IWMC World Conservation Trust

The proposed plan, labeled an effort to “protect jobs and animals” by the St. Petersburg Times, attempts to answer concerns by two, often conflicting, constituent groups: wildlife managers and private landowners. Scientists insist that listing a plant or animal species as “endangered,” “threatened,” or “of special concern” should be an exclusively scientific matter. Landowners believe any such process must be tempered with an acknowledgement of and process for relief of social or economic hardships incurred as a result of such listings. 

The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, in fact, acknowledged the merits in both arguments. As a result, the Commission convened meetings of a stakeholders’ working group during the summer of 1998 to determine a middle ground. The working group included representatives of the Florida Forestry Association, Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, the Florida Cattleman’s Association, the Non-game Wildlife Advisory Council, Florida Wildlife Federation, Florida Chamber of Commerce, Florida Farm Bureau, Everglades Coordinating Council, Florida Home Builders Association, and the Florida Audubon Society. 

Historically, under Rule 39-27.002 of the Florida Administrative Code, the Commission reviewed the status of individual plant or animal species or subspecies for listing in one of the special categories, reclassification or declassification on an “as-needed” basis with listing decisions based exclusively on scientific criteria. To be listed as “endangered” a species or subspecies must have a high likelihood of becoming extinct in the foreseeable future. “Threatened” meant the species in question is likely to become endangered. “Special concern” species or subspecies are those deemed likely to become threatened. 

Landowners protested the inflexible imposition of prohibitions against the purposeful and incidental taking (capture, molesting or killing) of any plant or animal under the current regulations. Under current Florida Code, regulations forbidding such activities on species that fall into any listed categories are automatically imposed as part of the listing process. The new proposal provides a degree of administrative relief. 

Under the new plan: 

• Clearer, more quantitative definitions of “endangered,” “threatened,” and “special concern” would be developed, 
• A formal petition process to trigger status review to list, down-list, or de-list a species would be formulated, 
• A time-frame for the completion of the listing process on a case-by-case basis, overseen by Commission members, would be imposed, 
• A process of independent and non-binding peer review of scientific information regarding a plant or animal’s listing status would be performed by credible, and objective scientists, 
• Any formal action on listing petitions would take place during an open meeting of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commissioners and allow for public comment, 
• Scientific decisions regarding the need for a listing action would be separated from any regulatory implications of that listing. 

The next step would be the development of a management plan for that species. Included in the plan would be recommended additional regulations and a specific timeframe for the plan’s completion. The proposed management plan would be reviewed for any necessary scientific, economic, and socio-political modifications. Once completed the final listing recommendations, management plan, and any added regulatory prohibitions would be acted upon by the Commissioners. 

The proposal received the blessing of the majority of stakeholders working group on January 21, 1999. The proposal underwent public scrutiny at three public workshops and a review by the Commissioners in March. Rules to implement the process were passed by the Commission at its May 1999 meeting.�