from the Center for Biological Diversity
Legislation Would Strip Federal Protection From Wolves Before Recovery is Complete
WASHINGTON— The Center for Biological Diversity today condemned newly introduced federal legislation that would strip Endangered Species Act protections from wolves around the country before they have fully recovered.
“Recovery of endangered wolves is still far from complete,” said Michael Robinson of the Center. “Wolves occupy a mere 5 percent of their historic range in the continental United States and continue to be threatened by illegal killing and government predator control.”
Three bills have been introduced in Congress that would, variously, remove Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in Montana and Idaho, these states plus portions of surrounding states, or the entire country. The bills respond to a federal judge’s ruling in August that overturned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to remove Endangered Species Act protections from wolves in Montana, Idaho and portions of Washington, Oregon and Utah. Judge Donald W. Molloy ruled that the Fish and Wildlife Service cannot delist a species along political boundaries, in this case retaining listing in Wyoming, but rather must make such decisions based on science.
“The Endangered Species Act wisely requires decisions concerning the fate of endangered species like the wolf to be based solely on the best available scientific information,” said Robinson. “Allowing lawmakers to replace scientists in deciding which species get protected under the Endangered Species Act subverts the scientific process and sets a terrible precedent that will allow special interests to dictate which animals survive and which don’t.”
Since wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in 1995, their numbers have increased to roughly 1,600 animals now primarily inhabiting Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. However, those states intend to drastically reduce wolf numbers once the animals are stripped of federal protection. Wyoming designates the wolf a “predatory animal” that can be shot on sight across almost 90 percent of the state. Wolf numbers in Idaho and Montana would be drastically curtailed under liberal public hunting and trapping seasons, as well as by the U.S. Department of Agriculture through aerial gunning, trapping and snaring, and gassing of pups in dens.
Wolves have also started to inhabit surrounding states, including four recently established wolf packs in the Cascade Mountains of Oregon and Washington, and individual wolves sighted in Utah and Colorado. These animals are in dire need of continued Endangered Species Act protection.
“Wolves have gained a pawhold in the northern Rocky Mountains, but they still need federal protection,” said Robinson. “With anti-wolf attitudes persisting among ranchers and wolf recovery just getting off the ground — or yet to begin in many areas — more work needs to be done to recover the wolf.”
To that end, the Center for Biological Diversity in July 2010 petitioned the federal government to develop a national recovery plan for the gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act to establish wolf populations in suitable habitat in the Pacific Northwest, California, Great Basin, southern Rocky Mountains, Great Plains and New England.
Wolves play a critical role in ecosystems. In Yellowstone National Park, wariness of wolves keeps elk from grazing on cottonwood saplings in low-visibility valleys. The cottonwoods that have matured in the 15 years that wolves have been back are reversing decades of ecological decline by providing habitat for birds, shade for fish, erosion control, and dam material and food for beavers whose ponds improve wildlife habitat even more. In Grand Teton National Park, a decline in pronghorn numbers was arrested and reversed by the reintroduction of wolves, which kill coyotes that hunt newborn pronghorns. In similar fashion, wolves benefit foxes. Overall, considering also the carrion that wolves provide to scores of other animals and the wolf’s role in ensuring survival of the fittest in its prey animals, this remarkable species is recognized as an engine of evolution.
Court Removes Much-needed Protections From Desert Bald Eagle, Species’ Fate Now Uncertain
PHOENIX, Ariz.— A federal judge today granted a request by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the desert nesting bald eagle from the endangered species list unless and until the Center for Biological Diversity successfully challenges the agency’s February 2010 decision taking the species off the list.
On July 9, 2007, the Bush administration overruled Fish and Wildlife Service biologists, ordering the agency to remove the desert nesting bald eagle from the endangered species list. It had been on the list since the 1970s. The Center filed suit and on March 6, 2008, U.S. District Judge Mary H. Murguia struck down the delisting decision and ordered the agency to return the bald eagle to the endangered species list.
On Feb. 24, 2010, the Obama administration issued a new decision also removing protections from the eagle. This new decision uses the same flawed logic as the 2007 Bush-era decision and also involved agency bureaucrats overruling agency scientists.
The Center had asked the judge to keep the species on the list until the new decision was legally challenged and resolved. The judge denied that request, telling the Center it first needed to file suit and prove the new decision is illegal.
“The Obama administration’s decision earlier this year was just as politically tainted as the Bush decision in 2007,” said Dr. Robin Silver of the Center. “We look forward to proving that in court in a suit we plan to file shortly.”
For more than three decades, every recognized bald eagle expert has acknowledged the fact that the desert nesting bald eagle is unique and important to the species as a whole. But on July 18, 2006, Fish and Wildlife Service career administrators gave their staff “marching orders” to abruptly reverse their opinion and “to find an analysis that works.”
On March 5, 2008, Judge Murguia called the agency actions “arbitrary and capricious.” She ordered the agency to issue a new evaluation, and issued an injunction against lifting protection for the eagle in the interim.
On Dec. 9, 2009, after agency bald eagle experts again reinforced their opinion that the desert nesting bald eagle is unique and important to the species as a whole, career administrators again ordered the eagle experts to reverse their position, saying, “My staff will work with you on development of the revised version of the finding.”
The biggest threats to the eagle are increasing habitat destruction and human harassment — and the judge’s protective order had been the only law protecting eagle habitat. Today’s order also removes the requirement for mandatory mitigation funding of the NestWatch program.
NestWatch provides on-site protection for the most threatened eagle nests beginning in the middle of December of each year. Between 1983 and 2005, NestWatch rescued 9.4 percent of all young eagles fledged in Arizona, including up to 50 percent of a given year’s reproduction. Until this ruling, agencies such as the Salt River Project, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation and Department of Defense had been required to contribute yearly money to the NestWatch program to make up for destruction of habitat and harm to eagles.
Michael J. Robinson
Center for Biological Diversity
P.O. Box 53166
Pinos Altos, NM 88053
For updates on and analysis of the BP oil spill, see www.biologicaldiversity.org/gulf_disaster