Nevada Farm Bureau Submits Comments On Proposed Rule Changes

Three different proposed regulation changes in how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the National Fisheries Service deal with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) were due for public comment on Monday, August 21^st.  Nevada Farm Bureau participated in sharing feedback, along with a number of others who were interested in the topic.

 

For the most part, the proposed changes were intended to reverse the changes that were made under the Trump Administration.  It would seem that is the primary regulatory direction being taken by the Biden Administration – whatever the Trump Administration did…needs to be changed back.

 

One of the proposals put back in place the “blanket 4(d) rule” involving the way that Threatened Species are dealt with.  This proposal only dealt with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and actually re-establishes a difference between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Fisheries Service.  Nevada Farm Bureau had this to say about that proposed change:

 

 

The remaining two proposed rule changes involved both of the agencies.  One of the proposed regulation changes involved the interagency consultation process (Section 7) that takes place when there is a species listed under the ESA. Either of the two agencies (actually both) need to confer with other federal agencies on how they should carry out their activities in light of the listed species.  Nevada Farm Bureau offered these comments ) regarding these proposed changes:

 

 

The additional proposed change of regulations for both of the agencies involves Section 4 of the ESA, with one of the major changes deals with word changes to emphasize that the agencies won’t be including details about the economic impact or other impacts that the listing will have.  There are also word-smith changes to identify how “foreseeable future” is defined and details over designating unoccupied habitat that might be plugged into designated critical habitat.  Nevada Farm Bureau’s comments offered these perspectives to those rule changes: