[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 28, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2357-S2358]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Baucus, Mr. 
        Grassley, Mr. Allard, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Smith, Mr. Reid, Mr. 
        Lieberman, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Craig, Mr. 
        Nelson of Nebraska, Ms. Collins, Mr. Cochran, and Mr. 
        Brownback):
  S. 700. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide a tax 
credit to individuals who enter into agreements to protect the habitats 
of endangered and threatened species, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues, 16 
bipartisan

[[Page S2358]]

cosponsors, to introduce the S. 700. Approximately 1 year ago, Senator 
Lincoln and I introduced the Collaboration for the Recovery of the 
Endangered Species Act, or CRESA, an earlier bill to amend the 
Endangered Species Act or ESA. S. 700 is an updated version of the 
Endangered Species Recovery Act or ESRA, which we introduced on 
December 6, 2006. Like ESRA, S. 700 does not amend the current ESA, but 
builds on ideas set forth in the original CRESA. It creates policies 
that finance the recovery of endangered species by private landowners. 
S. 700 makes it simpler for landowners to get involved in conservation 
and reduces the conflict that often emanates from the ESA. It will be 
an important codification of much-needed incentives to help recover 
endangered species. And, since the introduction of CRESA 1 year ago, 
I'm proud to count over 100 different species and landowner 
organizations and advocates that have partnered with us in support of 
this important tax legislation.
  Over 80 percent of endangered species live on private property. Under 
the current law, however, there are too few incentives and too many 
obstacles for private landowners to participate in conservation 
agreements to help recover species. S. 700, like the voluntary farm 
bill conservation programs that inspired its creation, will make it 
more attractive for private landowners to contribute to the recovery of 
species under the ESA.
  This bill resulted from effective and inclusive collaboration among 
key stakeholders most affected by the implementation of the ESA. 
Landowner interests include farmers, ranchers, and those from the 
natural resource-using communities. For example, some current 
supporters of S. 700 who contributed invaluable advice are the American 
Farm Bureau and the Society of American Foresters. This could not 
rightly be called a collaborative project without the vital and 
necessary input received from the Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental 
Defense and the National Wildlife Federation--key environmental groups 
that made significant contributions. They understand that landowner 
must be treated as allies to ensure success in the long-run for the 
conservation of habitat and species. Finally, while the genesis of this 
bill has many roots, a passionate catalyst was James Cummins of 
Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Foundation, whose great concern for the 
outdoors provided inspiration to move these ideas forward.
  These experts worked together to craft S. 700, which provides new tax 
incentives for private landowners who voluntarily contribute to the 
recovery of endangered species. The tax credits will reimburse 
landowners for property rights affected by agreements that include 
conservation easements and costs incurred by species management plans.
  For landowners who limit their property rights through conservation 
easements, there will be 100 percent compensation of all costs. That 
percentage declines to 75 percent for 30-year easements and 50 percent 
for cost-share agreements.
  It is worth noting that this is the same formula that works 
successfully for farm bill programs such as the Wetlands Reserve 
Program. Private property owners are appropriately rewarded for crucial 
ecological services that they provide on their property. The public 
benefits from these services, which ensure biodiversity. While the 
primary returns from this investment are protection and recovery of 
endangered species, the public will also undoubtedly gain additional 
benefits such as aesthetically pleasing open space, a reduction in the 
number of invasive species and enhanced water quality.
  The legislation provides a list of options that give landowners a 
choice--a crucial element for the success of this proposal. For some 
landowners, a conservation easement will be the most attractive option. 
Easements are flexible tools that can be tailored to each landowner and 
species' interests. An easement restricts certain activities, but it 
still works well with traditional rural activities such as ranching and 
farming. For agreements without easements, there is flexibility to do 
what is necessary for the concerned species without the need to 
sacrifice property rights into perpetuity.
  The tax credits provide essential funding that is necessary to 
respect private property rights. Wildlife should be an asset rather 
than a liability, which is how it has sometimes been viewed under the 
ESA. With wildlife becoming valuable to a landowner, those who may have 
been reluctant to participate in recovery efforts in the past will be 
more likely to contribute with these new incentives. When people want 
to take part in the process and do not fear it, the likelihood of 
conflict and litigation is reduced. For years, this type of conflict 
has proven costly not only financially to individuals and the 
government, but also in terms of relationships between people who share 
the land and natural resources. With a new trust and new model for 
finding conservation solutions, we can improve and expand our 
conservation work.
  Provisions have been made to accommodate landowners whose taxes may 
be less than the tax credit provides. Partnerships in the agreements 
will allow any party to an agreement to receive a credit as long as 
they pay or incur costs as a result of the agreement. This language 
will allow creative collaboration among governments, landowners, 
taxpayers and environmentalists, further increasing the number of 
people involved in finding new solutions for conservation.
  Furthermore, this bill also expands tax deductions for any landowner 
who takes part in the recovery plans approved under the ESA, and allows 
landowners to exclude from taxable income certain Federal payments 
under conservation cost-share programs. This will allow both 
individuals and businesses to deduct the cost of recovery work without 
bureaucratic obstacles.

  This bill not only sets forth the financing for private landowners, 
but it also makes it easier to implement the agreements. Landowners 
will receive technical assistance to implement the agreements. Also, to 
remove some legal disincentives to recover species, liability 
protection may be provided to protect the landowners from penalties 
under the ESA. This removes the fear of trying to help endangered 
species. Currently, more species usually just means more liability for 
a landowner.
  As a result of these incentives, I expect to see a phenomenal 
increase in the number of success stories. These stories will sound 
familiar to those creative collaborators working on the ground now 
where we have learned that the types of tools provided in this bill can 
work if offered consistently.
  The Endangered Species Recovery Act is very exciting to those of us 
who value protecting our natural resources. It provides collaborative, 
creative ways to balance conservation with economic uses of our natural 
resources. It also preserves rural ways of life. I look forward to 
working with my colleagues in the Senate and House to move ahead with 
this legislation which will provide a new model for conservation to do 
better work. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate 
and House to move ahead with this legislation.
  I am deeply grateful to my colleagues from Arkansas, Iowa and Montana 
for their essential expertise and support to create S. 700. I ask 
unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
                                 ______