Discover More

The ESA Edit That Could Affect an $800 Million Species Offset Market and Undermine Decades of Tribal Salmon Recovery
Last month, EPIC submitted detailed public comments opposing a proposed federal rule that would weaken the Endangered Species Act by removing habitat destruction from the definition of "harm." If the Rule goes through, it has profound implications for the restoration economy and Tribal communities.

Comment: Opposition to the Proposed Rule to Rescind the Definition of "Harm" Under the Endangered Species Act
Comment: Opposition to the Proposed Rule to Rescind the Definition of "Harm" Under the Endangered Species Act

California’s restoration bottleneck deepens biodiversity debt

Fun Tidbits I Learned While Researching US Biodiversity Markets

Beetles in a Pay Stack: Stacking and Bundling in Biodiversity Credit Markets

The Worst Trump-Era ESA Changes are Gone

Species on the Move: Considering the Future of Conservation Banking in the Face of Climate Change

EPIC Featured: Markets for Valuing Biodiversity on the Climate Positive podcast

Three Steps Forward for Species Mitigation in 2023

EPIC submits ESA Sec. 4D comments to increase tribal sovereignty in natural resources

3 New Changes for Offsets under ESA Section 7 and 1 Very Old Holdout

Biodiversity Net Gain: Understanding the Most Ambitious Biodiversity Policy in the World

Species Mitigation Policies Are Totally Back!

Terrasos and the evolution of habitat banks in Colombia

The ‘Poison Pill’ in the Proposed Rule for Voluntary Species Conservation

Top 5 Changes in the New GRI Biodiversity Metric

Bald and Golden Eagles Enlist the Resistance

Build Conservation Banking Back Better

ANPR Cheat Sheet
