Category Archives: Endangered Species Act

New England Bunny Hop

Posted on by
Reply

New England cottontail in MaineLast autumn, nine New England cottontails bred in captivity at the Roger Williams Park Zoo in Rhode Island were released inside a predator-proof fence enclosing one acre of the Ninigret National Wildlife Refuge, also in Rhode Island.

You can read all about the New England cottontail captive breeding program in the Association of Zoos and Aquariums blog wildexplorer.org. Find the article here.

In Massachusetts, MassWildlife has been collecting roadkilled cottontails and cottontail skulls since 2010 to figure out how many and where the two species of cottontails are in the state. Out of the 500 specimens received, about 10 percent have been New England cottontails and several new populations have been uncovered.

MassWildlife would like to have more samples from the western part of the state, and hopes to reach sportsmen, highway department workers, animal control officers, and other interested citizens with their plea.

More info about the program is available in the April 2012 edition of MassWildlife News, which was not on line at press time. But do check for it here.(Info from the program from last year is available here.)

New England cottontails look an awful lot like Eastern cottontails. Sometimes even the experts need a DNA test to tell them apart for sure. But New England cottontails are the only one of the pair native to New England, although the Eastern cottontail is taking over its territory.

New England cottontail numbers have plummeted, earning the species an Endangered Species Act listing as “warranted but precluded.”

Last Minute Objections to New ESA Defination

Posted on by
Reply

On the last day of the comment period, a group of 97 conservation scientists sent a letter to the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) objecting to the proposed definition of “significant of portion of its range” in the Endangered Species Act.

The last day also saw a letter signed by 89 environmental organizations objecting to the new definition.

The most comprehensive article on the topic is from Environmental News Service.
Another article appeared in PlanetArk.
The Center for Biological Diversity, which took the lead among the environmental organizations commenting, also posted the letter from the scientists, here.

Photo: cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, Credit: Mike Wrigley/USFWS

Last Minute Objections to New ESA Defination

Posted on by
Reply

On the last day of the comment period, a group of 97 conservation scientists sent a letter to the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) objecting to the proposed definition of “significant of portion of its range” in the Endangered Species Act.

The last day also saw a letter signed by 89 environmental organizations objecting to the new definition.

The most comprehensive article on the topic is from Environmental News Service.
Another article appeared in PlanetArk.
The Center for Biological Diversity, which took the lead among the environmental organizations commenting, also posted the letter from the scientists, here.

Photo: cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, Credit: Mike Wrigley/USFWS

New State (And National) Listings of Endangered Species

Posted on by
Reply

Gray petaltail, endangered in New JerseySix species of dragonfly are among the newly listed threatened and endangered species in New Jersey, according to a press release from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. The changes to the list focused on flying species. Most of the animals were birds, and in addition to the dragonflies, the Indiana bat was added to the state endangered species list. (It was already on the federal endangered species list.)

Non-breeding bald eagles were moved from endangered to threatened, reflecting their continued recovery in the state. Other bird species whose status was changed to reflect improved numbers are the non-breeding bird populations of osprey, peregrine falcon, red-shouldered hawk, northern goshawk, short-eared owl, and vesper sparrow, and the breeding population of Cooper’s hawk.

The black rail, golden-winged warbler and red knot were listed as endangered and American kestrel, cattle egret and horned lark were listed as threatened.

The ruling, which took effect Tuesday, also created a new category: “species of special concern.”

Read the press release here.
Read an article in the Asbury Park Press or
the Atlantic Highlands Herald.

The press release did not include the name of the dragonfly species listed, so here they are:

Endangered
Petaltail, gray (dragonfly) Tachopteryx thoreyi

Threatened
Baskettail, robust(dragonfly) Epitheca spinosa
Clubtail, banner (dragonfly) Gomphus apomyius
Clubtail, harpoon (dragonfly) Gomphus descriptus
Jewelwing, superb (dragonfly) Calopteryx amata
Snaketail, brook, (dragonfly) Ophiogomphus asperses

Earlier this month the state of California provided coverage to two species of yellow legged frogs under the California Endangered Species Act, according to a press release from the California Department of Fish and Game.

Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (Rana sierrae) was listed as a threatened species and the southern mountain yellow-legged frog (R. muscosa) as an endangered species, the press release reports.The frogs have disappeared from 75 percent of their historical habitats because of chytrid fungus and because they are being eaten by non-native trout.

Read a brief article on the listings in the San Jose Mercury News, here.
Read the state’s Notice of Findings here. (Very brief.)

Finally, Canada has moved to list three bat species, the tri-colored bat (AKA eastern pipistrelle), the little brown myotis (AKA little brown bat), and northern myotis (AKA northern long-eared bat) as endangered species because of white nose syndrome. Read an article in the Edmunton Journal here.

Photo: Gray petaltail by Eric Haley

ESA Listings are Bigger in Texas

Posted on by
Reply

Have a little patience with this New York Times article on how the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s settlements with WildEarth Guardians and the Center for BioDiversity mean “an unprecedented flurry” of Endangered Species Act listings in Texas. (There are 96 species under consideration in the state under the settlement.)

The top of the story tells you what you should already know. (Settlement. 250 species under consideration, total. Six years.) The middle tells you something that should come as no big surprise. (Oil companies sincerely oppose the listing of a couple of lizard species that will really cramp their drilling style.)

But the end, ah, the end, raises some important questions. Just how does a state manage such a flurry of listings? Who is paying the academic researchers whose work is so crucial to the listing discussion? Where will the feds find researchers? Where will the researchers find the time? All food for thought.

Read the New York Times article here.

Read our previous postings on:
the Houston toad and
the WildEarth Guardians/Center for Biodiversity settlement.

 Photo: Houston frog; courtesy of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

Feds Tinker with ESA

Posted on by
Reply

If the US Fish and Wildlife Service issues a press release, but no news outlet covers it (other than reprinting the release) is it news? The Endangered Species Act (ESA) guidance published in the Federal Register on Dec. 9 is news worth knowing for most state wildlife agencies.

(And likely, it’s not getting coverage because its being billed as a “policy draft.” But drafts quickly become policies, if no one is paying attention.)

The guidance aims to clarify the “significant portion of its range” phrase in the ESA. However, the language of the guidance seems to muddied the phrase’s meaning further.You’ve got to wonder when both the US Sportsmen’s Alliance (“continuing federal power grab”) and the Center for BioDiversity (“recipe for extinction”) are POed.

Thanks to the interpretation of the guidance by the Endangered Species Law and Policy blog of Nossaman LLP (yes, these are the lawyers who are suing your agency over wildlife and environmental issues, particularly if you are the State of California or the USFWS), it appears that:

-A species will now be protected throughout its range, even it is only at risk in one (“significant”) portion of its range. (This is what has the Sportsmen’s Alliance up in arms. Consider the impact on the Gunnison sage grouse, for example.)

-A species range will be considered only in its range now. Its historical range will be taken under consideration, but that’s all. (This is what has CBD up in arms. If a species is thriving in even a tiny portion of its vast former range, and wiped out in the rest, it won’t be considered at risk. Consider the impact on the gray wolf, for example.)

If you can’t get enough of this legal stuff, here’s a three-page interpretation of the guidance from Perkins Coie LLP, another law firm with an endangered species practice.

Read the USFWS press release here.
Read the guidance in the Federal Register here. (Be forewarned: It’s a 20 page PDF)

The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are accepting public comment until February 7, 2012.

Photo: Gunnison sage grouse. Photo courtesy Bureau of Land Management

Feds Tinker with ESA

Posted on by
Reply

If the US Fish and Wildlife Service issues a press release, but no news outlet covers it (other than reprinting the release) is it news? The Endangered Species Act (ESA) guidance published in the Federal Register on Dec. 9 is news worth knowing for most state wildlife agencies.

(And likely, it’s not getting coverage because its being billed as a “policy draft.” But drafts quickly become policies, if no one is paying attention.)

The guidance aims to clarify the “significant portion of its range” phrase in the ESA. However, the language of the guidance seems to muddied the phrase’s meaning further.You’ve got to wonder when both the US Sportsmen’s Alliance (“continuing federal power grab”) and the Center for BioDiversity (“recipe for extinction”) are POed.

Thanks to the interpretation of the guidance by the Endangered Species Law and Policy blog of Nossaman LLP (yes, these are the lawyers who are suing your agency over wildlife and environmental issues, particularly if you are the State of California or the USFWS), it appears that:

-A species will now be protected throughout its range, even it is only at risk in one (“significant”) portion of its range. (This is what has the Sportsmen’s Alliance up in arms. Consider the impact on the Gunnison sage grouse, for example.)

-A species range will be considered only in its range now. Its historical range will be taken under consideration, but that’s all. (This is what has CBD up in arms. If a species is thriving in even a tiny portion of its vast former range, and wiped out in the rest, it won’t be considered at risk. Consider the impact on the gray wolf, for example.)

If you can’t get enough of this legal stuff, here’s a three-page interpretation of the guidance from Perkins Coie LLP, another law firm with an endangered species practice.

Read the USFWS press release here.
Read the guidance in the Federal Register here. (Be forewarned: It’s a 20 page PDF)

The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are accepting public comment until February 7, 2012.

Photo: Gunnison sage grouse. Photo courtesy Bureau of Land Management

Midwest Wolf Delisting Expected to Stick This Time

Posted on by
Reply

The final rule to remove the western Great Lakes population of the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act is expected to be published in the Federal Register today (Dec. 28, 2011).
The rule will take effect 30 days after publication, so if all goes as planned, that will be Jan. 27, 2012.

The rule applies to gray wolves in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and “portions of adjoining states,” according to the US Fish and Wildlife press release announcing the final rule.

A map from the US Fish and Wildlife Service of the “Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment” of gray wolves suggests that the adjoining states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, and the tiniest slivers of Indiana and Ohio.

More information about this population segment, including lots of links, is available from the Midwest region of the USFWS, here.

The USFWS species profile of the gray wolf is here.

Here’s a draft of the Federal Register rule.

Read the USFWS press release for details such as the total population in the area (4,000, with more than half in Minnesota).

This is the third time in the past five years that Minnesota’s wolf population has been delisted, notes the Saint Cloud Times. This time, the ruling is expected to stand, the article says. Read the rest here.

Read more in:
USA Today
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 

Map: courtesy of US Fish and Wildlife Service

Paper Says US 531 Short on ESA Listings

Posted on by
Reply

The International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List of imperiled species is merely informational. The United States’ Endangered Species Act (ESA) is regulatory; it can compel (or forbid) action to save species from extinction.

A recent paper in the journal Conservation Letters says that there are a lot more US species listed on the Red List as the equivalent of endangered or threatened than actually appear on the US’s ESA list. In fact, there are 531 more species on the Red List than listed under the ESA, the paper says.

The paper cites an inadequate budget US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) budget and the existance of a “warranted but precluded” catagory as the major road blocks to a complete listing.

What about politics? That’s where USFWS places the blame, says Scientific American’s on-line news site.

Read an international perspective from Asian Scientist, here.

Read the abstract in Conservation Letters, here. (The full article requires a fee or subscription.) See the whole article on the Center for Biodiversity website, here.

Photo: The New England cottontail is on the IUCN Red List, but not listed under the US Endangered Species Act. Photo by David Tibbetts, courtesy USFWS

Fisher Comeback Planned for California

Posted on by
Reply

Last week four more fishers were released in northern California, raising the number of fishers released to 39 in the Stirling City area in the past two years, says an article in the Contra Costa Times. With the release of the last four fishers, the program is now in a four-year monitoring phase, the article says.

Pacific fishers, unlike their eastern cousins, are thought to be dependent on old growth forests. The project area is anything but pristine, however. The land is owned by Sierra Pacific, a timber company. The article quotes a Sierra Pacific vice president saying that if the project is successful, it will show that fishers can survive on managed landscapes, which will mean Sierra Pacific can continue to log in fisher habitat, even if the animal is listed under the Endangered Species Act.

The article says the company will be allowed to do that anyway:

By hosting the fishers, the company, which owns about 1.6 percent of California’s land, also gets a 20-year guarantee it will be able to cut trees even if fishers are listed as endangered.

 Read the entire article here. There is also a slideshow of the recent release.

Here’s the California Department of Fish and Game’s description of the project. It includes a link to more detailed information in a .ZIP file and to the 2010 annual report.

Photo: Fisher release, courtesy of California Department of Fish and Game.