Both sides of the debate have strong reasons for disliking section 10. After a brief discussion of HCPs and their history in Part II, this Comment will evaluate the best arguments from both landowners and preservationists in Parts III and V. Parts IV and VI will discuss case history supporting both sides. Part VII will then discuss the philosophy of eco-pragmatism and recommend that resourcists and landowners should adopt some of its principles regarding adaptive management and HCPs. Within this Section, the Author will argue that the advantages to pragmatism in constitutional law that Daniel Farber submitted in 1988 are perfectly suited to the conflicts presented by modern HCPs, and it is essential for landowners to understand this. Further, the ESA must be revised to make HCPs less complicated and more cost-effective for landowners, so that it will be reasonable for them to develop operative plans. HCPs are really the only viable option we have for addressing the needs of vastly different competing interests. These tools for conservation must be embraced and strengthened, so they can successfully and efficiently preserve species.
Mark F. Maples,
Habitat Conservation Plans: Embracing Landowner Pragmatism and Quieting the Complexity of the Incidental Take Permit Process,
Tex. A&M J. Prop. L.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/journal-of-property-law/vol1/iss2/5