This does not mean that reporting, surveillance and other requirements should never be subject to Safe Harbor agreements, but rather that the temptation to go overseas with such requirements can only drive out landowners whose cooperation would benefit endangered species the most. In considering this point, it is important to take into account the consequences of the eviction of landowners. A system so complex that it prevents landowners from participating means that the conservation of endangered species on private land must be achieved primarily through the enforcement of the revenue ban. However, this ban does not even reach many of the most serious threats to species survival, including the loss of natural disturbance regimes, the presence of alien species, the inevitable downward spiral of small isolated populations in already fragmented habitats, etc. FWS agreed. In exchange for measures contributing to the recovery of species listed on non-federal lands, participating landowners receive formal assurances from the service that, if they meet the sha conditions, the service does not require additional management or other activities from the participants without their consent. In addition, at the end of the agreement period, participants can reuse the registered property on the basic conditions that existed at the beginning of the SHA. Learn more about a Safe Harbor agreement that provides suitable habitat for listed species such as the Gray Wolf and Northern Owl in Northern California. Another endangered species on the island that has not been found at the site is the Marian bog chicken (Gallinula chloropus guami).

As this was not the case on the project site, the developers did not ask for permission to take it at random. However, the Commonwealth Government had imposed a number of requirements on the project under local environmental legislation, which had nothing to do with endangered species. . . .