An improved imperiled species system for Florida

Staff ideas, February 2009

Team vision

A system that combines imperiled species listing, protection and management that:

• Is understood and supported • Is transparent, science informed, objective and

quantitative.• Accurately identifies species that are imperiled• Provides a framework to effectively conserve

imperiled species• Is supported with adequate funding and people.• Provides a platform for partnerships to effectively

conserve imperiled species• Is complemented by FWC’s other management

programs

Exotic Species

HarvestedSpecies

Non-game Species

Imperiled Species

Federal ESA

Species management continuum

Imperiled Species Management System =

How we manage imperiled species in Florida

The list: Two components based on how species are

assessed

Florida species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA):

• Federally Threatened• Federally

Endangered

Florida species at risk of extinction but not listed under the federal ESA

(Florida’s state listed species)

No overlap

Federal State

Florida’s Imperiled Species List

Federal State

Called Florida’s federally listed species

Florida’s state listed species

Listed by US Endangered Species Act by USFWS or NMFS

State listing process & approved by Commission

Categories Endangered & Threatened; treated same

Single category (on or off list)

Florida’s Imperiled Species List

Millsap et al. 1990 method

FWC’s current IUCN-based method

Hybrid: Millsap as filter then FWC’s current IUCN-based method determining whether or not to list

Florida species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) as:•Federally Threatened•Federally Endangered

Federal Component State Component options

Millsap FWC current IUCN-based

Scientifically based?

Yes Yes

Scientific method

Quantitative & Expert opinion

Quantitative

Listing threshold

Must be established

Established

ESA method

• The use of the ESA listing criteria for assessing the state component of the list is not recommended. – The criteria are not fully quantitative – Would result in increased conflicts

when determining whether to list a species

– Increase in public confusion between the state and federal listing systems

Removal from list

• Federal species would be removed from Florida’s Imperiled Species List when they are removed from the ESA list

• The species management plan for the Florida component would include quantitative objectives and measures to determine when species can be de-listed

• A management plan must be completed for species removed from the list

Protections• Species on the Florida Imperiled Species List

would be protected by Florida statute and by FWC rule that would prohibit specific actions

• Specific rules and protections may be adjusted to meet species’ needs and may be more or less stringent than the basic protections

• Species listed by ESA would also have federal protection, regulation, and permits – FWC could adopt additional state rules and regulations

and issue state permits – regulatory and permitting authority could be delegated

between federal agencies and FWC for particular species to avoid duplicate or redundant regulation

Protections

• Questions – what level of penalty (felony,

misdemeanor) is most effective – what permits would be issued – how to address the issue of

“incidental take”

Management plans• Management plans can be tailored to each

listed species’ conservation needs and to balance the available resources for conservation – may be complex and long-term – may be terse and focused – would normally include recommendations for rules

and regulations that conserve the species

• Management plans will prioritize resources and activities

• May develop multi-species or habitat-based plans

Conclusion

This proposed new system should incorporate the following elements:

• make listing species more clear and more efficient

• remove any discrepancy between Federal ESA and Florida imperiled listing

• provide a customized management plan for each listed species to meet its conservation needs

• retain objective criteria, scientific information and full transparency

• The FWC seeks continued input from stakeholders to evaluate and refine these proposals