Conservation Fund Block Threatened

Calling the Wilson Administration’s conservation program weak and ineffective, the chairman of a key state Senate committee warned that he will block the program’s $175 million in proposed funding unless the effort is overhauled to ensure protection against development for the California gnatcatcher.

The governor’s embattled program has “significant weaknesses . . . which make it very difficult to justify the budget,” Sen. Dan McCorquodale (D-San Jose) wrote in a letter to Secretary of Resources Douglas Wheeler earlier this month.

As chairman of the Senate’s Natural Resources Committee, McCorquodale is in an influential position to hold back the money. His committee convenes Tuesday to discuss the proposed $2.5-billion budget of the California Resources Agency, which includes $1.75 million for the conservation program for the 1992-93 fiscal year.

Initiated last fall at the request of the Irvine Co., the governor’s program is intended to avoid the restrictions of endangered-species law by negotiating voluntary agreements between developers, environmentalists and local governments to set aside habitat preserves.

Its first mission is forging agreements to protect the habitat of the gnatcatcher, a small songbird that nests mostly in Orange, San Diego and Riverside counties in areas targeted for housing developments, toll roads and other projects.

Undersecretary of Resources Michael Mantell said Thursday that he remains confident after a Wednesday meeting with McCorquodale that the senator will support at least a portion of the funding, which is needed to hire biologists and other start-up staff.

Mantell said McCorquodale “has some genuine concerns about the progress and the problems we encountered,” and that the agency agreed Wednesday to address them at oversight hearings before the committee in June.

“I know he still has some concerns now, but I’m not sure he would go so far as holding up funding,” Mantell said. “He may attach some conditions and bring (the amount) down further, but I’m confident Sen. McCorquodale will be supportive of this effort.”

Mantell added, however, that McCorquodale “didn’t give us any firm commitments.”

Mary Shallenberger, principal consultant for the committee, said “nothing changed” after Wednesday’s meeting and that McCorquodale still wants major changes in the program. McCorquodale was unavailable for comment Thursday.

“The indication I get from him is that he hasn’t backed off on that letter,” Shallenberger said. “He doesn’t want to decimate (the program), but he’s very unhappy with the way it is going.”

The funding dilemma is the latest problem plaguing the program. So far, it has failed to protect the habitat of the gnatcatcher and has not achieved most of the Wilson Administration’s self-imposed milestones and deadlines. Many of the parties involved are dissatisfied and threatening to withdraw support.

The Administration urged the state Fish and Game Commission last August to reject the advice of state biologists and deny endangered-species listing for the gnatcatcher because of the new conservation program.

McCorquodale said in his March 12 letter that “the case for listing is even stronger now,” because some of the bird’s habitat has been destroyed since August.

“Unfortunately, several of the worst fears over the looseness of this program have come true,” he wrote.

The senator told Wheeler in the letter that “in order to be an effective program, it must include at a minimum” temporary controls on development of the bird’s habitat, monitoring of grading activities, enforcement authority to ensure that agreements are adhered to, and specified milestones and deadlines.

“If not, I do not see that funding the effort is a wise use of the very limited resources we have,” he wrote.

McCorquodale chastised Wheeler for “deciding not to uphold your commitment to work this year to strengthen” the program.

The Resources Agency promised last fall that its program would contain all the features McCorquodale wants, including controls to ensure that development doesn’t harm the bird’s terrain. But the agency has failed to get the parties’ voluntary agreement to them.

Shallenberger said the senator is especially upset that the governor’s officials used the program to lobby the Fish and Game Commission against listing the bird, a decision which under law is required to be based only on scientific data.

“It’s too high of a risk. They are into a very risky business,” she said. “If the economy turns around, there’s nothing in this law which stops them from (harming the habitat). There’s no binding aspect of this and what (developers) are doing is buying time.”

Money for the conservation program would come from the state’s environmental license plate fund, in which residents pay extra for special plates. Wheeler is requesting $1.75 million for the program, but the Assembly recently agreed to $1.3 million.

“My guess is the senator will take a larger cut than the Assembly did,” Shallenberger said.

Dan Silver of the Endangered Habitats League, an environmental coalition, agreed with McCorquodale’s assessment of the program. But he said McCorquodale’s involvement comes too late.

Since seven months of negotiations have failed to get all parties to agree to voluntary controls, Silver said he instead recommends that the gnatcatcher be listed immediately by state officials.

Southern California developers say the temporary controls that McCorquodale wants are unnecessary because they believe there already is adequate protection of the habitat.