Adaptive Management in Habitat Conservation Plans

Habitat conservation plans (HCPs) allow incidental take of threatened or endangered species in exchange for conservation measures that minimize and mitigate such taking. Habitat conservation plans entail a compromise between regulatory certainty and scientific uncertainty. This compromise is controversial because many HCPs are thought to inadequately address scientific uncertainty. Adaptive management is the systematic acquisition and application of reliable information to improve natural resource management over time. Ideally, under adaptive management, conservation strategies are implemented as a deliberate experiment. This approach can establish cause-and-effect relationships and point the way toward optimal strategies. Adaptive management has been promoted as essential to management under uncertainty, but few HCPs incorporate genuine adaptive management. Habitat conservation plans will continue to lack adaptive management until certain conditions are met, such as acknowledgment that an HCP is a management hypothesis, landowner interest in improving biological outcomes, and sufficient financial resources. Economic incentives would encourage adaptive management in HCPs. Habitat conservation plan permittees might receive direct payments or tax deductions for reliable information that benefits a species. “Mitigation credits” could be awarded for information produced through adaptive management. In effect, habitat would be exchanged for information that benefits a species. Successful use of mitigation credits would depend on correctly valuing information and enforcement of the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Under a “precautionary polluter pays principle,” an HCP permittee would put up an environmental assurance bond. Portions of the bond are returned with interest as adaptive management demonstrates that environmental damages are unlikely to occur. Funds spent on adaptive management are funds unavailable for habitat protection, so limited financial resources may force a compromise between protecting habitat and acquiring knowledge.