| By passing the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP), California created the most comprehensive, ecosystem-based conservation strategy in the United States. Although similar to the habitat conservation plans (HCPs) required by the federal Endangered Species Act, NCCPs were believed to be a step forward by focusing on protecting entire ecosystems, having a higher conservation standard, increasing public participation, giving more assurances to landowners, and having more local-level oversight. As this approach to conservation becomes more popular among stakeholders, it was necessary to determine whether or not society should continue to support this strategy. A modified snowball technique was used to identify study participants. A total of 64 in-depths interviews of major stakeholders were conducted. Participants included agency employees, attorneys, biologists, consultants, developers, members of environmental organizations, and policy analysts. This study found that although most stakeholders believed the NCCP rules, monitoring, and enforcement process were followed, they could still be improved, largely by an increase in resources. The study also determined that the majority of the stakeholders agreed adaptive management was adequately included; there would not be NCCPs without the "No Surprises" policy; and, no stakeholders were left out of the process. Most importantly, stakeholders were clearly willing to redesign the rules, monitoring, and enforcement process to improve the NCCP. The principal strengths cited included the NCCP as an ecosystem approach, the protection of listed and non-listed species, and the ability for stakeholders to reach consensus. Overwhelmingly, the stakeholders cited a lack of resources as the primary weakness of the NCCP. Other principal weaknesses included the NCCP was subject to political influence and it was a complex process. Although the majority of the stakeholders believed the NCCP was successful at preserving biodiversity while at the same time allowing for economic development to occur, several stakeholders noted that success could not be determined at this time, at least in terms of biodiversity preservation. Finally, a little over a third of the stakeholders stated the NCCP should not be adopted while the same number of respondents believed that the NCCP should be adopted on a case-by-case basis. |
