Spring 2004
This is an archived article. Facts and links are current as of publication date.

 

Close cooperation between Army installations and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has been the key to stabilizing and conserving the threatened and endangered species on Army installations. Continued success will require even greater coordination in the future.

The need for interagency cooperation has grown with the passage of section 318 of the National Defense AuthorBlaization Act (NDAA) of 2004. Section 318 amended the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 4 to prevent the Secretary of the Interior from designating critical habitat on an installation if the Department of the Interior determines the installation's Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) is sufficient to conserve a newly listed species.

In the past, ESA allowed FWS to exclude designation of critical habitat where benefits to the species would be outweighed by adverse consequences to other interests, such as the economy or military readiness. The military services have used this provision in the past.

The new provision offers an additional tool for the military and FWS. In either case, the Army must participate in the critical habitat designation process to provide necessary information to FWS.

Simply having an INRMP, however, will not be enough. The Department of the Interior will need to state in writing that the installation's INRMP will benefit the species for which critical habitat is being proposed. This will likely mean installation programs associated with the conservation of the lands addressed in the INRMP must also be appropriately funded.

To ensure that these new provisions of the ESA are used in lieu of the critical habitat designation process, the Army must work with FWS at all levels.

Installations must keep track of FWS efforts to list new species and designate critical habitat. This will allow installations to develop and provide necessary information to FWS during the administrative rule-making process. Participation will allow installations to integrate themselves into all aspects of the critical habitat designation process. Early involvement should also prompt installations to begin reviewing their own INRMPs sooner.

At the regional level, the Army and other services' regional environmental coordinators (RECs) have been talking with their counterparts at FWS to make sure they understand the current status of the Army's INRMP programs. The RECs also want to make sure that the regulatory community is prepared for the additional work that will result from the need to designate a critical habitat while reviewing installation INRMPs.

The Region 2 office of FWS is in the process of redesignating critical habitat for the Southwestern willow flycatcher. A court ruling set the original 1997 designation of habitat for the small bird aside, and FWS was directed to redesignate. FWS is currently soliciting the cooperation of the military services during the preparation of National Environmental Policy Act documentation.

Todd Snow, of the Army Corps of Engineers, said this process "is of great importance to the Corps due to the number of flood control projects we manage." The Army will solicit input from installations that might be affected by this redesignation, to make certain that existing INRMPs are used where possible.

FWS is also drafting guidelines for INRMPs and critical habitat as it relates to military installations. In January 2004, FWS established a new military liaison position in its Washington, D.C., office. As DoD liaison, Lou Gorman is working on guidance for incorporating the new requirements and how they should be implemented. Laura Henze, the FWS national Sikes Act coordinator, has already been working with the Sikes Act coordinators in the regions to prepare them for the pending guidance.

"The FWS is in the process of making sure the field is up to speed on the new provisions of the ESA as it relates to INRMPs," said Steve Helfert, Region 2 FWS military liaison.

Army RECs are also working with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The agency has many of the same responsibilities under ESA as does FWS. NOAA for example is in the process of identifying critical habitat for 20 salmon and steelhead species listed under ESA. NOAA is aware of the new requirements and has asked for input from Army entities that might be affected by the designation. Efforts to include DoD early in the process should provide NOAA the needed information in a timely manner and allow installations to assess the completeness of their existing INRMPs.

These first steps toward implementing the new provisions of the ESA are coming together through the cooperation of the regional offices of numerous federal agencies. In the end this more efficient approach to the ESA will streamline the bureaucracy and promote the recovery of endangered species.

Respond to this article
	Issue Contents