Conservation Progress: avoiding species extinction through the legislative process

Here's a mixed bag of good news/bad news from the Center for Biological Diversity. It ranges from progress on protecting endangered species that have been in political limbo for years, to threatened leopard frogs, to further recognition of the bluefin tuna's precarious status.

There's a dilemma we often face. Sometimes we feel we need to prioritize and possibly protect one animal but let another suffer for the sake of economic development or some other pressing reason. We hope that we can evaluate each situation objectively, but it can be a slippery slope. The problem is what that one loss might represent: a weakening in our obligation to protect natural resources that can lead to rationalizing one species extinction after another.

We must be steadfast in our personal choices and remain vigilant in preserving the political safeguards and regulations that provide conservation and protection.

839 Species Move Toward Protection
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this week agreed to a legal settlement that might result in federal protection for 839 plants and animals spiraling toward extinction. The agreement could lead to final protection decisions for 251 species that have been stuck on the federal warranted-but-precluded "candidate" list, many for decades; the Center for Biological Diversity filed scientific petitions to list 192 of these. It may also spur the Fish and Wildlife Service to process listing petitions for 588 additional species, of which the Center petitioned and/or filed suit to protect 511. In all, the Center's endangered species campaign brought 84 percent of all the species included in the agreement to this point of protection.

The species include the Rio Grande cutthroat trout and yellow-billed cuckoo, which the Center petitioned to protect in 1998 and has filed multiple lawsuits over; the Pacific fisher, which we petitioned to protect in 2000; the yellow-billed loon and Kittlitz's murrelet, which we petitioned for in 2001 and 2004; and the Oregon spotted frog, which we petitioned to protect in 2004.

Unfortunately, while the Center was working to reach a better, more certain agreement, the Fish and Wildlife Service secretly convinced another conservation group, which had petitioned for very few of the species, to sign this weaker deal, full of loopholes and containing harmful language that will help the agency reject the protection of other equally imperiled species in the future. The Center is considering options to fix the flawed agreement and ensure that the species we pushed this close to protection are actually brought over the finish line.

We'll keep you updated in the coming weeks on our efforts to secure full protection for these species. Thank you for your vital help and support getting these rare, important plants and animals this far.

Southwest Frog Defended From Open-pit Copper Mine
The Southwest's stocky, charcoal-spotted Chiricahua leopard frog now inhabits less than 20 percent of its former range -- yet in the feds' new proposal for protecting its much-needed remaining habitat, areas important for the frog's recovery are glaringly absent. The Center for Biological Diversity filed comments Thursday to remedy that.

Long threatened by grazing, disease, groundwater pumping and pollution, the Chiricahua leopard frog is now imminently threatened in southern Arizona's Santa Rita Mountains, where the proposed Rosemont open-pit copper mine could obliterate the sensitive amphibian. The mine site was left out of the feds' proposal for protected "critical habitat" even though frogs live there, making the area critical to protect. Worse, the feds' proposal downplays scientific evidence that the frog's northern populations may be a different species, meaning that southern populations -- like those in the Santa Ritas -- may be even rarer than previously thought.

Read more in our press release and learn about our campaign to save the Chiricahua leopard frog.

Scientists Declare Bluefin Tuna Endangered -- Join Our Bluefin Boycott
The list of those who say bluefin tuna urgently need protection continues to grow. This week a committee of Canadian scientists and government representatives declared that the bluefin should be listed as an endangered species; we couldn't agree more. Last year the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned to have the Atlantic bluefin protected under the Endangered Species Act. In November, after international regulators failed to take action, we launched a nationwide boycott of bluefin.

One of the most remarkable marine creatures in the world, the warm-blooded bluefin tuna is a fierce ocean predator, can reach up to 10 feet in length and 1,200 pounds in weight, and can swim at up to 50 miles per hour, crossing the ocean in just weeks. But it can't outswim overfishing, which is driving it extinct at alarming rates, and the BP Gulf oil spill has helped make Atlantic bluefin more endangered than ever.

If you haven't already, join more than 30,000 activists in the Center's Bluefin Brigade by pledging not to eat bluefin or support restaurants that serve it -- and don't forget to spread the word by liking and sharing the page on Facebook. Then get details on our Bluefin Boycott, the Atlantic bluefin tuna and the bluefin developments in Canada.

Japanese Whaling: Australia files with the International Court of Justice

The end of last year's whaling season in the southern oceans was a dismal economic failure for Japan due, in no small part, to the actions of anti-whaling organizations like the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS). But it is not exactly clear as to what Japan is planning to do for the upcoming season. Radical activist groups like SSCS are ready to do battle with the Japanese whaling fleet and should that occur, there will certainly be media coverage in the form of news reports and, perhaps, more episodic television.

However, equally important are the quiet efforts that are taking place on the international front, in the world courts. This week, the Australian government filed a written submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) calling for an end to Japan's whaling activities in the Antarctic ocean. This is the next step in an international legal battle that has been brewing since Australia first petitioned the ICJ in 2009, advocating a global ban on whaling.

As reported by the Dow Jones Newswire, "'Despite Australia repeatedly calling on Japan to cease its illegal whaling activities, Japan has refused to do so. That is why the Australian Government has taken this case in the ICJ. The [Australian] Government believes the whaling carried out by Japan is commercial, not scientific, and does not fall within that narrow exception,' the Australian government said in a statement."

Japan's rationale that they can engage in whaling under a "scientific research" provision within the rules of the International Whaling Commission has been questioned by many nations. And there appears to be ample evidence that the whales that have been taken have ended up in the commercial marketplace which is viewed as a direct violation of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.

Australia's submission with the ICJ will be sealed until 2012, after Japan has had time to prepare a written response. It is hoped that the international legal body will take up the issue and rule in favor of Australia and the whales. It may seem a slow and tedious process, but it is another powerful force - as powerful as the more attention-grabbing activist groups - albeit working from the opposite end of the anti-whaling notoriety spectrum.

Let us hope that the Japanese government will recognize that they are rapidly becoming boxed in a corner by world opinion and should reconsider their position on a destructive and antiquated cultural and commercial activity.

Focus On Fur: protecting endangered or threatened animals on land

Proactive conservation groups come in a wide variety of flavors, focusing on a singular issue or many, working in conjunction with other groups or going it alone. Whatever the strategy, the goal is to achieve results that are meaningful and lasting.

In the past, I have cited the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) as an organization that has chosen the legal approach to advancing the cause of conservation and protection of endangered species. Working with other legal groups like Earthjustice or conservation groups like Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, and others, CBD adheres to a strategy of utilizing the courts to get federal agencies to follow through with laws or regulations already in place or to consider issues that are in line with the agencies charter or mandate.

While this blog gravitates mostly towards issues regarding the ocean, occasionally I like to turn attention to those creatures that reside on dry land. Focusing on fur, here are a few developments announced by the Center for Biological Diversity that caught my attention. Two represent ongoing challenges - of which public support can have an impact - and two are victories that can be savored but require continued diligence if they are to persevere. The Center is not the only the group involved in pushing ahead on these issues; CBD will mention working in conjunction "with others" and I often wish they would list those others groups - all deserve their due credit.

And you can make a difference to - by petition support or financial contribution, if possible.

Wolves' Fate at Stake in Congress -- Take Action
The Center for Biological Diversity and 47 other groups yesterday wrote to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, urging her to oppose legislation that would permanently end federal protections for endangered gray wolves, leaving them open to slaughter. Later in the day wolves caught a slight break when the Senate voted down a House Republican spending bill that, among other anti-environment measures, included a provision to strip wolves of federal protections.

But that doesn't mean wolves are out of the woods. Members of Congress have shown a disturbingly keen interest in stripping Endangered Species Act protections for wolves throughout Montana and Idaho and parts of Utah, Oregon and Washington. If approved, such legislation will bar protection for northern Rockies wolves as "endangered" even if their numbers plummet toward zero. Both Montana and Idaho have long been chomping at the bit to raze wolf populations.

Congress has never taken a step like this before -- and endangered species protection must be determined according to science, as current law prescribes, not through a rider hidden in a gigantic funding bill. In fact, such legislation puts the very Endangered Species Act at risk and sets a terrible precedent for other species hovering on the brink of extinction.

Take action with us now by telling your senators to stop any congressional effort to strip protections from gray wolves.

Read more in E & E News.

Big Oil Sues Over Polar Bear Habitat Protections
Big Oil has filed the first lawsuit challenging the biggest "critical habitat" designation ever made -- and won by the Center for Biological Diversity and allies. Specifically, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association -- representing 15 oil and gas companies, including BP, Exxon and Chevron -- last week sued the federal government for protecting 120 million acres for Alaska's polar bears. The oil companies say that polar bears are too "abundant" to deserve the protected area, and that setting aside the land will be too expensive because it may get in the way of oil and gas development. Other entities, including the state of Alaska, are also expected to challenge the designation.

The Center has been working since 2001 to save the polar bear from the dire threats the species faces -- including oil and gas development. We're the group that originally wrote the petition earning the bear its status under the Endangered Species Act; we're still fighting to earn it the full "endangered" protection it desperately needs. We won't let any critical-habitat challenge succeed. Stay tuned for a polar bear update soon.

Read more in the UK's Daily Mail.

Wolf Massacre Halted in Alaska -- Thank You
Wolves on Alaska's Unimak Island won't have to face the prospect of getting gunned down by aerial shooters -- and you deserve some of the credit. After Center for Biological Diversity supporters sent in nearly 34,000 comments, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this Monday announced it won't let Alaska aerial gunners kill gray wolves on the island as part of a misguided attempt to stop the decline of caribou. (There's little evidence that wolves are at fault.) The Alaska Department of Fish and Game was planning to shoot wolves from helicopters on the Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge. Aerial killing is as inhumane as it is unnecessary, especially during the pup-rearing season. Thanks so much for saving wolves young and old from devastating deaths.

Get more from the Alaska Public Radio Network.

Protection Restored for Tongass National Forest
In another big Alaska victory, a judge has ended a lawsuit brought by the Center and allies by vetoing a decision that exempted the majestic Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The rule, passed in 2001, is meant to protect pristine public forests from destructive activities like road building and resource extraction. But to boost the timber industry, the Bush administration decided the rule wouldn't apply to the Tongass, leaving the 17-million-acre forest wide open to exploitation.

"This is a victory for the wolves, bears, deer, goshawks and other unique species that rely on the untouched old-growth forest of the Tongass for their survival," said the Center's Alaska Director Rebecca Noblin. "The Tongass never should have been exempted from the roadless rule, and this court decision provides valuable respite for old-growth-dependent species that have been hammered by unsustainable logging practices in the Tongass."

Read about the Tongass victory in the Los Angeles Times.

Victory for the Northern Rocky Wolves: judge returns dwindling numbers to endangered status

The wolves of Greater Yellowstone and the Northern Rockies have won an important reprieve in the courts. On Thursday, a federal judge ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had illegally stripped the gray wolves of the northern Rockies in 2009 of their protections under the Endangered Species Act by using political, rather than scientific-based, reasoning. The judge ordered the wolves be placed back on the endangered species list, which effectively halts the hunting of wolves that was taking place in Montana and Idaho.

The ruling was the result of a lawsuit brought by The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Defenders of Wildlife and other groups, and defended by Earthjustice, a major environmental legal firm. It is a prime example of the importance of utilizing the power and effectiveness of the courts on behalf of conservation issues - as equally important a component as is generating public awareness and support.

"Yesterday's ruling will also help other wildlife because it strikes a down Bush-era policy adopted by the Obama administration allowing the government to protect only small populations of endangered species instead of the entire species. Reliance on this anti-environmental Bush policy has been one of the many low points of Interior Secretary Salazar's management of endangered species," said Kieran Suckling, executive director of CBD.

Wolves - like sharks, tigers, and other apex predators - serve an important function in maintaining a healthy ecosystem. I commented on the importance of this predator vs. prey relationship and the consequences that have transpired over the years with the on again, off again eradication of wolves. This new ruling will hopefully put the natural balance back on a steady course.

But the wolves are not totally out of the woods yet, as there are pockets of wolf populations that are at risk from reduced habitat and conflict/poaching potential with ranchers. Roger Schlickeisen, president of the Defenders of Wildlife, noted, "We must continue our on-the-ground efforts to prevent conflicts between ranchers and wolves, counter anti-wolf misinformation in the media and work with all stakeholders to ensure these wolves fully recover and can then be legitimately delisted."

Read press release from the Defenders of Wildlife.
Read article from Montana's Missoulian.

From the Deserts to the Oceans to Outer Space: CBD takes it all on

Here's some interesting news items from the Center of Biological Diversity (CBD). This group is making more and more of an impression in the state and federal political hallways because they are not afraid to go for the judiciary jugular when necessary and initiate legal action on behalf of endangered animals and ecosystems. And they get results!

U.S. Jaguar Court Hearing
Exactly three weeks after the death of Macho B, the last known jaguar in the United States, this Monday a federal court heard oral arguments in the Center for Biological Diversity's bid to win a federal recovery plan and protected habitat areas for the endangered species. The hearing went very well. The judge peppered the government lawyer with difficult questions and clearly was skeptical of the agency's changing litany of arguments.

Though jaguars were declared endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1997 -- thanks to another Center lawsuit -- the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has done nothing to recover the species or protect its habitat. In a cruel irony, the agency argues that it doesn't need to protect the jaguar because it's too endangered. That's right -- because the great cat's U.S. range has shrunk to near nothing, the agency argues it's too small to protect. Presumably, if the jaguar were less endangered, it would receive more protection?

Real Protection for False Killer Whale
Seeking an end to the slaughter of false killer whales in Hawaii, last week the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice, and allies sued the National Marine Fisheries Service over its failure to protect the rare marine mammal from the state's longline fishery. For nearly a decade, false killer whales -- actually large members of the dolphin family -- have been getting hooked and entangled by Hawaii's longline fleet, dying at rates far beyond what the population, which numbers at only about 500, can sustain. The Marine Mammal Protection Act requires the Fisheries Service to try to eliminate these deaths, yet even after a 2004 Earthjustice lawsuit by the Center and allies -- when the Hawaii-based fishery was ominously classified as "Category 1" due to its excessive killings of false killer whales -- the agency failed to act on the mammals' behalf.

San Francisco Bay-Delta Fish Protection
While the state of California is moving (slowly) toward safeguarding two of the San Francisco Bay-Delta's most imperiled fish, the longfin and delta smelt, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has stalled on responding to petitions for protection -- so this week, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Bay Institute filed a notice of intent to sue. In 2007, the Center and allies petitioned the federal government and California to protect the longfin smelt, but the Bush administration didn't make a decision on protection by its August deadline. Way back in 2006, the Center petitioned to upgrade the delta smelt's federal and state Endangered Species Act status from threatened to endangered -- but 23 months after a decision was due, the feds still haven't responded. Luckily, California has been a bit more proactive, designating both fish as candidates for greater protections. But meanwhile, thanks to degraded conditions in the Bay-Delta caused by water diversions, pollution, and introduced species, both the delta smelt and the Bay-Delta population of the longfin smelt are fading fast.

The "smeltdown in the Delta" -- as the extinction trajectory of Bay-Delta smelts is known -- is on fast-forward, but despite court orders to clean up their act, federal and state water agencies are still mismanaging California's largest and most important estuary.

And here's an odd one . . .

Bat Blasts Off as Space-shuttle Stowaway
A small, daring free-tailed bat made one giant leap for batkind this month while clinging to the external fuel tank of the space shuttle Discovery -- and holding on for dear life even after liftoff. It's highly unlikely that the bat made it into space -- since the shuttle accelerates from zero to 100 miles per hour in 10 seconds after takeoff -- but in the photo of Discovery clearing the launch tower, the tiny creature is definitely visible on the side of the tank. Though the flight was probably fatal, the bat has made history and will live on in legend.

Unfortunately, even as we mourn the loss of the first "space bat," bats across the Northeast are experiencing an even scarier and not-at-all-entertaining demise thanks to the mysterious, deadly, and rapidly spreading bat disease known as white-nose syndrome. The Center is working to protect bats from all threats in the face of the devastating sickness, which just this month was confirmed to have spread to West Virginia.

You can learn more about these at the Center for Biological Diversity web site. Click here.