Print This Article			Print All Articles			Email the Editor

Proposed Salmon Habitat Designation Follows Cost-Benefit Approach Advocated by NAHB

The proposal comes as a direct result of a successful NAHB lawsuit that forced the NOAA Fisheries in 2002 to withdraw its original designations across all of Oregon and Washington and significant portions of California and Idaho because the agency had failed to conduct an economic impact analysis of those designations on local economies, as required by the Endangered Species Act.

While NAHB staff members are still analyzing the voluminous new proposal, it is clear that the government has implemented the cost-benefit methodology recommended by the association in which the value of specific areas to the protection of salmon is weighed against the economic cost to those areas. This methodology could have national ramifications for future decisions on federal regulations of private property.

This approach gives NOAA Fisheries a strong incentive to exclude from regulation areas that have a lower importance for the protection of a species and where those designations would take a high toll on the local economy — such as cities and their suburbs.

Here are some highlights of the latest proposed rulemaking:

• The proposed amount of designated critical habitat encompasses one-fifth of the acreage covered under the previous rules in Oregon and Washington and represents a 50% reduction in the amount of property affected in California and Idaho.
• The new designation focuses on areas that are actually occupied by endangered fish populations, and areas that are most important for those species’ survival.
• Areas with lesser biological value to the species — and areas that are already covered by Habitat Conservation Plans — are excluded from the new rules.
• The new critical habitat designations are the product of inter-agency communication among the Department of the Interior and the Commerce Department. This is a big step that should lead to more sensible and consistent rulemaking by the federal government.

The proposed rulemaking is currently open for public comment, and local and state HBAs are encouraged to supply additional data on potential economic impacts in the affected states. This input could help expand the area that is exempted from critical habitat designations.

For further information on the proposed designation — including maps of affected areas — click here.

For more information on participating in comments on this issue, e-mail Michael Mittelholzer at NAHB, or call him at 800-368-5242 x8660; or contact Christopher Galik, x8663.

go to top