Groups Demand That Navy Follow Rare Species Act

A coalition of 41 environmental organizations on Wednesday blasted a bid by the U.S. Navy to have two California Marine Corps bases exempted from provisions of the Endangered Species Act, saying such a move “would set a terrible precedent for similar unjustified exemptions . . . across the country.”

“We question why the Marines deserve a special-treatment exemption from the nation’s premier wildlife protection law,” said David Hogan of the Center for Biological Diversity’s San Diego office. Hogan wrote the formal response to the Navy’s request to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on behalf of dozens of major environmental groups, including the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club.

Fish and Wildlife officials are considering excluding Camp Pendleton, a sprawling Marine base in San Diego County, and Miramar Marine Corps Air Station in San Diego.

Maj. Brad S. Bartelt, spokesman for Camp Pendleton, said he did not believe it was appropriate to respond to a letter that was directed to the Fish and Wildlife Service. He and other military officials say national security issues make the exemptions necessary, and that the bases are taking alternate means to ensure preservation of birds, frogs and other creatures nearing extinction.

Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman Jane Hendron of the Carlsbad office declined comment on the specific claims in the letter because she had not yet seen it.

However, she said, “We work regularly with Camp Pendleton and Miramar. The U.S. military has in effect been doing a lot of proactive wildlife conservation activities.”

The military is seeking to substitute its own conservation plans at the two bases. Such plans are “essential to ensuring that both the Navy’s national defense mission and conservation obligations are met,” wrote Lt. Sean Banks.

But environmentalists say those plans have yet to be formally approved and implemented, do not offer comprehensive measures, and the bases have failed to carry out their own recommendations.

“The notion that the Marines are already fully protective of endangered wildlife is laughable,” Hogan said. “The Marines are a war machine, and that machine is not easily adjusted to embrace protection of natural resources.”

He noted in the letter that at Miramar, 116 vernal pools--seasonal wetlands created by winter and spring rains that are home to the fairy shrimp--have been lost to construction. Military housing has also been proposed on Miramar land containing coastal sage scrub, habitat for the endangered gnatcatcher songbird.

Sensitive habitat at Camp Pendleton has been destroyed by activities such as off-road motorcycle and training vehicle use, and the dumping of construction material into vernal pools, Hogan said.

Bartelt declined comment on these allegations.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 requires designation of critical habitat--land crucial to the survival of a threatened or endangered species. Prompted by a lawsuit, federal officials proposed in February to designate nearly 800,000 acres--including land on both bases--as critical habitat for the gnatcatcher. A final decision is expected by Sept. 30. The bases are also trying to avoid such impending designations for the San Diego fairy shrimp, arroyo southwestern toad and the tidewater goby.

Any activity on federal land designated as critical habitat must be scrutinized by the Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that species, their habitats and potential habitats would not be adversely affected. If the habitats would be adversely affected, limits could be placed on uses for the land.

“The critical habitat proposals are unacceptable given their potential impact to our military mission,” Bartelt said.

Hendron said that since the letter was received after a public comment period that ended July 31, it is uncertain whether it will be considered.

Hogan said the letter was sent late because the Fish and Wildlife Service had not publicly announced that it was in negotiations with the Navy, something he believes violates federal law.

“For Fish and Wildlife Service to proceed with excluding bases from critical habitat . . . would certainly invite additional lawsuits,” he said. The agency has already lost or settled about 85% of 160 lawsuits filed against it by the center Hogan represents.