Defenders of Wildlife Blog

The Supreme Court decision not to hear an appeal of the 10th Circuit Court decision upholding the Clinton administration’s Roadless Area Conservation Rule is a huge victory for wildlife.  As a part of the team who helped establish the rule, I can say that the 11-year battle was well worth it.

The “roadless rule” was a directive from President Clinton to protect all remaining roadless areas on our national forests.  Of the 192 million acres of national forests in the U.S., 58.5 million acres — or nearly 30% — are without roads.  These areas are important places for wildlife and the anchors for biodiversity across large areas of the western and eastern states.  Roadless areas provide critical habitat for many threatened and endangered species, and include many watershed areas that are a critical source of drinkable water for major metropolitan areas across the West.

Tongass National Forest, Alaska

President Clinton signed the roadless rule in January, 2001, to resounding criticism from Members of Congress who saw this as usurping Congressional authority to create new wilderness areas. At the time, I was a member of the Clinton Administration, and along with General Counsel at the President’s Council on Environmental Quality Dinah Bear (now a Defenders Board member), we argued that the President was not creating new wilderness, but simply using his executive authority to protect these essential public lands.  Other critics of the policy argued that this was done at the end of the administration with little opportunity for public input, despite the fact that the President’s action was the culmination of more than two years of work, an extensive outreach effort, and the most public comments ever received in history on any administration proposal. Legal challenges ensued, but a three-judge panel gave a unanimous ruling that the Clinton roadless rule was legal, and last week the Supreme Court allowed that decision to stand.

What does this mean for wildlife? It means that they can continue to count on the safety of some of their most important habitats. In the northern Rockies, for instance, road development is a clear detriment to the recovery of grizzly bears. It fragments their habitat and increases their chances of a run-in with humans. Protecting roadless areas will give grizzly bears an anchor to build their populations and will aid in their recovery. You can find another example in the Pacific Northwest, where maintaining the headwaters of rivers and waterways is critical to the recovery of many threatened and endangered salmon species. While dams are one clear impediment to their migration upstream, roads in their nesting areas can create erosion, which pollutes the water and interferes with salmon spawning and development. Since existing roads in many national forests are already creating erosion problems, new roads would only make matters worse. Protecting these remaining roadless areas is an important part of the effort to restore iconic salmon runs in the region.

The battle to protect wildlife can be a long and winding road – pun intended.  In this case, the outcome is a vindication of the hard-fought work of President Clinton, Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck, and all of us who believed it was the right thing to do.  And wildlife will be better off as a result.

This week wildlife suffered a double blow.

On Tuesday when the House of Representatives passed a bill that stripped environmental protections from enormous tracks of public lands along the U.S. border. This presents serious threats to wildlife by allowing Border Patrol to be excused from existing laws that protect sensitive areas such national parks and wildlife refuges.

The second blow came on Wednesday from the House Interior Department Appropriations Subcommittee. The subcommittee passed a bill that not only cuts the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) budget by more than 20 percent, it also forces a FWS decision on whether wolves in Wyoming be removed from the endangered species list.  Wyoming is a state that is planning extensive wolf killing programs once the species is delisted.

Defenders of Wildlife’s president, Jamie Rappaport Clark, blasted the measure in a statement:

“These are policy changes industry and conservatives alike have sought for years and the current state of the economy is only the latest excuse for pursuing their extreme agenda. It is yet another example of Congress kowtowing to the special interests and enacting shortsighted policies that leave the next generation holding the bill.”

For most Americans, summertime is a chance to finally enjoy the great outdoors and appreciate the incredible diversity of native wildlife our country has to offer. It’s time for swimming at the beach and watching shorebirds, hiking in the mountains through fields of wildflowers, and spending lazy afternoons fishing on our nation’s lakes and rivers.

But in recent years, summer has meant the exact opposite here in D.C. It’s time for wildlife opponents in Congress to make their sneak attacks on some of America’s most imperiled plants and animals by cutting holes in our nation’s safety net—the Endangered Species Act.

Polar bears would lose federal protection under a Farm Bill amendment introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah).

The latest onslaught started last week with an insidious rider proposed to the Senate Farm Bill that would eliminate protections for polar bears, Florida panthers and hundreds of other species that exist in only one state.  That was followed quickly by another proposed farm bill amendment that would make it virtually impossible to protect species on private lands by mandating onerous economic analyses and discounting valuable scientific information. We should be doing everything we can to rescue America’s imperiled wildlife, not throwing up additional roadblocks that will push them closer to extinction.

This week, we’re anticipating several more anti-wildlife provisions to be introduced that would eliminate vital protections for endangered species and the habitats they depend on for survival.

First up is a bill that includes an array of nightmarish attacks on our public lands and wildlife.   One of these could spell disaster for jaguars, caribou, lynx, grizzly bears and dozens of other species along our borders. This provision, which was introduced by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), would waive about three dozen essential environmental laws on Federal public and tribal lands within 100 miles of our borders with Canada and Mexico.  In addition, the bill would give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) unilateral authority to engage in numerous destructive activities on Federal public and tribal lands anywhere in the U.S., regardless of protective status or proximity to the border.  If passed, the law would allow DHS to build roads through wilderness areas, erect fences around key wildlife habitat and restrict access to national parks without any public involvement whatsoever.

But as two thoughtful ranchers point out in an op-ed for the LA Times, the disastrous border provisions are completely unwarranted. Many landowners already work very closely with border patrol agents to make sure our border regions remain safe without discarding America’s most important environmental safeguards. In another fantastic op-ed for U-T San Diego, a returning Iraq veteran makes the case that our public lands are a source of inspiration and healing for our troops, both when they’re abroad and when they return home.  Rep. Bishop may offer an amendment to this provision on the House floor, but it will do little to address the most significant problems with the legislation.

Last year, this loggerhead was crushed by an off-road vehicle while nesting on Cape Hatteras shores.

Another provision in the same bill would undo critical protections for piping plovers and sea turtles at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The National Park Service finally announced new rules earlier this year to restrict access to the beach and put a stop to the destruction caused by excessive off-road-vehicle use. Nesting populations of shorebirds and sea turtles have started to recover since 2008 when interim regulations were put in place. Let’s not turn back the clock by allowing Congress to override necessary protections for continued recovery of these rare birds and sea turtles.

A key subcommittee in the U.S. House of Representatives will also begin work on the Interior Appropriations bill this week. This is the same legislation that included more than a dozen attacks on wildlife last year, and it’s likely to have a similar fate this year. We’re particularly concerned about a rider that’s been floated by Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) that would prevent anyone from challenging the delisting of wolves in Wyoming. Such a rider would make it virtually impossible for Defenders, our conservation partners, or any citizens to undo a deadly wolf plan in Wyoming that would allow unrestricted wolf killing across the vast majority of the state.

We’ll be keeping a close watch on Congress this week and urging our champs to take a strong stance to make sure vital wildlife protections remain in place. Please take a moment today to contact your members of Congress and tell them to uphold America’s commitment to preserving our natural heritage for future generations.

Click here to see what you can do to help!

Lake of the Lone Indian, John Muir Wilderness

The U.S. Forest Service agreed on Monday to let an independent panel of scientists review the list of plants and animals the agency will be responsible for monitoring in the Sierra Nevada national forests, settling a lawsuit brought by Defenders and our conservation partners in 2008.

The wellbeing of these “indicator species” reflects the overall health of a forest. If the Forest Service finds that logging, for example, would cause the species harm, wildlife officials should take precautionary steps to protect them before allowing a timber harvest to move forward.

Defenders’ forest expert Peter Nelson says, “The settlement gives us greater confidence that the management of Sierra Nevada Forests will be based on science, not politics. This is good news for both Californians and this region’s sensitive wildlife.”

Read the full story on Defenders’ website.

Like most wild animals, panthers need space to survive. And thanks to a recent land purchase along the Caloosahatchee River in Florida, they now have a little more room to roam.

Several entities  ranging from government agencies to non-government organizations to private and corporate donors all teamed up to purchase the American Prime property that provides panthers a dispersal zone from south to central Florida and beyond.

Prior to the economic downturn, the parcel was slated to become a new subdivision. Once the owners had to sell, preserving this panther corridor became an important priority as it is still in a relatively natural state while other lands along the river are developed. Without this linkage panthers would have no crossing point to travel north.

“We have supported efforts to protect and restore this land for years so that panthers can expand their range,” said Laurie Macdonald, Florida programs director. “And since a mother panther with kittens was recently documented just south of this area – north of where females have been confirmed in the last 30 years – I am feeling optimistic.”

The panther family was caught on film by a trail camera  north of the new nighttime slow speed zone Defenders helped champion to protect panthers in Okaloacoochee Slough State Forest (link to press release http://www.defenders.org/press-release/new-slow-speed-nighttime-panther-zone-help-reduce-wildlife-vehicle-collisions-keri and blog http://www.defendersblog.org/2011/12/florida-panther-sighting-heralds-slow-zone-designation).

“We are pleased that the dedicated effort by many organizations and individuals, particularly the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The Nature Conservancy, Natural Resource Conservation Service of the U.S.  Department of Agriculture, National Wildlife Refuge Association, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Walmart, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and private donors, has finally secured this crucial habitat corridor,” stated Macdonald. “Defenders will continue to work with partners in south Florida and other parts of the state to improve safe passage through habitat protection as well as road improvements like wildlife crossings, roadside sensors and speed zones for wide ranging species such as panthers and bears, as well as motorists.”

Press release: http://www.fl.nrcs.usda.gov/news/ConservationPartners_WRP_Announcement_2012.html

Photo, caption and credit: http://www.fl.nrcs.usda.gov/news/images/Panther_dark_large.jpg

Articles:

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2012/may/22/land-deal-glades-county-florida-panther-habitat/

http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012305230024

Defenders’ members and supporters submitted more than 40,000 public comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service last week, voicing opposition to a proposed land swap and road through the ecological heart of the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

It’s one of Alaska’s most diverse refuges, with lagoons, tundra and stunning mountain peaks. This incredible habitat is home to brown bears, wolverines, caribou and other wildlife.

Tens of thousands of waterfowl, seabirds and shorebirds rely on the Izembek Refuge for nesting and feeding. In fact, each fall the refuge shelters nearly the entire population of Pacific black brant and emperor geese.

But the community of King Cove (population 938) wants to build a road through federally protected Wilderness lands within the refuge that would put this wondrous place at risk.

In exchange for some $38 million in federal funding to modernize medical facilities and to develop a marine transportation system (including a $9-million hovercraft for emergency medical evacuation), community officials in 1998 had agreed to leave Izembek alone.

A land swap and road proposal threaten the Izembek Nation Wildlife Refuge.

Now the town is backtracking on its promise and vigorously lobbying federal officials and the Fish and Wildlife Service to approve the precedent-setting land swap that would clear the way for this unnecessary, destructive road.

Community representatives claim it would improve emergency access to a nearby airport in Cold Bay, Alaska, but experts estimate that it would take some two hours to reach the airport traveling by road versus approximately 20 minutes by hovercraft, which has successfully performed more than 30 evacuations since 2007.

While a final decision is likely to still be months off, it will be difficult for federal officials to ignore such widespread opposition to the proposal.

A huge thanks on behalf of Izembek’s wild ones goes out to all of you who spoke out against the road.