Landowners scramble to adopt habitat plans before fisher listing decision
ANDERSON, Calif. — Private landowners in Northern California and parts of the Northwest are scrambling to adopt conservation plans for the fisher, which may soon be added to the federal list of protected species.
In Northern California, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is taking public comments through April 1 on Sierra Pacific Industries’ proposed 10-year enhancement-of-survival permit, which would allow incidental take of fishers in exchange for improving their habitat on its timberlands.
Measures the timber company would undertake on about 1.5 million acres in 16 counties would include limiting logging activities during critical denning periods, taking steps to keep out trespassers growing marijuana and making sure fishers can’t get into water tanks at logging sites and drown, according to USFWS.
The permit “would allow us to continue managing as we would have absent the listing because we are improving habitat conditions for the fisher,” Sierra Pacific spokesman Mark Pawlicki told the Capital Press in an email.
The proposed Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances “provides benefits to the fisher that exceed any protections that would occur from a listing,” he said.
The USFWS is expected to decide April 7 whether to list the West Coast population of fishers as threatened in Washington, Oregon and California.
A mammal about the size of a house cat, the fisher is a member of the weasel family
Sierra Pacific’s application is one of two proposed CCAAs for which the federal government is taking comments. The other is from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, which wants to sign up forest landowners to voluntarily protect fishers to avoid facing tougher land-use limits.
About 60 to 75 landowners have expressed interest in Washington state’s agreement, WDFW wildlife biologist Gary Bell has estimated. The public comment period for that agreement ends March 30.
A similar plan organized by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is under review at the Department of the Interior headquarters in Washington, D.C., and should be out for public comment soon, said Jody Caicco, a USFWS forest resources division manager in Portland.
About eight timber companies have voiced interest in Oregon’s plan, Caicco said. As long as the plan is published before April 7 and the comment period is underway, landowners can sign up within 30 days of a listing, before it is recorded in the Federal Register, she said.
“It’s actually going to be down to the wire, for sure,” Caicco said. “But … all it is is a matter of submitting their application.”
There would be differences between the agreements, officials said. While Washington’s plan would be administered by the state, USFWS would handle applications from individual landowners in Oregon under a single agreement, Caicco said.
In addition, while Washington’s plan protects known fisher sites, California’s is geared toward generally preserving habitat. That’s because animals in Washington are collared, enabling officials to know where they are, while in California they are not collared, said Robert Carey, a USFWS wildlife biologist in Yreka, Calif.
Neither Carey nor Caicco are aware of other landowners preparing CCAA applications on their own, and they doubt there would be enough time. Despite all the scrambling to meet the deadlines, there is no chance a listing decision would be delayed, Carey said.
“The decision was already extended once,” he said. “Originally the decision was due out in October 2015 and they extended it out to April of 2016. … I don’t think they can (extend it again).”
Once a listing is published in the Federal Register, a landowner would not be able to obtain a candidate conservation agreement, Carey said. He or she could submit a Habitat Conservation Plan and apply for an incidental take permit, but they would not give a landowner quite as much latitude, Carey said.
Some landowner groups hope their voluntary conservation efforts will avert a listing of the fisher, as voluntary protection measures were a major factor in the USFWS decision not to list the greater sage grouse. The Washington Forest Protection Association and Washington Farm Forestry Association are among groups supporting the state’s approach.
For Sierra Pacific Industries, the CCAA is seen as a sort of insurance as the company anticipates taking fishers as a result of periodically harvesting and moving timber within the animal’s habitat.
Even if the fisher is not listed, “we will still incorporate the measures in the CCAA in our forest management to assure that the fisher is protected during our normal operations,” Pawlicki said.