The debate over voluntary conservation practices arises again as the FWS proposes a draft policy that allows landowners to earn credits for voluntarily conserving at-risk wildlife. On a separate note, a study attempts to build a protocol for natural capital accounting in Canada and a white paper looks at using performance-based approaches in the recently passed US Farm Bill.
This article was originally published in the Mitigation Mail newsletter. Click here to read the original.
22 August 2014 | This month, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed a new draft policy on building a crediting system that would protect threatened wildlife that hasn’t yet been listed as endangered. The policy, which is part of the Service’s Candidate Conservation program, seeks to incentivize landowners into early conservation.
“The adage ‘an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure’ is appropriate here,” says the FWS’ Chief of Public Affairs, Gavin Shire. “This policy is one more tool that can be used in conjunction with the others to help prevent species decline.” Under the proposal, any landowning entity individuals, companies, government agencies, etc. can earn credits by practicing conservation that benefits an unlisted species.
But while early conservation isn’t disputed as a sure way to preserve a species, is some skepticism out there regarding voluntary measures. We cover the debate here. A public comment period on the draft policy is open until September 20, 2014.
In other news this month, environmentalists are not happy about evidence that a mining company successfully haggled down its mitigation costs by one-fourth, and Canada takes a crack at accounting for its natural capital values.
We also have two pieces on results-based finance: one looking back at the evolution of efforts to link payment to performance, and a blog post that considers how to refocus Farm Bill conservation subsidies on outcomes.
The Ecosystem Marketplace Team
If you have comments or would like to submit news stories, write to us at [email protected].
Please see our Reprint Guidelines for details on republishing our articles.