Defenders of Wildlife Blog

Kim Delfino, California Program Director

Migratory birds in San Joaquin Wildlife Refuge (Photo Credit: Jen Bullock)

It’s almost February, and on the San Luis National Wildlife Refuge Complex, things are getting interesting.  The great Pacific Flyway migration is winding down — up to a million waterfowl have visited the refuge, including Ross’ geese, Aleutian cackling geese, snow geese, green-winged teal, mallard and American widgeon.  The Tule Elk bulls are getting ready to shed their antlers, and the showy wildflowers that ring the unique endangered vernal pool wetlands are about to bloom.  Vernal pools are seasonal, temporary pools of water in grasslands that provide habitat for more than 40 different kinds of species.  As the water evaporates in these pools, different kinds of flowers bloom in concentric rings around them – it’s quite a show! Amid all of this natural hullabaloo is another kind of hubbub – a debate over whether or not the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge, part of the San Luis National Wildlife Refuge Complex, should be expanded into San Joaquin County.

While San Joaquin County is home to four rivers and part of the ecologically-critical Bay Delta, this county does not have a national wildlife refuge.  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which manages the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge, has proposed to expand the refuge to include a new corridor of river habitat stretching from Merced County into San Joaquin County.  Willing landowners – mainly farmers – would be able to sell land to the FWS to become part of the refuge if they are interested in doing so.  Then the FWS would replant these former agricultural lands with oaks, cottonwoods and willows along the San Joaquin River, restoring some of the vast riparian forests that were lost long ago when the Central Valley was developedand changed from a massive wetland and riparian forest to a sea of cropland, orchards, cities and towns.

All in all, the Central Valley has lost more than 95 percent of its riparian forests, resulting in a huge decline in migratory birds, shorebirds, raptors, reptiles, amphibians, fish and mammals.  Some of California’s most endangered fish and wildlife call this area home.  The critically endangered San Joaquin kit fox roam the region, and Swainson’s hawks soar over the valley grasslands. Riparian brush rabbits hide in the brush near rivers and streams while giant garter snakes make their homes in riverbanks. Even the endangered least Bell’s vireo has been found in the valley’s riparian forests.  And Chinook salmon migrate through Delta rivers and streams while delta smelt spend their lives moving around different parts of the Bay Delta’s estuary.

The proposed expansion of the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge could provide habitat for more than 325 species of wildlife.  Unfortunately, we could miss out on this opportunity to protect and recover some of California’s most endangered species.  The San Joaquin County Farm Bureau does not want to see an expansion of the refuge into San Joaquin County.  They argue that they don’t believe that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will manage the refuge land well, and they worry about endangered species coming onto their property.  Some opponents of the expansion even argue that the federal government will take their land for the refuge, despite the fact that the FWS has repeatedly stated that they will only acquire land from willing sellers.

Riparian Brush Rabbit (Photo Credit: US Fish and Wildlife)

These fears are all misplaced.  Expanding the refuge will actually provide economic benefits to area farmers and landowners by increasing property values in the area.  Further, FWS refuge staff have successfully recovered endangered species — like the riparian brush rabbit — on federal lands without a single documented negative impact to adjacent landowners.  Farmers are stewards of the Central Valley’s environment, and if they choose to work with the FWS to recover threatened and endangered species, they can help enhance that environment and avoid future conflicts over land use and conservation as recovered species are removed from the endangered species list and from further regulation.

Defenders of Wildlife has worked to protect and restore the myriad of threatened, endangered and declining fish and wildlife in the Central Valley for more than a decade.   We have partnered with fishermen, hunters, ranchers, farmers and other environmental organizations to secure protections for the region’s wetlands, grasslands, vernal pools, migratory birds and declining fish populations.   We have supported the FWS staff in their efforts to obtain funding for this refuge, secure water for wildlife on the refuge, and even get a brand new visitors center in Los Banos, providing much-needed public access and education to a part of the Central Valley that has been underserved for decades.  This refuge expansion is yet another opportunity to improve the protections for Central Valley fish and wildlife as well as an important opportunity to provide San Joaquin County with a new place for public education and access to the outdoors.

The proposed expansion of the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge is one of those rare win-win situations:  a win for wildlife and a win for San Joaquin County and the Central Valley.  The FWS wants to know what you think.  The public comment period on the refuge expansion is open, but closing soon! It will be over this Friday on February 1.  Defenders has sent a letter urging the FWS to expand the refuge, and so should you!

To view the proposal, go to:  http://go.usa.gov/YMWY  To comment, just send an e-mail to fw8plancomments@fws.gov with “San Joaquin River” as the subject.  Together, we can help secure this victory for California’s wildlife!

Sierra Weaver, Senior Staff Attorney

Sea otters rest wrapped in kelp beds along the Pacific Ocean during California Spring (Credit: Bruce J. Lichenberger)

Like many animals under the protection of the Endangered Species Act, the southern sea otter has had a long and bumpy road to recovery. In the 18th and 19th centuries, this population of otters was hunted to near extinction, bringing a population of approximately 16,000 down to an estimated 50 individuals, and struggling to rebound to today’s estimated to 2,800. Though the population’s historic range once stretched from Alaska all the way down the Pacific coast to Baja California, it now spans only a fraction of the distance. And even after hunting ended, otters have remained threatened by other human activities like oil drilling and commercial fishing. Clearly, this was a species that needed protection from humans. The question was how.

Back in the 1980s, oil spills were considered the greatest threat to sea otters on California’s central coast. The small marine mammals depend on their thick fur to keep them warm in cold ocean water, and contact with even a small amount of oil can cause death by hypothermia. In an attempt to guard against this threat to the southern sea otters, a plan was hatched to create a second colony of otters in a safer location offshore, on California’s Channel Islands. The plan involved a couple of elements. First, move a number of otters out to San Nicolas Island to try to start a population that policymakers believed could help guard against a mass die-off in the event of a catastrophic oil spill. Second, because otters were being moved closer to the lucrative fishing grounds of Southern California, the plan also created a “no otter zone” from which the otters would be removed if they were discovered there. Quite simply, the decision was made to encourage otters to inhabit some places, but keep them out of others.

Between 1987 and 1990, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) moved 140 sea otters from the coast of California out to San Nicolas Island. Unfortunately, many of the otters did not survive the initial move, and many others left San Nicolas to return to the mainland. Not only did the otters not take well to being moved to the island in the first place, but they fared similarly badly when moved out of the “no otter zone.”

A southern sea otter yawns.

Because of the harm to otters caused by a program that was supposed to help them, FWS stopped moving otters in the early 1990s to reevaluate the program. For several years, only a few otters were reported in the “no otter zone.” However, by 1998 the numbers began to increase — the otters had found their way back. In 2000, FWS determined that continuing to remove otters from the “no otter zone” was not only causing harm to individual otters that didn’t survive the move, but also likely to put the entire species at risk. These scientists determined — a decade after the translocation program was initiated — that the most important thing to sea otter recovery was range expansion, and that the “no otter zone” originally included in the translocation program was fundamentally inconsistent with the needs of the species. The otter moving stopped, but the regulations making most of Southern California technically “off limits” to sea otters stayed on the books, continuing to threaten otters with the specter of forced relocation.

For years, FWS has consistently found that otters need to move and expand their range if the species is to recover from its threatened status and find its way off the endangered species list. Despite this scientific knowledge, however, the policy response has been excruciatingly slow. But yesterday, FWS finally took action, signing a final rule that formally puts an end to the “no otter zone,” ending the experiment in active management of otters on California’s coast, and truly allowing natural range expansion to occur. And you deserve some of the credit too: during the public comment period for the policy change, Defenders’ supporters sent more than 11,600 comments to FWS to show their support for the repeal of the “no otter zone.” This is a fantastic, if long- awaited outcome from FWS, and one that we hope will allow southern sea otters to inch closer to recovery.

Mary Beth Beetham, Director of Legislative Affairs

Migratory birds play many integral roles in healthy natural systems, including predators, prey, seed dispersers and pollinators, and are actively appreciated and enjoyed by millions of people across the country each year. The Migratory Bird Management program has been entrusted with the massive assignment of protecting our nation’s incredible migratory birds, but it is already underfunded for its task. The fiscal cliff or a poorly crafted end-of-the-year budget agreement could trigger more funding cuts that will severely hamper this conservation and protection work and bring even more challenges for these amazing creatures that already struggle with disease, habitat loss and the effects of climate change.

Snow geese stop at Sacramento NWR during their migration route (Credit: George Lamson)

Bird-watching is also a boon to the economy. In 2011, nearly 47 million people participated in bird-watching activities in the U.S. Nature-based tourism in Texas’ Lower Rio Grande Valley, for example, is centered around enthusiasts who come to see the nearly 500 bird species recorded there. The tourism was recently found to generate $463 million per year in economic benefits for the four surrounding counties [PDF]. The 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation reports that birding generated over $82 billion in total industry output, as well as 671,000 jobs and $11 billion in local, state and federal tax revenue. The reports are done every six years, so the economic information for 2012 will soon be available.

More than 1,000 species of birds occupy an array of habitats across the U.S., and 251 of them are listed under the Endangered Species Act or are of conservation concern. The first State of the Birds report in 2009 documented broad declines in U.S. bird populations; nearly all native Hawaiian birds have plummeted to the verge of extinction, as well as 39 percent of ocean birds, half of coastal shorebirds, 30 percent of arid land birds and 40 percent of grassland birds.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 protects these important avian species. It implements four international treaties for birds common to the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Japan and the former Soviet Union. Except as allowed by regulations, the Act makes it unlawful to pursue, hunt, kill, capture, possess, buy, sell or trade any migratory birds, their parts, products or features such as nests or eggs. In the U.S., the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Migratory Bird Management program enforces these regulations — it protects, manages and regulates all activities associated with migratory birds. This vital program is divided into five parts, all of which could be crippled by further budget cuts triggered by the fiscal cliff or an overall budget agreement, resulting in a huge impact on our nation’s migratory birds.

A red knot at Sunset Beach, North Carolina (Credit: Dick Daniels)

Knowing Who’s There and Protecting Them
The largest piece of the program is Conservation and Monitoring. As part of it, FWS surveys, assesses and monitors bird populations so that management actions can be based on sound scientific information. It also helps scientists understand the influence that factors such as climate change and energy development can have on bird populations.

The program also pursues strategic conservation efforts for high-priority focal species that have been selected for more intensive work, including red knot (which has declined by 75 percent in the last 20 years), Laysan albatross (which has declined by 32 percent where most of its population is found), American woodcock, long-billed curlew, American and black oystercatcher, tri-colored blackbird, Sprague’s pipit, cerulean warbler, painted bunting and black-footed albatross.

This part of the program also helps cities protect birds in urban and suburban areas by teaching cities how to reduce the chances of bird collisions with buildings, towers and other man-made structures, and improving habitats directly through its Urban Treaties initiative.

Keeping Birds Healthy
Diseases like botulism, avian cholera and influenza and West Nile virus have become a greater threat to wild bird populations as they are subjected to the added stresses of climate change, habitat fragmentation and factors like the increased use of pesticides. These diseases can also become greater problems for society as a whole if transmitted to humans or poultry. Under the Avian Health and Disease program, FWS works to protect the health of wild birds by establishing baselines for health, identifying current and emerging disease risks, investigating infectious and non-infectious diseases and doing everything possible to prevent diseases and be prepared to manage outbreaks.

Regulating Use
Under the Permits program, FWS regulates activities related to migratory birds, a well as bald and golden eagles, making sure that protected birds are only taken for the limited number of allowed reasons like scientific study, falconry, rehabilitation, education and religious use of eagles by Tribes.

A greater sandhill crane visits Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon during the fall migration (Credit: Roger Baker, USFWS)

Protecting Habitat
The Federal Duck Stamp program oversees the design and sale of the annual Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp or Duck Stamp. Funds raised by the Duck Stamp are deposited in the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund and used to purchase and protect habitat for waterfowl. In fact, since 1934, Duck Stamps have raised more than $750 million, which has allowed FWS to protect more than 5.3 million acres of habitat. Waterfowl hunters 16 and older are required to possess a valid stamp, but non-hunters can also buy them to support wetlands conservation.

Hands Across North America
Lastly, the North American Waterfowl Management/Joint Ventures program administers an international plan between the U.S., Canada and Mexico for waterfowl management across all of North America. The plan is implemented on the ground by 21 regional Joint Venture partnerships between federal, state and local governments, businesses and conservation groups. This program has several great accomplishments to its name, including permanent protection of two million acres of working forest lands in the Northwest, initiation of the San Francisco Bay wetland restoration project (the largest project of its kind on the West Coast), improvement of long leaf pine restoration in the Southeast and development of a grassland plan to conserve birds in the Chihuahuan Desert.

Please let your members of Congress know that  you support a balanced approach to address the budget deficit — one that does not include further cuts to important and beneficial wildlife conservation programs like the Migratory Bird Management Program.

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.

“Coast to Coast” is a summer blog series highlighting some of America’s most imperiled wildlife. By using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s new state-by-state endangered species map, we will tell stories about native plants and animals in unique landscapes where Defenders will be focusing its conservation efforts in coming years.

One of the world’s most endangered animals is also arguably one of the world’s most adorable. With limbs dipped in black and a mask like a bandit, the black-footed ferret looks like a stretched-out panda bear. But don’t be deceived by its cuddly appearance. This critter is a voracious nocturnal carnivore that preys almost exclusively on prairie dogs.

The ferret’s habitat once extended across the Great Plains from Canada to Mexico. Unfortunately disease, habitat destruction and elimination of their primary food source have taken a toll on this small predator. Today, less than five percent of the ferret’s original prairie dog colony habitat remains. As people moved westward, the prairie disappeared, and so did the ferret’s food source. Prairie dogs became the target of widespread eradication efforts.  Considered vermin because they clipped the grass short on their colonies, ranchers went to great lengths to rid their newly acquired land of prairie dogs. Some states, such as Kansas, passed laws that required the killing of all prairie dogs. Piles of poisoned prairie dogs can be seen in photos from the turn of the last century. With no food and nowhere to go, the black-footed ferret was on the brink of extinction. The species became so rare that by 1974 no known ferrets remained in the wild. When the last captive black-footed ferret died in 1979, the species was presumed to be extinct.

Then in 1981 one lucky dog stumbled upon a ferret in Wyoming. Watch the following video to find out about the incredible find back in 1981.

Researchers discovered that a few dozen ferrets lived in the area and continued to monitor the population for a few years. Then tragedy struck; disease proved deadly to prairie dog and ferret populations, and brought the black-footed ferret once again to the brink of extinction. Their numbers dwindled to a scarily low 18 individuals in 1986.

Those last 18 ferrets found were brought into a captive breeding program. Over time, biologists became very successful at breeding ferrets; over 7,000 kits have been born in captivity. Once numbers reached a sustainable level, ferret reintroduction began. . Now, nearly two decades later, the ferret is on the road to recovery. Last year marked the 30^th year anniversary of their rediscovery and the 20^th year of their reintroduction to the wild. They have been reintroduced to 19 sites from Canada to Mexico. Of these, four sites are considered a success, two have failed, and the other 13 are yet to be determined.

Listen to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service describe the important recovery efforts under way in the following podcast:*

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.

Defenders of Wildlife supports this small predator’s success as an official member of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Black-Footed Ferret Recovery Implementation Team. Over three dozen governmental agencies and non-profit organizations pool their resources and expertise.  While partnering with federal agencies, Defenders also partners with tribal and private landowners to secure crucial habitat for the prairie dog and the black-footed ferret. We have helped with ferret recovery efforts at Northern Cheyenne Reservation, Lower Brule Reservation, Cheyenne River Reservation, Rosebud Reservation, and with private landowners in Kansas, among other sites.

It takes a team to save valuable species. Without coalitions like this, rare species don’t stand chance.

Click here to learn more about what Defenders is doing to help black-footed ferrets.

To find out how you can help, visit the Black-footed Ferret Recovery Program at www.blackfootedferret.org

*The podcast featured in this blog post was edited to comply with file size restrictions.  The content of the podcast has not been changed.

It wasn’t so very long ago that the sight of a gray wolf in the northern Rockies was a reason to celebrate. It meant that the hard work of thousands of people for many years was finally paying off, and a species that was nearly snuffed out entirely was beginning to set down roots in its native habitat once again. As a biologist in charge of endangered species conservation for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the time of the wolf reintroduction into the northern Rockies, I was deeply involved in working on the release. Knowing we were finally restoring a key missing piece of the northern Rockies ecosystem was a highlight of my career, and incredibly exciting.

Today, however, I’m stunned that we are fighting to save the same species from the very people who should be working to keep it safe. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has decided, without the scientific data to prove it, that gray wolves no longer require the protection of the Endangered Species Act in the state of Wyoming. They’ve made the same delisting decision before, in Idaho and in Montana — delistings that led to the killing of hundreds of wolves. While the management plans in Montana and Idaho are extremely troubling, Wyoming’s wolf management plan is much worse. Under that plan, wolves in most of the state will be treated as vermin that can be killed at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all. Wyoming intends to drive wolves down to the smallest population they can — just above the threshold that could land the species back on the endangered species list. That is no way to manage wolves. In fact, it is unlike any other plan to manage similar wildlife in the area, like mountain lions and bears. Clearly, the ability for wolves to fulfill their natural ecological role in maintaining healthy, balanced ecosystems will be severely compromised, casting their long term recovery into serious doubt. This approach would also cut off routes for wolves dispersing to Colorado or Utah, making it nearly impossible for northern gray wolves to ever return to these important parts of their historic range.

That such a plan could even be entertained is shocking. How could reckless, unregulated killing of wolves be considered a credible plan for a species just barely returned to the region? But even more distressing is the seemingly unqualified support that this plan is receiving. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Department of the Interior. The Obama Administration. These are the voices that should be railing against a plan so completely lacking in scientific reasoning, and so clearly inadequate to sustaining a healthy population of wolves in the region. Instead, they are lowering the bar for the Endangered Species Act, and diminishing what it means to recover imperiled species.

If it seems like this decision cannot possibly have been based on sound science, it’s because it wasn’t. It was based on politics. The Obama Administration wants to be able to point to delisted wolves and say, “Look! The Endangered Species Act works!” I can’t blame them for wanting to say that wolves are recovered — I’d love to be able to say it too. The truth is, the Endangered Species Act can and does work, and gray wolves in the Northern Rockies have made a tremendous comeback. But the recovery  isn’t truly complete until the state plans guarantee the long-term sustainability of wolves in the region, using the best available science and long-trusted wildlife management goals and standards.

President Obama and his administration have prided themselves on bringing science-based decision making back to the White House. But now, when the need for science and reason is critical, the White House is eerily silent. For all of them — for the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of the Interior, for the Obama White House itself — the problem isn’t a lack of scientific reasoning; it’s a lack of political will and courage. It appears that it is safer to claim a hollow victory than to keep working toward a real one. It is easier to say “job well done” than to keep working until it really is.

The Administration may have abandoned the Endangered Species Act with this decision, but I can’t. Having spent years pursuing protection and stability for our most threatened and vulnerable species, I can’t stand by and watch as the administration undermines 40 years of recovery for gray wolves. At Defenders of Wildlife, we’re ready to throw all our weight behind this effort. We’re continuing to talk to the White House and the relevant agencies to show them that this plan cannot be put into action. And if, as we suspect, the delisting is announced in the coming days, we are ready to take the fight to the courtroom. Your support — whether through donations, advocacy, or simply spreading the word — will be invaluable as we pursue this course, and I thank you sincerely for standing with us, and standing up for wolves.