Responsibilities of Federal Agencies To Protect Migratory Birds

This executive order directs federal agencies whose actions negatively affect migratory birds to develop Memoranda of Understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service within two years, promoting bird conservation through habitat protection, minimizing take, and integrating conservation into agency planning. It establishes an interagency Council for the Conservation of Migratory Birds to oversee implementation and requires environmental analyses to evaluate effects on migratory birds.

Federal Register Open PDF 66 FR 3853

Impact dates

Jan 10, 2003
Federal agencies finalize Memoranda of Understanding with Fish and Wildlife Service
Jul 9, 2001
Fish and Wildlife Service develops schedule for MOU completion

Key directives

Fish and Wildlife Service to develop MOU completion schedule within 180 days of signing
Federal agencies with measurable negative effects on migratory birds must develop and implement MOUs with Fish and Wildlife Service within 2 years
Each MOU must establish implementation protocols and reporting requirements
Each MOU must include dispute elevation process
Agencies must integrate bird conservation into plans and NEPA analyses
Agencies must provide advance notice or annual reporting on intentional take
Agencies must identify and mitigate unintentional take, focusing on species of concern
Secretary of Interior to establish interagency Council for Conservation of Migratory Birds
Council to produce annual reports and administer Presidential Migratory Bird Federal Stewardship Award
Agencies must publish MOU availability notice in Federal Register

Who is ordered

Timeline

Immediate

Fish and Wildlife Service to develop MOU completion schedule
Agencies encouraged to begin conservation measures immediately

Near term (90d)

Fish and Wildlife Service schedule for MOU completion due within 180 days

Long term

Agencies must finalize MOUs with Fish and Wildlife Service within 2 years
Ongoing integration of bird conservation into agency planning processes
Annual Council reports and Presidential award selection

Risks & tensions

Vague 'as practicable' and 'to the extent permitted by law' language may limit enforcement; no penalties for non-compliance
Dependent on appropriations and Administration budgetary limits, creating fiscal uncertainty
Explicit disclaimer that order creates no separately enforceable rights, limiting judicial recourse
Exclusion of independent establishments narrows scope of coverage
Grandfathering of existing contracts/permit agreements may delay conservation benefits
MOU implementation may be delayed until formal planning process revisions are completed