The House Resources Committee passed the Endangered Species Data Quality Act of 2004 (HR 1662), by a 26 to 15 vote. The bill requires that the Secretary of the Interior take into account peer review and field studies before determining if a species is endangered.

Supporters believe that the bill will ensure accurate decision making, while critics argue that it will weaken protections for threatened and endangered species. By a similar margin, the committee also passed the Critical Habitat Reform Act of 2004 (HR 2933), which sets stricter standards for critical habitat designation.

Both bills sat in the 108 th Congress last year but did not get voted on either in regular sessions or in the lame duck session. The bills, currently listed as “pending further action”, now move to the full House where they face an uncertain future. They will be reintroduced and are scheduled for vote in the 109th congress, which begins January 4, 2005.

Key provisions of the Endangered Species Data Quality Act of 2004:

• Directs Secretary of the Interior to ensure that use of “best scientific and commercial data available,” complies with guidelines issued under the Data Quality Act of 2000, emphasizes field survey data, and requires greater weight to peer-reviewed field data;
• Requires field survey data in order to list species;
• Requires data from landowners and operators to be considered;
• Requires a description of data to be gathered for a recovery plan and the steps that would be taken to acquire the data;
• Specifies independent peer review process for all listings and delistings, recovery plans, and biological opinions with a jeopardy conclusion;
• Requires peer review by three unbiased reviewers appointed by the Secretary of the Interior from recommendations submitted by the National Academy of Sciences and affected state governors;
• Requires specific determination of best data available and opportunity for public review;
• Requires that information be requested from relevant state agencies during a consultation; and
• Expands role of applicants for federal actions during consultation and specifies that existing federal permit holders should be treated as applicants.

Key provisions of Critical Habitat Reform Act of 2004:

• Requires critical habitat designation to the extent “practicable, prudent, and determinable”;
• Moves critical habitat designation to three years after listing or one year after adoption of a recovery plan, whichever comes first;
• Stipulates that land subject to a Section 10 agreement or permit, to an incidental take statement following consultation, and to state or federal conservation programs is not subject to designation as critical habitat;
• Before designations are granted, requires that advocates must first consider areas known to be occupied;
• Requires that economic loss and costs to landowners and data from local governments must be considered; and Requires that local governments notices and GIS maps be posted on the Internet.