State of Interior Part III: Streamlining Our Way to Species Extinction
Imperiled species rely on the protection that a monument or national wildlife refuge designation provides their habitat. These public lands are cherished and valued across our country because many Americans, including outdoor recreationalists, enjoy the pristine nature that stems from taking care of unique habitat. The Department of the Interior, under the leadership of Secretary Ryan Zinke is responsible for the proactive conservation and enforcement of some of our nation’s strongest environmental laws, like the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act — but you wouldn’t know that looking at a list of their actions regarding wildlife in the past year. The undoing of the conservation progress of previous administrations appears to be their goal, as evidenced by the sledgehammer being taken to our bedrock environmental laws and progressive collaboration efforts. It seems that nothing is sacred. Nothing is safe.
In late January 2017, the then-Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) issued an order banning lead in fishing tackle and ammunition. In the face of strong science and broad societal concerns about the impacts of lead on the environment, it is increasingly clear that the use of lead ammunition is unacceptable. There are readily available alternatives on the market, and we know the incredible harm that lead poses to people and to wildlife. Lead ammunition and fishing lures poison and kill many millions of birds and other animals each year, and risk contamination of our waterways and drinking water. But Secretary Zinke signed an order on his first day in office overturning the ban.
The greater sage-grouse is renowned for its distinctive mating display, one of the most colorful natural history pageants in North America. Many, and not just birders, travel across the country to see these magnificent grouse dancing in the springtime on their leks. Sage-grouse are ambassadors for the Sagebrush Sea, a vast and inimitably western landscape that stretches across much of the interior United States. As with many native habitats, development, agriculture and other anthropogenic uses have encroached on this vital but imperiled ecosystem. Sagebrush steppe supports hundreds of fish, wildlife and plant species, including more than 350 species of conservation concern, which is why a diverse group of stakeholders came together to develop a comprehensive collaborative new conservation strategy to protect this landscape. The final plan was not perfect, and from Defenders’ perspective, could have done more to protect sage-grouse and other wildlife, but pulling off this unprecedented effort deserves respect — and a chance to work.
Which is why when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announced it would be replacing the previous administration’s plan and conservation guidance with much weaker measures, we were deeply concerned. Revising the current strategy is a waste of time and money, undermines the collaborative conservation initiative and seriously threatens the long-term viability of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-dependent species. Rather than reducing protections, Secretary Zinke and the BLM should be taking advantage of this revision to strengthen conservation prescriptions in the current plan, bolstering measures to better protect and connect key habitats, establish sagebrush reserves, increase resiliency to climate change, and reduce manageable impacts like wildfires and invasive species. Unfortunately, they seem determined instead to shirk their stewardship responsibilities to the land and the diversity of wildlife and plant species that depend on the Sagebrush Sea and set up a reckless and irresponsible conflict that the previous collaborative partnership sought so hard to avoid.
Science is also facing a much bigger hurdle than it should be in the department that oversees the implementation and enforcement of the Endangered Species Act. Some of the FWS’s decisions over the course of the past year regarding the listing of endangered and threatened species have been disappointing, to say the least. The rationale for some of these decisions misinterprets or blatantly ignores science, violating the law aimed at preventing their extinction. Climate change, an indisputable warming of the world caused by human activity, is undeniably affecting species and habitats. And yet, the Pacific walrus, a species that relies on the cold, icy Arctic remaining so, was denied protection under the ESA.
The Canada lynx faces a similarly alarming fate if the FWS’ suggestion to remove federal protections for the species is finalized. The recommendation is based on uncertainty around the impacts of climate change, paired with adequate regulation for habitat protection. This recommendation dodges a court order requiring the FWS to publish a recovery plan for the lynx, now 15 years overdue. For a species adapted to hunting in reliable snowpack, climate change that will only become more extreme over the next 80 years will likely harm the population. Coupled with logging and habitat fragmentation, the future outlined in the species’ recent status assessment point to maintaining or even expanding current protections to strengthen the plan for conservation.
While some species have received or retained protections in the last year, numerous controversial decisions have been made, and the lack of consistency and clarity in the decision-making process is alarming. Science-based decisions should be unequivocally consistent when the fate of our wildlife is on the line… and they are not.
The endangered Mexican gray wolf is also fighting an uphill battle trying to get support and leadership from the FWS. A deeply flawed recovery plan was finalized, and it wasn’t based on the best available and well documented science in its calculation of wolf recovery goals. Barriers to habitat connectivity weren’t adequately addressed either. The plan calls for only about 300 wolves in the Southwest United States, even though biologists on the FWS’ own Science and Planning Subgroup calculated that a population of at least 750 wolves should be established before delisting. Defenders is currently in court challenging this intentional oversight and the blatant disregard for science.
Another important environmental law, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), is a startling victim of the administration’s favoritism for fossil fuels. The MBTA, which turns 100 this year, protects birds not just from unauthorized hunting but also from being trapped, poisoned, or killed by industrial operations. Migratory birds are increasingly threatened by oil and gas facilities, powerlines, wind farms, cell towers and other industrial activities, but the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior issued a legal memorandum reversing the longstanding interpretation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to exempt industry from “incidental take,” depriving birds of the regulatory protections necessary for their conservation. This new legal interpretation flies in the face of what every administration since the 1970’s has held to be true: The Migratory Bird Treaty Act strictly prohibits the unpermitted killing of birds. Instead, Trump’s Interior Department has gone out of its way to give industries like oil and gas a free pass to kill birds.
After a year of repealing and undermining wildlife conservation, Secretary Zinke is looking ahead to even “greater” things for the Interior Department. He’s shaken things up, but an ominous video from February 8, 2018 describes “an epic year at the department, where things are just getting started.”
In the fourth part of our series, we will the discuss department shake-ups and how the reorganization is putting things in perspective.
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Medium to hear the latest from our experts and sign up for our emails to take action and join us in our fight to protect wildlife.
