Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Endangered Species Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House hearing spotlights ESA transparency bill; sponsor and agency discuss public access to data
Summary
Representative McClintock and the Fish and Wildlife Service discussed H.R. 180, which would require agencies to publish the data used in Endangered Species Act decisions and to change how litigation fees are handled; the agency said it supports transparency goals but raised implementation and legal-cost concerns.
Representative McClintock introduced H.R. 180, the Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act, during the subcommittee's legislative hearing and said the bill responds to long-standing complaints by state and local officials that scientific and commercial data used in ESA listings is often unavailable to the public. "There should be nothing secret about science," McClintock said, adding that public access to underlying data would allow broader scientific review.
Jay Shirley, principal deputy director and acting director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, testified that the Service "supports the goals of H.R. 180" and welcomed opportunities to work with the sponsor and the committee on implementation. Shirley told lawmakers the Service already publishes substantial data used in status assessments but cautioned the agency lacks the legal expertise and capacity to build and maintain an extensive litigation database as the bill directs. He also recommended continuing to award ESA-related litigation costs from the judgment fund rather than appropriations and suggested capping litigation fees.
McClintock argued the bill would improve credibility of ESA decisions, saying unpublished or inaccessible data prevents scientific challenge and can mislead policy. The bill would also treat data submitted by states, tribes and counties as automatically part of the "best available scientific and commercial data," and would conform certain ESA litigation fee awards to mechanisms like the Equal Access to Justice Act.
During questioning, members raised concerns about privacy and the risk of exposing sensitive location data for vulnerable species; Shirley said the Service would seek to protect species-specific location information where disclosure could enable wildlife trafficking. Committee members and witnesses emphasized that transparency can strengthen science if appropriately implemented and that technical and legal details should be clarified before statutory changes are enacted.
No formal amendments or votes were taken on H.R. 180 during the hearing; the committee asked the Service for additional technical feedback and said it would accept written comments and data into the record.
