H.R. 717, the “Listing Reform Act”
H.R. 1274, the “State, Tribal and Local Species Transparency and Recovery Act”
H.R. 2603, the “Saving America’s Endangered Species Act"
H.R. 3131, the "Endangered Species Litigation Reasonableness Act"
What is the fundamental issue?
The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), which protects endangered and threatened species and their habitats, can delay or prevent real estate development that might harm a protected species or its habitat.
I am a real estate professional. What does this mean for my business?
The ESA adds regulatory costs and burdens to property and economic development. It may also be a violation of the 5th Amendment by limiting (taking) the use of property through regulation without compensating the property owner.
NAR supports reform to the Endangered Species Act that:
- Recognizes economic impacts to the community when designating and recovering endangered species and habitat,
- Provides market-based incentives to encourage species protection, and
- Compensates private property owners when they have been deprived of the economic value of their property.
While not anticipating a comprehensive ESA reform legislative effort in 2017, NAR continues to pursue "rifle shot" opportunities as they arise. Current bills currently under consideration and supported by NAR include:
H.R. 717, the “Listing Reform Act”, (Rep. Pete Olson), requires review of the economic cost of adding a species to the endangered or threatened species list;
H.R. 1274, the “State, Tribal and Local Species Transparency and Recovery Act”, (Rep. Dan Newhouse), requires that all data related to making a determination that a species is endangered be made available to States;
H.R. 2603, the “Saving America’s Endangered Species Act", (Rep. Louie Gohmert), provides that nonnative species in the United States not be treated as endangered species or threatened species; and
H.R. 3131, the "Endangered Species Litigation Reasonableness Act", (Rep. Bill Huizenga), would conform ESA citizen suits to other existing laws.
This legislation help assess the economic cost of listing a species, provide additional transparency and accountability during the listing process and help reduce costs and streamline the listing process.
NAR supports reforms to the ESA that take into account the economic impacts of designating and recovering endangered and threatened species. NAR also supports safeguards that protect private property rights, incentives for species protection and the use of sound science in listing decisions.
In the meantime, NAR has commented on an unprecedented increase in listed species under the ESA as well as the proposed review of hundreds of species in a shortened timeframe, pursuant to a court settlement. NAR urges greater transparency and outreach by the Administration in its consideration of this staggering number of potential listings.
In a landmark decision, in the fall of 2015, the Department of Interior (DOI) decided not to list the Greater Sage Grouse as endangered. DOI officials believe that the unprecedented efforts and partnerships created to protect critical sage grouse habitat is sufficient to adequately protect and grow the species. However, in a related action, the DOI cordoned off nearly 10 million of public lands to protect additional sage grouse hebitat. NAR does not support this action, as these public lands generate revenue through activities such as grazing and timbering and would negatively impact the economies of communities adjacent to the lands. NAR commented on this unprecedented withdrawal of public lands.
Recently, the Trump Administration has taken steps to rescind this public lands withdrawal for sage grouse habitat.
In March of 2016, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) finalized a rule that will change the critical habitat designations process. This rule provides the FWS with more authority to designate critical habitat and is not required to incorporate an economic impact analysis into the decision-making process.
Land Use, Property Rights and Environment Committee