Transcript No Slide Title

Endangered Species: Bison
Bears and Wolves-the Science
and the Policy
Matthew A. Cronin, Ph.D.
University of Alaska Fairbanks
School of Natural Resources and
Agricultural Sciences
11February 2013
ESA impacts on resource use
Timber, mining, oil, fishing,
farming, livestock
Northern Spotted Owl-Timber
Polar Bear-Oil
Steller Sea Lion-Fishing
Klamath salmon-Farming
Coastal California gnatcatcher-Building
Grizzly bear-Livestock
Wolf-Livestock Hunting
Sage Grouse-Oil, Livestock
Sullivan vs Haskett
• D. Sullivan Alaska Attorney General: “…in
the coming months as environmental groups
attempt to list more species under the ESA
and shut down resource development in the
OCS and Tongass National Forest…” ADN
12/13/09
Sullivan vs Haskett
• G. Haskett U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Alaska Director:
• “Many people fear that ESA listings will
curtail development in Alaska, but there is
no evidence that this ever has been or will
be the case”
• ADN 12/26/09
Amazing
• No evidence ESA might affect resource
development?
• Sullivan’s point was also made by anyone
ever dealing with the ESA
Caribou on the North Slope
• Not ESA, but similar use of selective
science to stop resource development
• National Research Council report 2003
concluded decline between 1992 and 1995
was due to oil field impacts
• Didn’t note the large increases in the herd in
other periods
Caribou 6000 to 67000 during
North Slope oilfield operations
caribou
Central Arctic Herd Caribou numb
1975-2008
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
1960
5000
Pred
1980
2000
Year
2020
Wildlife in the Tongass National
Forest
• No ESA listings but threat of listing
goshawk and wolf subspecies influence
TLM Plan
• Creation of OGR and move to exclusive
second growth harvest
• Identification of nebulous “Endemics”
ESA in Alaska
Polar bears
Beluga whales
Other Whales
Steller sea lions
Sea otters
Walrus
Goshawk
Wolf
Murrelet
Loons
Seals
Are Polar Bears Threatened with
Extinction?
No: Polar bears are not currently
threatened and has healthy populations
Alaska Grizzly Bear
Montana Grizzly Bear
FWS concludes they are
threatened with extinction
Using Models of global warming and
SUMMER sea ice disappearance led to
models that polar bears will decline across
their entire range to the point of near
extinction
The impact
Polar bears are threatened by arctic sea ice loss,
which is attributed to climate change, which is
attributed to human greenhouse gas emissions,
so greenhouse gas emissions are to be regulated.
This will affect many parts of the American and
Alaskan economies
Best Available Science:
Data Quality
Number populations declining = 5
Number populations stable = 5
Number populations increasing = 2
Number population unknown = 7
Total number of worldwide populations =19.
Worldwide population number
has increased 2-3X in last 40
years
20,000-25,000 in 2006,
21,500-25,000 in 2002,
21,000-28,000 in 1995,
25,000 in 1984-1989,
8,000-10,000 in 1965-1970
Population predictions with
Models
Decline in the size of the total population of
more than 30% within the next 35 to 50 years.
30% decline is not a threat of extinction
Polar bears have survived
several previous warming
periods with no summer Arctic
Sea Ice
State of Alaska
• Lawsuit to challenge the Polar Bear ESA
Listing
• Reviewing Recent Critical Habitat
Designation
• Attempting to Work Cooperatively on the
Relevant Science
Alaska Wood Bison
Plains Bison
Simmental
Tarantaise
Saler
Limousin
Charolais
Shorthorn
Red Angus
Angus
Taurine cattle
Chirikof Is. AK
Scotch Highland
Florida Cracker
Hereford
Pineywoods
TX Longhorn
Criollo
Nellore
Indicine cattle
Gyr
Chitna R. AK
Nat. Bison Range
FarewellAK
Plains bison
Delta AK
Copper R. AK
Henry Mts. UT
Yellowstone NP
Nielson Canada
Plains bison
Plains bison
Plains bison
AK Wood bison
Wood Buffalo NP
Wood bison
Wood bison
Miner Inst.
MaKenzie BS
0.1
Plains bison
Wood bison
Does it matter?
Plains bison survive in Alaska and
plains X wood bison herd survives in
Canada
Wood bison subspecies on the ESA list is
preventing (re) introduction of wood
bison to interior Alaska
Plains bison are petitioned for ESA
listing in lower 48 States
Wolf
• Wolf DPS on ESA list in northern Rocky
Mt States until recently
• Wolf DPS in Great Lakes States on ESA list
until recently
• Mexican wolves subspecies on ESA list
• Wolf subspecies in southeast Alaska
petitioned for ESA listing
• “Eastern Wolf” proposed by FWS as a
SPECIES
ESA Problems
• The review system of ESA documents
within the federal agencies is closed
• Government agencies frequently use
science selectively for the ESA, but Recent
examples of Balanced Science from Gov’t
• The ESA has been dramatically expanded
because it includes subjective subspecies
and populations
• ESA now allows predicting with models
future “Endangerment”
The Wildlife Society
ADVOCACY
STATE AND FEDERAL
WILDLIFE AGENCIES
Partner with Environmental groups
CBD
The entire system of review of science in the
ESA process is closed. FWS or National
Marine Fisheries Service-NMFS creates a
petition or receives a petition from
environmental groups to consider a species for
ESA listing.
FWS reviews the petition, decides if it’s
warranted, prepares a Status Review and a
Proposed Rule and selects peer reviewers of
them. FWS then reviews the peer reviews and
produces a final Status Assessment and
Proposed Rule.
FWS then selects peer reviewers of Proposed
Rule and solicits public comment. FWS then
reviews the peer reviews and public comments
and produces a final rule. FWS can dismiss or
ignore public comments and peer review
comments without accountability.
FWS or NMFS has the role of author, editor, and
reviewer for their own documents.
The potential for litigation challenges to FWS
decisions in this process is slanted because
courts give deference to agencies in assessing
science and management information.
Federal Deference
“Although plaintiffs have proposed many alternative conclusions
that the agency could have drawn with respect to the status of the
polar bear, the Court cannot substitute either the plaintiffs’ or its own
judgment for that of the agency. Instead, this Court is bound to uphold
the agency’s determination that the polar bear is a threatened species as
long as it is reasonable, regardless of whether there may be other
reasonable, or even more reasonable, views. : “Although plaintiffs
have proposed many alternative conclusions that the agency could
have drawn with respect to the status of the polar bear, the Court
cannot substitute either the plaintiffs’ or its own judgment for that of the
agency. Instead, this Court is bound to uphold the agency’s
determination that the polar bear is a threatened species as long as it
is reasonable, regardless of whether there may be other reasonable,
or even more reasonable, views.
Subspecies and Populations are
not well-defined and
Designations for ESA Listings
are often Arbitrary
Current ESA Defines “Species”
as a Species, Subspecies, or
Distinct Population Segment
Agencies also invented the Term
Evolutionarily Significant Unit
(ESU)
Examples
Subspecies
Northern Spotted Owl
Wolf in Southeast Alaska
Mexican Wolf
Goshawk in Southeast Alaska
Wood bison
Examples
Populations
Salmon Stocks in Washington, Oregon,
California (e.g. Klamath)
Grizzly and Wolf in Lower 48 States
Southwestern Alaska Stock Sea Otter
Western Alaska Stock Steller Sea Lion
Beluga Whales in Cook Inlet
Conclusions
• The Current ESA is Deceptive Because it
Includes Undefined Subspecies and
Populations and now Allows Predictions
• Pro-ESA listing bias in the government
agencies is a serious problem
• Use of Models to predict Endangered
Species is becoming common and not good
science
Different Industries, agriculture and
citizens need to work together to
make ESA consistent with American
principles
“We must indeed all hang together, or, most
assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”
Benjamin Franklin
remark to John Hancock at the signing of the
Declaration of Independence 4 July 1776
State or Federal Authority?
“The powers not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States respectively, or to the people.” (10th
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution)
5th Amendment to the U. S.
Constitution
“…nor shall private property be
taken for public use without just
compensation.”
Anticipating ESA?
• “I know of no method to secure the repeal of
bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their
stringent execution.”
• Ulysses S. Grant, Inaugural Address, 4
March 1869
Proposed Action
• Multi-state University-Agency-Industry
project to address science issues for the
ESA
• Land Grant University Agriculture
Departments can help with science and
management
• Include non-wildlife scientists, foresters,
range managers, engineers in private and
public sectors
• Insist on return to Multiple-use management
Change ESA
• 1. Federal Endangered Species Act only
applies to entire species. Subspecies and
populations are managed by States
• 2. The Federal Endangered Species Act
does not apply on Private or State Land
• 3. States have the authority to list and
delist Endangered Species.
Sage Grouse
• Currently designated
“Warranted but precluded”
by higher priorities as an
endangered species