Defenders of Wildlife Blog

Matt Clark, Southwest Representative

I once spotted and photographed a family of javelinas on the U.S./Mexico border near the San Pedro River in southeast Arizona.  Through my camera lens, I watched the silhouette of an adult javelina cautiously approach the ominous border wall, and stop with a grunt.  It was a haunting image.  I can’t pretend to know what natural instinct brought the javelina to the border that day, but seeing those wild creatures literally cut off from their habitat by a steel wall stretching on for miles beyond sight – it really stuck with me.

A lone animal faces the impenetrable border wall. (Photo: Matt Clark, Defenders of Wildlife)

Ironically, on a prior visit to this same location, I was guided by a local landowner to a spot where someone had used a simple nylon rope to scale and defeat the wall in seconds.  Walls, no matter how tall and well-reinforced, will never succeed in keeping determined people from crossing the border illegally.  Sadly though, these same walls will, and do, stop wildlife in their tracks, denying them the territory, resources and genetic exchange they need in order to survive and adapt in the arid environment of the borderlands.

A scientific study I contributed to, published in Conservation Biology in 2009, concluded that dispersal movements and population dynamics of many wildlife species could be significantly affected by security infrastructure, especially those species that are land-bound and large enough for walls to keep them out, those that fly at heights lower than 13 feet as they disperse, or those that rely on continuous habitat for cover or perches.  Just a small sample of species whose transboundary movements could be further compromised by barriers and other developments at the border include desert bighorn sheep, mountain lion, black bear, desert tortoise, pronghorn, pygmy owl, wild turkey and the endangered jaguar and ocelot.

Unfortunately, when crafting border security-related legislation in the past, many in Congress have ignored major environmental concerns and have trampled the rule of law itself in their zeal to seal the border.  In 2005, Congress passed a controversial provision in the Real ID Act (Section 102) to waive dozens of laws in order to construct hundreds of miles of damaging border walls and roads.  The 37 laws that were swept under the mat include bipartisan legislation passed to protect public health, farmland, Native American graves and freedoms, historic sites, wildlife and other sensitive natural resources.  This unprecedented waiver authority, which allows a political appointee – the Secretary of Homeland Security — to waive any and all laws of the United States, has resulted in avoidable and expensive environmental and property damage, created numerous safety hazards, and has harmed interagency cooperation and trust.

Bighorn sheep are just one of many species that are put at risk by the borderlines. (Photo: Sandy Sisti)

A poll conducted by YouGov in 2011 found that 64% of those polled oppose giving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) discretion to waive environmental and other laws to build border infrastructure, and an identical number oppose congressional efforts to permanently waive such laws for border security.  This same poll found that the vast majority of Americans (92%) strongly prefer beefing up efforts at the Ports of Entry over spending billions of dollars on hundreds of miles of fencing in between the Ports.

The past damage done is bad enough, but now new threats are coming into play. Specific provisions in the immigration reform bill (S. 744) introduced into the Senate, run counter to public opinion and common sense.  The current version of S.744 would force DHS to develop a separate “Southern Border Fencing Strategy” and spend hundreds of millions to build yet more ineffective, environmentally harmful border walls. A very problematic provision in S. 744 would also further expand the existing waiver authority, enabling DHS to operate above the law for all border infrastructure and operations along the Southwest border, including building a sprawling network of forward operating bases, checkpoints, security camera tower s, roads and bright night lighting along the border and interior.  Collectively, this would add up to an unregulated, unmitigated environmental disaster with no accountability whatsoever.  To avoid such foreseeable folly, immigration reform legislation should be stripped of provisions that would enable walls and waivers. The proposal in S.744 for an even more expansive waiver is an unnecessary overreach – federal agencies are already operating effectively under an interagency agreement in place since 2006 that enables Border Patrol to have ready access to all lands along the border – including in designated wilderness – when a situation necessitates it.

The border wall extends for 670 miles, blocking wildlife from habitats. (Photo: Matt Clark, Defenders of Wildlife)

Even the current head of the DHS, Janet Napolitano, does not agree with the provision in S.744 that would dictate more wall building.  When testifying before Congress on the provision that would require dedicated funding for more walls she said, “We would prefer having money not so designated so that we can look at technology, air-based, ground-based, manpower, other needs that may be more fitting to prevent illegal flows across the Southwest border.”  This is the same reasoned voice who, as Arizona’s governor, bluntly stated: “You show me a 50-foot wall and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border. That’s the way the border works.”

What the border needs is not another set of ineffective, ecologically harmful walls and unpopular waivers, but rather more ingenuity and interagency collaboration that will foster the development of common sense, win-win solutions for both security and environmental concerns.

A 2010 report on interagency cooperation on U.S./Mexico border wilderness issues listed many successful efforts in the past where agencies have worked together to bolster border security. The report concludes: “The twin values of national security and public lands stewardship can be simultaneously fulfilled, but it will take continued interagency cooperation to assure this happens.”  The practice of waiving laws as a means to an ends is counterproductive; doing so only serves to eliminate the critical public processes and damage the trust that enables such interagency cooperation to occur and thrive.  As a nation, we can and must do better than walls and waivers. The future of our diverse borderlands region, and the wildlife it supports, depend on it.

Haley McKey

Last month we got some exciting news here at Defenders: our very own climate expert, Noah Matson, was selected to be a member of the Department of the Interior’s new Climate Change Advisory Committee!

This is an important step for the department.  Defenders has advocated for years that Interior agencies change their science and policy strategies to include climate change adaptation and assisted in their efforts to do so.  In a press release, recently appointed Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell emphasized that “responding to climate change and its effects on our natural and cultural resources is an important priority for the nation.”  It is indeed, and the formation of this committee is an encouraging sign that the federal government is taking climate change seriously.

Some migratory birds’ ranges are changing due to global warming.

So what will Noah be doing as a committee member?

“Members are tasked with identifying the key components of a strong, effective climate adaptation science strategy, and how to integrate those components into climate adaptation programs already in effect,” Noah says.  Specifically, the committee will advise the Secretary of the Interior on the operations of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center at the US Geological Survey’s headquarters, as well as eight new regional Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers.    “The question we’re trying to answer is: ‘how do we improve the way we manage our resources in the face of climate change’?”

There’s no doubt that our nation’s wildlife are responding to climate change: some migratory bird ranges are in flux, flowers are blooming earlier and ocean fish are retreating to deeper, cooler waters.  We simply cannot effectively conserve species without taking such changes into account.

In addition to science priorities, the committee will also advise the department on relations with key partners, such as state wildlife agencies, private landowners, tribes and others.  Working efficiently with partners is integral to Interior’s ability to coordinate with other climate adaptation initiatives, such as state-run wetland restoration or drought management programs.

Noah will be joined on the committee by members from a diverse number of organizations and institutions, including tribal, state and local governments, non-government organizations and the private sector.

This is a vital time for climate change policy and strategy.  The climate science center and the committee add a new dimension to our ability to protect our natural resources, help wildlife adapt to climate change and safeguard vulnerable communities.

The committee’s first meeting is expected to take place this fall.  Stay tuned as we follow Noah in his new and important role helping the Department of the Interior respond to climate change.

Gibbon pack in Yellowstone. Photo courtesy of U.S. National Park Service.

More wolf kill bills on the way in the West – Western state legislators are stepping up their efforts to ensure that more wolves get killed. Montana is considering giving away free wolf tags to elk and deer hunters and allowing silencers to be used on rifles late in the season. The state legislature is also fast-tracking a three-pronged bill that would (1) prohibit  wolf hunting and trapping buffer zones around Yellowstone and other national parks, (2) increase the number of wolves an individual can kill, and (3) permit the use of electronic calls. Meanwhile, Washington state ranchers are supporting a bill that would allow any private landowner to kill wolves or other predators at will without permission or oversight from state wildlife managers. Only Oregon is moving forward with responsible legislation that provides more emphasis on nonlethal strategies to prevent conflicts between wolf and livestock .

Good news, bad news for Mexican wolves – The good news is that the overall number of wolves counted in New Mexico and Arizona climbed to 75 this year – the highest total in 15 years and a big improvement over last year’s count of 58. At least 20 new pups were born and survived through the end of the year, and 13 different packs were identified. The bad news is that there are only three breeding pairs.  The lobos are facing a genetic crisis that puts their recovery at risk. That’s why Defenders continues to call for the release of additional wolves, as a first step toward genetic rescue of this rare subspecies. Listen to what Arizona State University biology professor Philip Hedrick had to say about the latest numbers on PNS radio:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Wolves alone can’t restore ecosystem — By now, most wildlife enthusiasts understand the important role that wolves play in dispersing elk and deer herds away from young aspens, cottonwood and willow trees.  However, nature is a complex system and the interdependence of multiple species is vital to sustaining a healthy ecosystem.  Researchers at Colorado State University found that restoring wolves alone cannot fix all the damage that occurred due to the loss of wolves and that beaver are necessary to help restore the water tables and plants that are the foundation for biodiversity.  The researchers conclude that predators should never be eliminated from their habitat because of the significant impacts that follow their loss.

For the young (or young at heart) who want to have some fun and learn more about the role of wolves in Yellowstone, check out this episode of “Fetch” from PBS Kids.  An interview with Doug Smith, the park’s lead wolf biologist, starts at the 6 minute mark.

The Hidden Life of Wolves – Want to get up-close and personal with a wolf pack in the comfort of your own home? Check out a new book from National Geographic, documenting the lives of wolves in central Idaho.

Karla Dutton, Alaska Program Director

Polar bear and cubs in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (Credit: USFWS)

Wildlife conservationists often view the success of their work solely in terms of species protected or habitat saved or restored. Certainly these are worthy and necessary goals to strive for. But what many folks do not factor in are the people who live in these habitats and who rely on some of these very same species for nourishment and economical wellbeing, and to sustain their cultures. These same people also have a unique knowledge of these species based on their many years — often generations — of observations. I believe we will be successful in sustaining habitats and species only when we work respectfully with the communities that call these places home.

Our partnership with The Alaska Nanuuq Commission (ANC) is a great example. The ANC was formed in 1994 so that Alaska’s Native people would have an active and meaningful role in the conservation and management of Alaska’s two polar bear populations in the Chukchi Sea and Southern Beaufort Sea. Alaska Natives have thousands of years of history with polar bears, which has led to a deep respect for the bear as a cultural symbol, a hunter, and a timeless part of the landscape. Polar bears rely on sea ice habitat, which is critical to raising young, finding prey and traveling. Now, due to rising global temperatures, sea ice melts earlier each spring, and forms later each fall, impacting the bears’ migration and access to prey. In 2008, polar bears were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

The ANC represents 15 coastal villages, many of which are faced with increasing numbers of polar bears coming into their communities and campsites. Defenders and the Commission are both interested in reducing conflicts between humans and polar bears in Alaska communities. Some of these animals are just passing through. Others, stranded on land for longer periods, are looking for alternate and less nutritious sources of food, since decreasing sea ice has made their main prey, ice-dependent seals, harder to come by. Defenders and ANC both recognize that if the same methods that keep people and their families safe also protect polar bears, then more polar bears will survive. With fewer human-polar bear conflicts, polar bears have a better chance of surviving, despite the challenges posed by climate change, and their survival allows the Alaska Native people’s culture and way of life to continue.

A polar bear on sea ice.

Defenders of Wildlife Alaska staff are working on developing and spreading the word about ways to help polar bears and humans coexist. In 2010, we funded a report called Sea Bear Under Siege, which details the plight of polar bears in Alaska and offers recommendations on how to best assist them as they navigate the arctic meltdown and continued loss of the sea ice that is so critical to their long-term survival.

In 2011, we worked closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Marine Mammals program to develop and deliver a workshop on polar bear diversionary feeding. This involves moving or placing food sources (such as marine mammal carcasses) away from human settlements to reduce human-bear conflicts. This international workshop shared tools and techniques used by polar bear managers in Russia, Canada and the U.S. to inform decision-making in Alaska. Jack Omelak, Executive Director of the Alaska Nanuuq Commission, also participated in the workshop. He found it very useful, and asked Defenders to play a role in the commission’s development of a human and polar bear interaction strategy. Defenders assisted the ANC with developing their Polar Bear Deterrence Needs Assessment in July and August 2011. The assessment contains feedback from the 15 ANC coastal villages, and the results informed the ANC’s strategic planning going forward. One of the priorities identified was a polar bear deterrent workshop.

Now we’ve teamed up with The Alaska Nanuuq Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Marine Mammals polar bear staff and the World Wildlife Fund’s Arctic Program to develop and host a polar bear deterrent workshop to be held next month. This workshop brings together the Alaska Nanuuq Commissioners from 12 of the 15 coastal villages (from Kaktovik to the villages of Gambell and Savoonga on St. Lawrence Island) along with Russian counterparts who are also addressing human conflicts with polar bears in their communities. At the workshop, all of these groups will share tools, tips and management ideas with the Nanuuq Commissioners so that they can spread these methods to their communities. As more people use these techniques and tools, they can be replicated and refined so that we all learn how to better coexist with polar bears.

This workshop represents something larger and more important than a single event. The partnerships forged, the trust built and the knowledge shared — whether it be traditional and local ecological knowledge handed down through many generations, or the tools western science brings — means that polar bear conservation decisions made going forward will be better, stronger, more equitable and I believe better for polar bears, their habitat and the people that call their world home.

Photo courtesy of Matt H. Wade

Wyoming wolf decision goes to court –Defenders and three other groups took legal action this week to challenge the premature delisting of wolves in Wyoming. After waiting the required 60 days since the Wyoming delisting rule was published, we filed a lawsuit arguing that the Interior Department illegally stripped protections based on a state management plan that treats wolves as unwanted vermin across the majority of the state, including in parts of our national forests. We expect better from the Obama administration, and as taxpayers we should all demand a better return on our investment. The recovery of wolves in the Northern Rockies has been a tremendous success, but now states are reversing years of conservation efforts by aggressively targeting these important animals. We must put a stop to the senseless and unnecessary killing before states follow through on their plans to drive wolf populations down to unsustainable levels. See follow-up coverage, including quotes from Rocky Mountain Director Mike Leahy in the Casper Star-Tribune and Cody Enterprise.

“The predator zone is still the focus of our concern. It’s a bad precedent to set, for the management of all wildlife species, to try drawing a line in the sand for any species.”  — Mike Leahy, Cody Enterprise

Yellowstone wolves no longer safe — As the wolf body count continues to rise across the region, some surprising victims are turning up. We learned this week that at least seven wolves that were known to spend much of their time within Yellowstone National Park have been killed so far this year by hunters in Montana and Wyoming. Though no hunting is allowed within the park, wolves often leave the park in search of food or to find a mate. Once they cross the invisible park boundary, wolves are no longer protected and can now be hunted in all three states that border Yellowstone.

Wolves in Yellowstone have been some of the most intensely studied wild animals on the planet and are incredibly valuable to researchers. For years, scientists have been able to monitor wolf activity under unique conditions where humans were not a threat to wolves’ survival. Now it appears some Yellowstone wolves will face the same risks as wolves elsewhere in the Rockies, potentially jeopardizing research on their natural behavior in the wild.

Read more about the Yellowstone wolves that were killed in this post from two veteran wolf biologists, courtesy of our friends at Wolfwatcher.

Wyoming-ites split on wolves – As Patrick Henry famously said, “United we stand, divided we fall.” Which explains why we continue to face an uphill battle with wolf recovery out West. A survey of Wyoming residents published this week shows that people are still deeply divided over wolves. The Jackson Hole News & Guide reports that 49 percent of residents think reintroduction was a good idea, but only 34 percent think the results have been positive. An overwhelming majority also supported hunting in parts of the state. With these numbers, it’s no wonder that the successful return of gray wolves remains embroiled in controversy.

Fresh air – The good news is that Defenders continues to make headway with Idaho ranchers who are finding ways to coexist with wolves in areas where they graze livestock. Our signature Wood River Wolf Project earned plaudits again this year from our partners for protecting more than 27,000 sheep with only four losses. Listen to a summary of our fifth season from Public News Service, featuring project manager Suzanne Stone and field supervisor Patrick Graham:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Mary Beth Beetham, Director of Legislative Affairs

You’ve probably heard a lot lately about the upcoming fiscal cliff — draconian automatic funding cuts to federal programs that will harm America’s wildlife and habitats, scheduled to take effect in early January in the absence of a larger budget agreement. But whether these automatic cuts occur or not, the shrinking federal budget will ensure that funding for wildlife and habitat conservation will continue to be in a precarious state for at least the next several years.

Bald eagles are one of many species that owe their recovery to the Endangered Species Act and the USFWS Endangered Species Program (Credit: Wes Gibson)

It’s my job to go to Capitol Hill and make the case for wildlife conservation funding — but it is more important than ever that you lend your help as well. Representatives and Senators need to hear from you, their constituents, that these programs are important and worth funding. To help you understand what’s at stake here, we’re going to spend some time each week explaining what these programs do to uphold our nation’s wildlife laws and protect endangered species, migratory birds and other key animals and habitats. Today, we’re focusing on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) Endangered Species Program.

The Endangered Species Act, one of the most visionary conservation laws ever passed, is our nation’s cornerstone of wildlife conservation. For nearly 40 years, it has been tremendously successful in preventing the extinction of our wildlife treasures, including bald eagles, California condors, Florida panthers, gray wolves, grizzly bears and manatees — all achieved despite severe and chronic funding shortfalls.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is one of two federal agencies responsible for implementing the Endangered Species Act, and it has jurisdiction over the lion’s share of the more than 1,400 protected U.S. plants and animals. The Service’s program is divided into four smaller programs that follow the different sections of the law: 1) Listing; 2) Candidate Conservation; 3) Recovery; and 4) Consultation.

Protecting New Species
First, FWS biologists and other staff analyze the best scientific information to identify species that may be in need of protection. Listing a species is a rigorous procedure. The FWS must develop, propose and finalize regulations that include information on the species population, range, habitat needs, evaluation of threats, examples of conservation efforts, and actions that may be prohibited if listing occurs. The listing process requires painstaking analysis of both scientific information and comments by the public, and can often take several years. Then, once a species is listed, the FWS has to designate habitat critical to the species’ survival and recovery.

The Pacific walrus is one of nearly 200 candidate species waiting for full Endangered Species Act protections (Credit: Joel Garlich-Miller)

Safeguarding Unprotected Species
If a plant or an animal faces severe enough threats to justify listing, but the FWS lacks funding to list the species immediately, it becomes a candidate species. While candidates await protection, Service personnel work with partners on the ground to put conservation measures in place and remove threats to these species. There are currently 193 candidate species, including the American wolverine, red knot, Pacific fisher, Pacific walrus, mountain yellow-legged frog, yellow-billed loon, New Mexico meadow jumping mouse and the lesser prairie chicken. Because FWS funding for listing is already inadequate, many candidates have been awaiting listing for years.

Helping Declining or Protected Species
Once a species is under the Act’s protection, it moves into the Recovery program, where Service staff develop and implement a plan to stop the species decline, and bring it back to the point where it can survive on its own. Developing a sound recovery plan can be another painstaking process, and involves working with scientists and stakeholders to spell out the research and management actions necessary for recovery. Once the plan is finished (and even while it is being developed), FWS leads the efforts to actually carry out the required activities on the ground, working with private landowners, state, local and other federal agencies, tribes and other partners. This part of the program includes efforts like:

• Restoring Florida panther habitat
• Monitoring and taking inventories of Canada lynx
• Installing wildlife crossings for ocelots in Texas
• Marking and maintaining boat speed zones for manatees
• Captive breeding and reintroduction of black-footed ferrets

As part of their recovery program, the USFWS has reintroduced endangered black-footed ferrets into their native habitat. (Credit: Ryan Moehring/USFWS)

Reducing Harm to Listed Species
While a species is protected, FWS staff works under the Consultation program to make sure outside projects don’t significantly harm protected species. There are literally tens of thousands of projects every year in all parts of the country that require consultation to reduce harm to endangered species, creating a crushing workload for agency personnel. This part of the program does things like:

• Work with the Coast Guard to reduce harm to manatees and sea turtles during events like regattas, boat races and fishing tournaments
• Work with the Army Corps of Engineers and other entities to reduce harm to the pallid sturgeon from navigation operations on the Upper Mississippi River
• Work with the Department of Defense to reduce harm to more than 100 species in Hawaii and the Pacific Islands from expanded use of larger munitions
• Work with the Bureau of Land Management, renewable energy companies and others so that wind turbines, solar arrays, and transmission lines can be sited and built while reducing harm to species like bats, golden eagles, whooping cranes and desert tortoise

All these pieces of the Endangered Species Program are vital to prevent the extinction of dozens of species, and to encourage the recovery of hundreds more. Further cuts to the program’s budget will delay or stop listing of species, undermine work to identify and conserve candidates and recover listed species, and slow or stop consultation, which would lead to a delay in projects and greater controversy surrounding the Endangered Species Act.

Keeping federal conservation laws and programs strong is essential to much of the work that Defenders does to protect wildlife and habitat. But these federal efforts are often only as good as the funding that supports them. The animals that benefit from these programs have no voice in politics. To prevent these cuts and keep these programs running, we have to take the message to Congress ourselves. Please, contact your elected officials and speak out on behalf of wildlife.