Less Imprecision in Species Treatment Act of 2023 or the LIST Act of 2023 This bill revises the process for removing a species from the endangered or threatened species lists. A species must be removed from the endangered or threatened species lists if the Department of the Interior produces or receives substantial scientific or commercial information demonstrating that the species is recovered or that recovery goals set for the species have been met. The publication and notice of a proposed regulation to remove a species from the lists must consist solely of a notice of the removal. The bill establishes a process for removing species from the lists if they were erroneously or wrongfully listed. The bill prohibits a person from submitting a petition to list a species as a threatened or endangered species for 10 years if the person knowingly submitted a petition with information that was inaccurate beyond scientifically reasonable margins of error, fraudulent, or misrepresentative.
The implications of HB99 are significant for state laws and wildlife management. It establishes clearer protocols for how species should be evaluated for removal from endangered lists, potentially leading to more expeditious and science-based decisions regarding species protection. This could facilitate the recovery of species that have reached their conservation goals and reduce regulatory burdens on landowners and industries that may be affected by endangered species designations. However, the bill may also invite scrutiny over its criteria for recovery and the speed at which species can be delisted, potentially impacting conservation efforts.
House Bill 99, titled the 'Less Imprecision in Species Treatment Act of 2023' or 'LIST Act of 2023', aims to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to enhance the precision and clarity in the processes of listing, delisting, and downlisting of endangered species. The bill mandates that if substantial scientific or commercial information indicates that a species has recovered or met its recovery goals, the Secretary of the Interior must initiate the delisting of that species. This requirement seeks to streamline the administrative processes involved in wildlife conservation and species recovery.
Notable points of contention surrounding this legislation include concerns from environmental groups and conservationists who argue that hastier delisting of species could undermine the efforts to protect vulnerable ecosystems and biodiversity. Critics may also question the potential for political influence over scientific determinations regarding recovery status, specifically regarding species that have been historically mismanaged or wrongfully listed. The ability to unilaterally remove species and the provisions that bar individuals from petitioning for future species listings for a decade if previous petitions were found to be fraudulent raise ethical and procedural concerns within wildlife conservation communities.