Defenders of Wildlife Blog

©James Ownby

Mark Salvo, Federal Lands Policy Analyst

There are few birds in the American West that know how to party like sage-grouse. Oh sure, you’ve got your hummingbirds with their swooping and diving and your huge, gawky sandhill cranes with their flamboyant, noisy mating rituals. But for sheer spectacle, nothing beats the sage-grouse and now is the perfect time to see them strut their stuff because it’s mating season out West.

Sage-grouse dancing occurs from March to May. In early spring at dawn, and often at dusk, sage-grouse congregate on “leks”— ancestral strutting grounds to which the birds return year after year. To attract a hen, males jockey for position, fan their tail feathers and swell their breasts to reveal yellow air sacs, and then, just as quickly, deflate them to make an utterly unique “swish-swish-coooopoink!” sound that can be heard from over a mile away. Scientists aren’t certain what about this flamboyant display is attractive to females, but it works. Take a look:

Sage-grouse are the charismatic ambassador of the “Sagebrush Sea,” a term given to the vast sagebrush prairie that once sprawled across thirteen western states and three Canadian provinces. Lewis and Clark described the grouse in their journal as the “cock of the plains”, and nineteenth century travelers reported seeing huge flocks of sage-grouse that darkened the sky as they lifted from valley floors. Native Americans emulated sage-grouse in ceremonial dress and dance. Settlers hunted the bird for food, and even collected sage-grouse eggs in spring for table use. Centuries of westerners have admired sage-grouse as fellow dwellers of the high desert, and birders travel from around the world to see sage-grouse in the wild.

Unfortunately, like too many other iconic western wildlife species, sage-grouse are in trouble. Sagebrush grasslands are a heavily used landscape. Humans have plowed, sprayed, burned, drilled, developed, mined and grazed millions of acres of sagebrush habitat. The remaining habitat is fragmented and degraded by weeds, wildfire, juniper encroachment, utility corridors, roads and fences. Sage-grouse range has been reduced by almost half with the loss of sagebrush steppe and grouse populations have declined to just ten percent of their historic numbers.

Sage-grouse in the snow (© Alan St. John)

William Hornaday of the New York Zoological Society was among the first to express concern for sage-grouse in 1916, publishing a pamphlet titled “Save the Sage Grouse from Extinction: A Demand from Civilization to the Western States.” Conservationists have heeded his call and launched a west-wide campaign to protect the grouse and the Sagebrush Sea. After struggling for more than a decade, we finally got a break in 2011 when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service committed to review sage-grouse for listing under the Endangered Species Act by 2015. The date certain for a range-wide sage-grouse listing decision has compelled a multitude of federal and state agencies and local entities to finally develop conservation strategies to protect and recover sage-grouse and their habitat.

Defenders of Wildlife is heavily engaged in these planning processes. We are analyzing thousands of pages of documents and working to improve federal and state conservation strategies. In Washington, DC, we are urging the Obama administration and Congressional representatives to strengthen conservation initiatives for sage-grouse, and out West we are diligently working to ensure that new development won’t harm the species.

But sometimes you’ve just got to make time to enjoy these spectacular birds. We invite you attend a show at a sage-grouse lek this spring. Dress warmly, bring binoculars and coffee, and be ready for fun. And then join Defenders to conserve sage-grouse so that they may continue to impress for generations to come.

© William R. Curtsinger / National Geographic Stock

Juan Carlos Cantu, Mexico Program Manager

Humans can regularly be seen on Mexico’s beaches, umbrella drink in hand. But we’re not the only ones who regularly hit the country’s beautiful sandy coastline. Literally, every sea turtle species on earth nests on Mexico’s beaches, save one that is only found in Australia. That’s why we’re known as the sea turtle capital of the world, and that’s why the way Mexico protects its sea turtles matters on a global scale.

Current Mexican law classifies all sea turtle species as endangered. But unfortunately this really only means turtles are protected from direct harvest—meaning they can’t be killed for their meat, skin, shell or eggs. Yet other factors pose serious dangers, including damage to and destruction of sea turtle habitat. Even nesting habitat, which is particularly important to the survival of these species, was not legally protected.

An endangered Olive Ridley sea turtle comes ashore to lay her eggs. (© Steven Price)

But not anymore, because in February, a new Mexican law (known as Official Norm-162) took effect, and it offers a whole slate of new protections for sea turtle nesting grounds in Mexico.

Previously, only the most important sea turtle nesting sites have been designated as sanctuaries and natural reserves, which allowed them some level of protection but left the majority of nesting habitat vulnerable.  But now, the new regulation extends habitat protections to all turtle nesting sites. Here are just some of the things that this new and unprecedented regulation has accomplished for sea turtle nesting habitat:

Protecting Native Habitat
The new regulation forbids the removal of native vegetation in the nesting habitat. When coastal vegetation is removed, especially from sand dunes, it allows increased erosion that could eventually destroy nesting beaches. In addition, some turtles like the critically endangered hawksbill sea turtle even prefer to crawl up the beach all the way up to the vegetation to nest.

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Hatchling (NPS)

Putting Out Artificial Lights
The regulation also addresses one of the main factors that disrupt nesting turtles: artificial lights from houses, hotels and roads. These light sources can not only disorient nesting females, but they can be lethal to emerging hatchlings. As they climb their way up from their sandy nest, newly-hatched turtles look for the subtle light reflecting off the surf and waves to orient themselves towards the sea. Artificial lighting can point them in the wrong direction and when you are that young, one wrong turn can force you to use up your limited energy stores, leading to an almost certain death. Even those that eventually make their way to the surf can be too exhausted to swim away, becoming easy pickings for fish and marine birds. For the first time in Mexico, this new regulation calls for moving, changing or eliminating any light sources that illuminates a nesting beach or creates a glow that could disorient the females or hatchlings. These changes won’t happen overnight, but authorities are already informing beachside homeowners and hotels of the new rules.

Off-Road Vehicles
The new regulation also helps address the use of heavy vehicles on the beach. Heavy vehicles may compact sand, destroy nests and eggs, create deep ruts that can become traps for nestlings and basically tear up nesting beaches. No more. From now on, vehicles on nesting beaches have to be less than 300 kg in weight and can only be used for patrolling and management of the nesting site.

In the U.S., sea turtle nesting grounds are often carefully protected. (© Robert S. Donovan)

Spectators
A less obviously threatening activity also outlawed by the new regulation is the release of newly hatched sea turtles. Many hotels near nesting beaches offer guests the opportunity to be part of the release of hatchlings into the sea. The problem is that they keep the hatchlings in confinement for many days until enough people sign up for the activity. So when they are released after being held in captivity, they are too weak to handle the surf or avoid predators. Hatchlings need to get into the water as soon as possible after hatching so they can use their limited energy to swim away. This tourism practice is now forbidden, and hatchlings have to be released immediately. Also for the first time, those who want to watch sea turtles laying their eggs during nesting season will have to follow strict rules.

All of these and many more regulations will help protect beaches, nests, female sea turtles, their eggs and hatchlings from now on. I am proud to say that Defenders of Wildlife played a key role in making this happen. We worked on this regulation for many years; in fact we were the ones who proposed its creation back in 2002. It took a decade of lobbying before we got the Environment Ministry to develop it, and Defenders is one of only four non-governmental organizations credited with helping to make these new protections a reality. It took a long time to get these regulations adopted but now when sea turtles hit Mexico’s beaches to nest, they will find it a safer place than ever.

(A special breaking edition of Wolf Weekly Wrap-up)

By Jamie Rappaport Clark

Just as we feared, it appears that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is ready to give up on wolf recovery before the job is done.

The LA Times reports today that the Service is expected to release its proposal soon to strip federal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for most gray wolves in the United States. Under the proposed delisting, only Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest would still be protected by the federal law. The opportunity for expanding wolf recovery to areas with superb, unoccupied habitat in areas such as Colorado, Utah and California would be abandoned entirely, and the future of smaller developing wolf populations in the Pacific Northwest could be serious jeopardy. (See map of current vs. historical range of gray wolves.)

The gray wolf delisting proposal represents a major retreat from the optimism and values which have been the hallmark of endangered species recovery in this country for the past 40 years. Instead, the proposal reflects a short-sighted, shrunken and much weaker vision of what our conservation goals should be. The Service has clearly decided to prematurely get out of the wolf conservation business rather than working to achieve full recovery of the species.  Their decision is the equivalent of getting up and leaving in the middle of a wildlife conservation movie, mumbling “game over – we’re done – let’s get some pizza!”

In its proposal, the Service has made a number of dubious determinations that are worth examining in greater detail.

Federal biologists have decided that Canis lupus, the species of gray wolf that once spanned much of the western and central United States, will no longer be considered endangered. Part of the agency’s rationale is that wolves in both the Northern Rockies and western Great Lakes have recovered and were already delisted. Of course, this ignores the fact that there are still significant areas in states like Colorado, Utah and California with excellent unoccupied wolf habitat but no wolves. Without federal protection and support for wolf recovery, wolves will be at the mercy of rabid, anti-wolf state politics that, unfortunately, is still far too prevalent across the West. Too often extreme rhetoric from ultra-conservative state politicians wins out over sound wildlife management principles.

More troublingly, the Service concludes that protection is no longer warranted since gray wolf populations worldwide are stable. This is a tragic reversal of long-standing FWS policy to protect imperiled species in this country regardless of their status north or south of our borders. By this same logic, grizzly bears, wolverines, lynx, bald eagles and numerous other iconic species would never have been listed and restored in the lower 48 because they exist in greater numbers in another country. The intent of the ESA was to restore these ecologically important animals in the United States. It doesn’t matter that they exist elsewhere. As Aldo Leopold, the grandfather of modern wildlife management once wrote, “Relegating grizzlies to Alaska is about like relegating happiness to heaven; one may never get there.”

The only bright spot in this otherwise significantly flawed delisting proposal is the Service’s decision to retain protection for Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest as a unique subspecies. With the current population hovering at 75 wolves, the agency at least recognized the need to continue protection for this struggling subspecies.

The bottom line, however, is that wolves are still not recovered in key parts of their range, and the conservation work is not done. Apparently the Service thinks it’s good enough to have gray wolves just in the Northern Rockies and western Great Lakes, and they’re ready to call it quits on restoring wolves anywhere else.

But we’re not giving up that easily. There is still time to convince the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to do the right thing and continue the fight for America’s gray wolves. We’re asking all our members and supporters to contact new Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell and demand that she maintain protection for wolves so they may continue to expand into their historic range and fully recover. This includes Colorado, Utah, California and western Oregon and Washington – all of which could benefit ecologically and economically from the return of gray wolves.

Please contact Secretary Jewell today and tell her NOT to throw in the towel on gray wolf recovery. These magnificent animals once roamed from Canada down to Mexico. They can do so once again if we give them a chance!

You can also join a live chat this morning about the proposed delisting and the future of wolf recovery in the U.S. with LA Times reporter Julie Cart at 9 a.m. Pacific/12 p.m. Eastern. Click here for more details.

Read Defenders full press release here.

Jonathan Proctor, Northern Rockies Representative 

Earlier this month, the Montana Supreme Court heard arguments from Defenders of Wildlife and others in a case that will have far-reaching impacts on the future of wild bison restoration across Montana.

Bison herds, once a familiar sight all across the Great Plains, are making a triumphant return at Fort Peck Indian Reservation.

You may recall our participation last spring in the transfer of 61 wild bison to the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, as well as the community celebration that followed. This marked the end of a 130-year absence of wild bison from these tribal lands, home to the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes. It was also the first restoration of genetically pure Yellowstone bison to the Great Plains.

But on the very day the bison arrived at Fort Peck Reservation, bison opponents asked a judge to order the removal of these wild bison. Yes, you read that correctly; bison opponents wanted a forced removal of wild bison from these tribal lands, as was done in the 1880s.

They didn’t get that wish, but they did convince the judge to stop any further wild bison restorations until a full hearing of the issue could be heard in his courtroom. This effectively stopped a planned transfer of half of these genetically pure bison to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, 180 miles to the west, where the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre Tribes also planned to start a new wild herd. That move remains on hold.

Meanwhile, Defenders of Wildlife and National Wildlife Federation intervened in support of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (who approved the move), and appealed to the Montana Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s decision.

The Montana Supreme Court heard this case last Friday in a large theater on the University of Montana campus in Missoula so that the public could watch the proceedings. Hundreds attended. Defenders joined with our tribal allies and a drumming group from the Fort Belknap Reservation in a gathering in front of the theater before the hearing to explain to the many reporters and attendees how vital wild bison are to restoring the human cultures and natural landscapes of the Great Plains. This gathering and the court hearing made headlines in newspapers, on television and on radio across the state.

Our attorney, Tim Preso from the Bozeman office of Earthjustice, did a spectacular job during the hearing, arguing that the court should reverse the lower court’s decision and allow bison restoration to continue. His last words made quite an impression on the crowd:

“The reason this case is important and has substantial public interest and the reason this court’s decision is important is highlighted in something the Fort Peck  Tribes wrote in their amicus brief where they described their own receipt of bison and said:

‘The Tribes were finally successful after a 130 year break in the historic relationship in reuniting the descendants of the Assiniboine and Sioux people who survived the 19th century with the descendants of wild bison that survived the bison holocaust of the same period.’

That’s why this case is important… and that’s why it’s important for this court to clear the way for the Fort Belknap Tribes to be able to enjoy that same reunion.”

We await the Supreme Court’s decision.

PausePlayPlayPrev|Next

Traditional Songs

Members of the Fort Belknap Reservation perform before the Supreme Court hearing.

“I came up here today to support the bison.”

Andrew Werk, Fort Belknap Tribal Council member, speaks to the crowd,

Restoration

Mark Azure, Fort Belknap Wildlife Director, explains his tribes’ goal of restoring wild bison.

Supreme Court Hearing

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks attorney Rebecca Jakes Dockter addresses the Montana Supreme Court.

An oiled pelican on the Gulf Coast (©Krista Schyler/Defenders of Wildlife)

Laurie Macdonald, Florida Program Director

This Saturday, April 20th, will mark the third anniversary of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. By Earth Day 2010, we had learned the terrible news that 11 men had died in an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig and we hoped an environmental crisis was not going to follow.

But follow it did. Over 200 million gallons of oil spewed from a failed drilling operation nearly a mile below the ocean surface: hot, highly pressurized petroleum hydrocarbons that had been stewing for millions of years. In the days that turned into months of frantic work to seal the well, the oil and attempts to contain it caused direct and long term damage to wildlife and their habitat, including an unknown number of deaths.

How can there be restitution for such an assault on the precious and extensive resources of the Gulf? How can the environmental losses be restored and the related economic losses be compensated? Sea turtles, whales and dolphins surfacing to breathe and sea birds resting or diving into the ocean were covered with oil. Seahorses and juvenile sea turtles living in the floating sargassum seaweed mats were killed when the mats were showered with dispersants and burned. Below the surface, deep sea coral colonies and shallow seagrass beds died due to the toxic combination of dispersants and oil. And on the beach, shorebird nests and chicks were trampled and scraped away by uninformed workers during cleanup operations, while heavy equipment and lights disturbed and harmed wildlife. Every part of the Gulf was affected by the spill, from its shores to the sea floor. People dependent upon marine resources, from shrimpers to hotel and restaurant owners, lost significant livelihood, and some of those living along the affected areas suffer ongoing illnesses.

Oil floats in the water off the coast of Louisiana. (©Krista Schyler/Defenders of Wildlife)

A complex combination of legislation and lawsuits is causing the responsible parties, British Petroleum (BP) and others, to pay significant costs and fines. Penalties under the RESTORE Act passed by Congress on June 29, 2012 will make $4 billion available for restoration and improvement of the Gulf and for the people that suffered losses due to the spill. The RESTORE Act ensures that 80 percent of Deepwater Horizon civil and administrative penalties under the Clean Water Act will go to Gulf Coast restoration, and sets up a framework that can ensure coordination between the Gulf States and the Federal government.

Defenders’ Florida Representative Elizabeth Fleming and I recently attended a public meeting of the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, which is evaluating which projects are most important to fund. The meeting was held to listen to information from the public about what actions we believed would be of the greatest benefit to the Gulf.

On behalf of Defenders, I presented a report that we produced with the National Wildlife Refuge Association that describes tracts of conservation land along the Gulf Coast and connections inland that should be acquired and added to the refuge system. This will protect wildlife habitat and help wildlife adapt to the impacts we are experiencing as a result of climate change and sea level rise. Examples include expanding the Gulf Islands National Seashore to protect sea turtle nesting beaches as well as people’s access to the coastline, and adding to the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge to complete the ocean-to-inland connection that wildlife will need to rely on as they adapt to climate change.

Shorebirds like this rely on the beaches affected by the Deepwater Horizon spill (©Krista Schyler/Defenders of Wildlife)

I pointed out three principles that I think should guide the decisions on how to spend the restoration funds. First, all projects, including those not focused on the environment (boat ramps and the like) must result in ecosystem benefits. Second, all projects should also take climate change and sea level rise into consideration. And lastly, the most important action we can take is to acquire valuable conservation areas that add to our system of natural resource lands and wildlife habitat.

Author Carl Safina in his book “A Sea in Flames,” closes with an observation on northern gannets — large, shining white seabirds that migrate from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico for the winter. Gannets dive for their prey and so they are directly affected by oil adhering to their bodies and by eating contaminated fish. Safina remarks that the first oiled bird whose image was in the news during the Gulf oil disaster was a gannet, and that seabird biologists speculated that up to a third of the population would be affected. The gannet already faces a host of threats near its breeding grounds, and is now suffering the impacts of the oil spill even 2,000 miles away, where it spends the off-season.

It is clear that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will continue to affect wildlife and habitat for years to come. Our job now is to help our damaged Gulf regain its health with carefully planned, enduring restoration work.

Assemblymember Pan speaks about how a ban on lead ammunition will benefit the state of California. (©Pam Flick)

Kim Delfino, California Program Director

Yesterday, we took one more important step in the effort to protect wildlife and human health from the toxic effects of lead ammunition. The California Assembly Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee passed a bill, by a vote of 9-5, that would require the use of non-lead ammo for all hunting in the state, putting California well on its way to being the first state to enact non-lead ammunition requirements.

The committee vote came one day after the bill’s authors, Assemblymember Anthony Rendon and Assemblymember Richard Pan, stood on the steps of the State Capitol with a scientist, a hunter, a veterinarian and Tesla the golden eagle, to outline why it is critical for California to remove lead from ammunition used to hunt wildlife. “Lead is a toxicant that is bad for human health and the environment, and lead ammunition exposes humans and other animals to this life-threatening poison,” said Assemblymember Rendon.

Lead is a known toxin that we have already removed from everything from paint to gasoline to pencils to pipes. Fifty years of scientific research has shown that the presence of lead in the environment poses an ongoing threat to the health of the general public and the viability of the state’s wildlife, including the California condor, bald eagle and golden eagle. Dr. Don Smith, Professor, Department of Microbiology and Environmental Toxicology at UC Santa Cruz stated, “Lead based ammunition is likely the greatest, largely unregulated source of lead knowingly discharged into the environment in the U.S.”

Assemblymembers Pan and Rendon, creators of the bill, with Tesla, a golden eagle. (©Pam Flick)

Lead bullets fragment into tiny pieces when they hit an animal during hunting. These small lead fragments are then easily digested by humans as well as wildlife that eat the gut pile of dead animals. Animals also ingest lead when foraging in fields and pick up spent ammunition mistakenly. These lead fragments are highly toxic in the humans and animals that digest them. In humans, exposure to lead causes brain damage, learning problems and slowed growth and, for children, no amount of lead exposure is allowable. In wildlife, lead poisoning causes an agonizing death through paralysis and starvation.

Given the toxic threat from lead ammunition, there is no legitimate reason to oppose the use of non-lead ammunition when non-lead alternatives are available, effective and comparative in price with lead ammunition. As Assemblymember Mike Gatto stated in the committee hearing, “This is the right thing to do. We don’t hunt with poisoned darts for a reason and we shouldn’t use toxic ammunition for hunting.”

Former Fish and Game Commissioner and an avid hunter Judd Hanna testified in support of the bill in committee. Mr. Hanna was one of 27 distinguished hunters from California – including the current President and Vice President of the Fish and Game Commission – who sent a letter in support of the bill because they believe it is a reasonable and prudent solution to a public health and environmental threat. Defenders has been working on this issue for years, is a sponsor of this bill, and one of the organizations leading a broad coalition working to pass it. Now we’ve secured a majority of the members of the California Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee to vote to ban this toxic substance. Let’s hope the full California Assembly embraces the cause as well. Stay tuned.