Grounds for Concern for Gnatcatcher : Habitat: The songbird’s territory continues to shrink. Two hearings this week will focus on proposal to list the bird as an endangered species.

Amid reports that nearly 1,000 acres of California gnatcatcher habitat have been plowed under since August alone, new hearings this week over the bird’s fate promise once again to pit the development industry against increasingly angry environmentalists.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has scheduled hearings Tuesday in Garden Grove and Thursday in San Diego to receive public comment on the agency’s proposal to place the rare songbird on the federal list of endangered species.

A similar effort at the state level failed last August, when the state Fish and Game Commission rejected its own biologists’ advice and opted for Gov. Pete Wilson’s plan to seek voluntary protections for the gnatcatcher, yet still allow development of valuable coastal land where the birds nest and feed.

Now, environmentalists dissatisfied with the slow pace of the Wilson Administration’s conservation program say federal protection is essential to the gnatcatcher’s survival. A coalition of environmental groups two weeks ago asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for emergency listing of the bird as an endangered species after the agency confirmed that nearly 1,000 acres of gnatcatcher habitat in Orange, San Diego and Riverside counties have been plowed since summer.

“If anything, things have become more urgent,” said Joel Reynolds, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, which filed one of the petitions seeking endangered species status for the gnatcatcher. “The extent of the gnatcatcher’s coastal sage habitat is already so minimal that further loss contributes all the more to the imminent extinction of the species.”

Building industry officials continue to argue that the once-common bird is not on the verge of extinction. Thus, there is no reason for a federal listing that would restrict development of hundreds of thousands of acres of coastal sage scrub in Orange, San Diego and Riverside counties, and cost billions of dollars in lost business.

If protections are needed, however, industry officials say that is best accomplished through the Wilson Administration’s nascent Natural Communities Conservation Planning program, which will begin distributing guidelines for studying the gnatcatcher this week.

“We would have liked the federal government to allow the NCCP process to move forward and allow us to try something to see if it works,” said Laer Pearce, executive director of the Irvine-based Coalition for Habitat Conservation, a group of nearly a dozen major Southland developers organized to fight the listing of the gnatcatcher as an endangered species.

The coalition has asked for an extension of the March 16 deadline for written public comment on the proposed endangered species listing.

“We have a number of new studies underway on the gnatcatcher that will be completed through this spring, summer and fall, and we believe this is going to be some of the most significant data to come along,” said Pearce. “These being scientific studies of the birds and their nesting, breeding and fledging habits, we don’t have much control. We’re on nature’s calendar on this one, not the federal government’s.”

Fish and Wildlife spokesman David Klinger said the extension request will become part of the public record on the gnatcatcher review process. But he said no decision has been made to extend the 180-day comment period, already one of the longest the agency has given for any proposed listing of a species, including the highly controversial spotted owl.

The agency is separately considering the request for emergency listing made by the Endangered Habitats League, a coalition of 30 environmental groups organized to preserve the gnatcatchers. By law, the agency must make a final decision on whether to list the gnatcatcher by Sept. 17.

Before the post-World War II development boom in Southern California, the slate gray gnatcatcher was a common sight flitting over the sage, cacti and buckwheat stands that dotted 2.5 million acres of coastal hills from Ventura to San Diego. By the 1960s, however, biologists began to notice a sharp decline in their number as the land the birds preferred was converted to commercial projects, roads and residential housing, much of it with expensive ocean views.

Today, the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that only 250,000 to 375,000 acres of coastal sage land remain, most of it in San Diego, Orange and Riverside counties. Correspondingly, the agency estimates that only 1,800 to 2,200 pairs of gnatcatchers remain in the three counties and parts of Los Angeles. Some environmentalists place that figure as low as 1,200 pairs.

“We did feel, and do feel, that the species is in trouble,” Klinger said. “That’s the pattern with endangered species in California. There are fewer and fewer places to go and more and more isolated pockets for them to hang on to. . . . Now, we are trying to judge whether the species has the ability to sustain itself in the habitat remaining.”

Klinger predicted that opponents of the listing will offer a substantially different view on the health of the birds and their remaining habitat. He emphasized that the agency will keep an open mind and assess data from all fronts.

Yet, despite all the keen interest and heated rhetoric over the gnatcatcher, this week’s hearings are shaping up to be low-key affairs. If so, that would be in stark contrast to the fiery debate between environmentalists and building industry officials who testified at two hearings before the state Fish and Game Commission last August.

“We’ve had very little inquiry from anyone about these hearings,” said Larry Salata, a biologist at the agency’s Laguna Niguel office who coordinated the three-year survey that led to the recommendation to list the gnatcatcher.

Only a few development and construction industry leaders are expected to testify at Tuesday’s hearing in Garden Grove, which will be held from 1 to 4 p.m. and from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Hyatt Regency Alicante hotel at Harbor Boulevard and Chapman Avenue. The reason: They view written public comment as having more impact on the final decision.

“What you get at these (federal hearings) are little old ladies who take a walk in the woods and the bikers who believe they should be allowed to ride wherever they want,” said Bart Doyle, general counsel for the Building Industry Assn. of Southern California, who plans to attend the hearings but not speak.

“Our experience is that most of the valuable information to the agency is submitted in writing, and we will do that,” Doyle said. “Our attitude is we’ll just get out of the way and let the public say its piece.”

Environmentalists, too, are banking heavily on written documents to support their case. But they predict a “good turnout” of at least 50 supporters at the Orange County session who will make a passionate, personal case for preserving the bird and the land on which it lives.

“We are not organizing a scientific presentation like we did last time,” said Dan Silver, coordinator for the Endangered Habitats League. “We’re telling people this is a very good time for you to come down and talk about what you’re familiar with.”

UC Irvine biologist Richard MacMillen, for example, plans to talk about the university’s plan to build a $3-million home and entertainment complex for its future chancellors on gnatcatcher habitat. Late last year, the university offered to examine other sites that are not home to nesting gnatcatchers, but the school has made no final decision to preserve rather than build on the birds’ habitat, MacMillen said.

“As far as I’m concerned, the matter is still unresolved,” said the biologist. “I intend to make the point that if you can’t trust a publicly supported institution in these matters, how can you possibly trust the corporate world? And therefore, the only solution for protection is immediate listing of the gnatcatcher.”