Our Response - Page 4


The delisting rule (Mesta 1999) discussed existing protections for Peregrines that continue despite delisting under ESA, such as those offered by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136) for new and existing pesticide registration and use; the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1600); and the Federal Land Management and Policy Act (43 U.S.C. 1701). Peregrines are also protected internationally by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This treaty was established to prevent international trade that may be detrimental to the survival of plants and animals. Peregrines were included in Appendix I of CITES on July 1, 1975.

In 2011 and 2012, members of the Peregrine Club of Philadelphia had discussions with Daniel W. Brauning, Wildlife Biologist Bureau of Wildlife Management Pennsylvania Game Commission over a suite of Peregrine management alternatives, nearly identical to those that were subsequently adopted by USFWS in 2008, that would allow harvest of Tundra Peregrines without interfering with the subspecies population of Peregrines nesting in Pennsylvania. The Peregrine Club of Philadelphia (PCP) also offered a workable strategy to the above mentioned biologist which could eventually allow harvest of Tundra Falcons modeled after our neighboring state of New Jersey, again without interfering with the subspecies population of Pennsylvania Peregrines. However, to date, the non-enforcement division of the Pennsylvania Game Commission continues to believe that the Peregrine remains an endangered species fourteen years after the Peregrine was deemed fully recovered by UFWS.

The Peregrine Club of Philadelphia respectfully requests that the commonwealth of Pennsylvania remove the Peregrine Falcon from the Pennsylvania List of Endangered and Threatened Species (“List”) during the present round of review.

The Delisting Monitoring Requirement of ESA

Section 4(g)(1) of the ESA requires that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),
...implement a system in cooperation with the States to monitor effectively for not less than five years the status of all species which have recovered to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act [the ESA] are no longer necessary...

In keeping with this mandate, the FWS developed this plan in cooperation with State wildlife or natural resource agencies (States), recovery team members, and other cooperators. It has received extensive review by independent experts. A 30-day public comment period was opened with the publication of a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register on July 31, 2001 (66 FR 39523), and again on September 27, 2001 (66 FR 49395). The Federal Register notices and the plan were also posted on the FWS Endangered Species Program’s web page (http://endangered.fws.gov). Meanwhile, the FWS continued to collect and compile data from existing monitoring efforts by States to track continued Peregrine recovery after delisting. Monitoring in association with this plan was initiated in 2002 as a limited, pilot program. A revised draft was distributed within the FWS for comment, to monitoring cooperators, and to the International Association for Fish and Wildlife Agencies on November 22, 2002, for their distribution to States for review. On January 13, 2003, this same version was distributed to individuals and organizations who commented on earlier versions. This version of the plan is based on data collected in 2002, from experience gained while administering a nationwide monitoring program in 2002, and on comments by States and other cooperators on earlier versions of the plan. This version of the plan, and FWS responses to comments on earlier versions, are posted on both the FWS Endangered Species web page

(http://endangered.fws.gov/recovery/peregrine) and on the Migratory Birds web page (http://migratorybirds.fws.gov). Any revisions and reports are available on the web.


Member Login