North Dakota Petroleum Council, North Dakota; Multi-Project Habitat Conservation Plan for the Dakota Skipper, Draft Environmental Assessment

The commenter argues that the proposed Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is flawed because it focuses on potential habitat rather than occupied habitat and relies on ineffective, experimental mitigation models. They contend that the plan fails to account for the specific impacts of oil and gas development on the Dakota skipper's critical habitat and does not provide sufficient protection for the species.

The Center for Biological Diversity opposes the North Dakota Petroleum Council's Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Dakota Skipper, arguing that it is incomplete, lacks specific mitigation measures, and fails to meet the "maximum extent practicable" legal standard. They contend that the plan allows for the destruction of critical habitat with insufficient oversight, lacks adequate funding assurances, and is administered by a trade association with a conflict of interest.

The commenter is requesting a federal emergency declaration and various administrative actions related to military training, fraud prevention, and national security. Their comments do not address the specific merits or impacts of the Multi-Project Habitat Conservation Plan for the Dakota Skipper.

An individual commenter opposes the proposed redefinition of incidental take levels for the Dakota Skipper. They argue that the current proposal could harm the population and advocate for stricter oversight, including the loss of permits or oil rights for infractions rather than just fines.

The commenter opposes the issuance of an incidental permit for the Dakota Skipper habitat conservation plan. They argue that the American taxpayer should not bear the cost of mitigating fossil fuel damages and suggest that the environment is best protected by phasing out fossil fuels entirely.