyle said in a phone interview last week. "But what happens when protecting animals screws up our lives as humans?" Although he earlier blamed the state Game Commission for the bat ruling that cost his local school district mitigation money, he now concedes that it was a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision and his state legislation would have no effect on that federal agency. But he said he knows of six other instances during the last three years when the Game Commission raised questions about bat habitat during a state permitting process. Asked if any of those permits were denied, he said they were not. He also said he's had complaints about the science used to designate species as endangered and about the lack of an appeal process for the listings by the fish and game commissions. And he acknowledged the legislation's strong economic focus, especially its benefits for the shale gas drilling industry. He said it was "fair" to say that the proposed changes to the species listings process would most benefit the Marcellus Shale gas drilling industry, although the coal industry will also welcome it. "The gas guys have said this legislation is great because now when they buy the gas rights they have no way of checking if the property is in the endangered range. This bill allows them to check if it's in the range," Mr. Pyle said. "The oil and gas industry has provided tremendous employment. All I'm asking is for the commissions to show us the proof that the animals are there." Mr. Pyle said House Republican Caucus attorneys have told him the federal species restoration money wouldn't be lost if his bill becomes law, just re-appropriated to the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. A joint hearing on the proposed legislation, HB 1576 by the House Environmental Resources and Energy, and House Game and Fisheries, is scheduled for 10 a.m. Sept. 17 at Indiana University of Pennsylvania's Northpointe Campus, 167 Northpointe Blvd., Building 167, Room 129. An earlier hearing on the bills was held Aug. 26 in Pottsville, Schuylkill County. At that hearing, Mr. Roe testified that the fish and game commissions have the expertise and experience to best manage the state endangered species program. "It is an increase in bureaucracy that results in totally inefficient and ineffective governance," Mr. Roe said. "Having an independent regulatory commission review the actions of another independent regulatory commission is redundant government that will negatively impact our constituents and will negatively impact our wildlife resources." There are 28 species of birds, bats and mammals on the state Game Commission's endangered and threatened lists, including the bald eagle, peregrine falcon, northern flying squirrel, great egret, short and long eared owls and the small-footed and Indiana bats. The Fish and Boat Commission oversees the listing of 62 state endangered or threatened fish, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates, including the shortnosed sturgeon, spotted gar, Massasauga rattlesnake, bog turtle and 10 freshwater mussels species. In the last five years, Mr. Arway said, the PFBC has added 13 species to its endangered list and removed 11. Don Hopey: dhopey@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983. First Published September 9, 2013 12:00 am Read more: www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/endangered-species-bill-threatens-federal-funds-702567/#ixzz2eRpwNO8X
|
|
|
Post by melody on Sept 9, 2013 20:24:31 GMT -5
Battle on the horizon in Pennsylvania over endangered species triblive.com/sports/outdoors/4671131-74/species-endangered-commission#ixzz2eRsU2zch The Associated Press 212-621-1500 Published: Sunday, Sept. 8, 2013, 10:32 p.m. State agencies, environmentalists and the federal government are raising alarms about proposed legislation that could significantly change the laws that protect threatened and endangered species in Pennsylvania. The legislation would give the Independent Regulatory Review Commission a role in the process of listing or delisting threatened or endangered species and in listing Wild Trout streams. The state Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Commission have exclusive authority for birds, animals, fish and other species. The two bills, one in the Senate and one in the House, would ultimately make it harder to keep species on a threatened or endangered list and make it “nearly impossible” to add new species, said George Jugovic, a lawyer with the environmental group Penn Future. State Rep. Jeff Pyle, an Apollo Republican and the lead sponsor of the House bill, said he's concerned the public has “no possible way to contest” decisions by the state commissions. “A second set of eyes never hurts,” Pyle said. Developers may face additional restrictions when a parcel of land is listed as habitat for a threatened or endangered species. Pyle said he was motivated to file the legislation when a school district had to spend $61,000 to compensate for building in an area where a species of endangered bat lives. Game Commission spokesman Travis Lau told The Associated Press that the agency had “no involvement whatsoever” in that case and the $61,000 was for a federal endangered species program. Jugovic noted that the Independent Regulatory Review Commission “has no particular scientific background” to make decisions about threatened species, but the Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Commission “have spent decades protecting fish and animals.” The legislation, Jugovic said, is “plainly an attempt to undercut the authority” of the two commissions to list species, and the very independence of those commissions may be what bothers politicians the most. The state programs are separate from federal endangered species listings and are often used to manage species that are threatened in a particular region but perhaps not nationally. Pennsylvania lists 21 birds and animals as endangered and seven as threatened, along with about 60 fish, amphibians and invertebrates. Carl Roe, executive director of the Game Commission, told legislators last month that the new system could take longer, use up more staff time and jeopardize federal grants. He also said the legislation was not addressing an existing problem since the Game Commission added only three species to the lists over the past 10 years. The legislation has some powerful backers. Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati, R-Jefferson, introduced one version this year. Read more: triblive.com/sports/outdoors/4671131-74/species-endangered-commission#ixzz2eRsU2zch
|
|
|
Post by dennyf on Sept 10, 2013 7:30:36 GMT -5
Yet another indication that the General Assembly is still on a tear, trying to further hamper the ability of our wildlife agencies to do what they're supposed to do: Manage and protect our wildlife.
I've checked my emails but haven't found the date/location of the next hearing, for some reason?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2013 10:55:16 GMT -5
"The legislation, Jugovic said, is “plainly an attempt to undercut the authority” of the two commissions to list species, and the very independence of those commissions may be what bothers politicians the most."
Yup. Politicians don't like it when you take out ways for them to serve their own self interests (re: money money money power power power). Our full time state legislature needs to be reduced to part-timers.
/gets back to kicking horse
|
|
|
Post by melody on Sept 10, 2013 15:09:24 GMT -5
Pa. gas industry: change endangered species laws online.wsj.com/article/AP282e420e14274420898e9d6b5844f7c9.htmlAssociated Press PITTSBURGH — As gas drilling booms in Pennsylvania, major industry groups are backing efforts to change the state's endangered and threatened species laws, alterations that environmentalists say could have far-reaching effects on wildlife. The Marcellus Shale Coalition, the Pennsylvania Independent Oil & Gas Association, and the Associated Petroleum Industries of Pennsylvania outlined their support in an Aug. 26 letter obtained by The Associated Press. The industry said the proposed legislation provides for "more efficient and effective resource development" as well as "transparency and accountability." Legislation in the state House and Senate would put some limits on the exclusive authority that the Pennsylvania Game Commission and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission currently have to list birds, animals, fish and other species, and to grant special consideration to special Wild trout Streams. The bills would instead give the state Independent Regulatory Review Commission a major role in the listing process. George Jugovic, a lawyer with the environmental group Penn Future, said the existing system is working well, and that the political independence of the Game and Fish commissions makes them better able to protect at-risk species. In contrast, the Regulatory Review Commission members are political appointees. The legislation "is a bad idea wrapped in a number of bad ideas," Jugovic said. The state programs are separate from federal endangered species listings and are often used to manage species that are threatened in a particular region but perhaps not nationally. Pennsylvania lists about 88 birds, fish, amphibians and other animals as endangered or threatened. For example, the black-crowned night heron is listed as endangered in Pennsylvania, but not nationally. In practical terms, developers and oil and gas companies face additional restrictions when a parcel of land is listed as habitat for a threatened or endangered species. Kathryn Klaber, the CEO of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, noted in an email that "every industry that moves dirt" must go through a comprehensive habitat review process prior to development, including coordination with multiple states agencies. The Pennsylvania Builders Association also supports changing the laws, said spokeswoman Melissa Etshied. The state Fish and Boat Commission has serious concerns about the proposed changes. Executive director John Arway told legislators last month that the proposed changes have "the very real potential to severely compromise" the state's ability to protect species. The legislation requires a re-evaluation of the status for all species on the list within two years. Arway said that "will be virtually impossible, which means many species will go unprotected." Arway said that since the legislation would only protect federally listed endangered species, other fish and animals "may disappear from Pennsylvania's waters, wetlands and landscape." Jugovic said the proposed changes could make it nearly impossible to list new species, make it easier to develop sensitive areas and threaten federal conservation grants. Rep. Martin Causer, a Turtlepoint Republican and chair of a key committee, told the AP that many legislators feel the process of listing threatened and endangered species "needs to be looked at." Causer said one of his key concerns is that there needs to be more opportunity for public comment in the process. "I think there will have to be amendments to the bills," Causer added, based on a public hearing that was held last month. He said another hearing is scheduled for Sept. 17 in Indiana, Pa., and he's interested in hearing more comments from sportsmen and environmental groups about their concerns. The Marcellus Shale Coalition provided a copy of the joint industry letter to the AP, but it's not clear how much of a role Gov. Tom Corbett's administration has in the proposal. Patrick Henderson, Corbett's energy executive, declined to say whether his office has lobbied for the proposed changes. The gas-rich Marcellus Shale has led to a drilling boom in Pennsylvania over the last five years, with thousands of new wells and hundreds of miles of new pipelines. That's brought jobs and billions of dollars in royalty payments to landowners, but also concerns over environmental impacts. The shale formation also extends under Ohio, West Virginia and New York. —Copyright 2013 Associated Press
|
|
|
Post by melody on Sept 10, 2013 15:10:20 GMT -5
PFSC has been invited to testify.
TUESDAY - 9/17/13 House Environmental Resources and Energy and House Game and Fisheries 10:00 a.m., Indiana University of PA - Northpointe, 167 Northpointe Boulevard, Building 167, Room 129, Indiana Joint public hearing on: HB 1576 Pyle, Jeff Act re species designation
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2013 15:11:13 GMT -5
So! The truth finally emerges. What business is worried about this? Now we know.
|
|