In which energy development is more endangered than the Greater Sage Grouse
As you may have heard, Obama's Interior Department came down with an interesting cognitively dissonant ruling today on the status of the Greater Sage Grouse, a species under considerable threat from habitat destruction throughout its fragmented range, and deserving of more attention even according to a Federal Judge who, in 2007, chastised the Bush administration for not listing it as endangered. Well, the US Fish and Wildlife Service now under Interior Secy Ken Salazar (an Obama appointee who himself comes from the geographic range of the Greater Sage Grouse) completely agreed with that assessment and decreed that "based on accumulated scientific data and new peer-reviewed information and analysis, the greater sage-grouse warrants the protection of the Endangered Species Act..."! So the USFWS agrees that the Greater Sage Grouse is a well-qualified candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act. Great news, right? But - and how conservationists dread that word "but" - that sentence continues "... but that listing the species at this time is precluded by the need to address higher priority species first.". Huh? Another depressingly familiar phrase to conservationists, always being asked to compromise and prioritize...
This decision has, understandably ruffled some feathers and I'm sure you'll find much more in-depth commentary and analysis elsewhere in the wildlife conservation blogosphere over the coming days. For instance, on the one hand, here's Audubon's attempt at a positive spin about how this means working more closely with state and private agencies to improve habitat and conservation planning; and on the other is this grouse from the Center for Biological Diversity, which was one of the petitioners forcing the USFWS to list the species on behalf of its particularly threatened Mono Basin population.
Being more of a distant sympathizer of the Grouse with little first hand knowledge, I won't attempt to offer any detailed response to what the USFWS decided today. I do, however, want to point to that touch of cognitive dissonance I mentioned earlier, as seen in the rest of the USFWS' press release. Remember they said that listing the Greater Sage Grouse was "precluded by the need to address higher priority species first." Oh... so you mean you are going to focus your limited resources on something even more endangered? OK, we can live with that, we are used to being asked to prioritize and compromise. We are grateful that you are at least adding this species to the candidate list, with hope of increased protection when you have more money on hand. Now would you mind telling us what those other species are that have higher priority, so we can try to help with them as well? Lets read the rest of the press release, shall we? Go ahead, read it again! What you'll find is no mention of another higher priority species (the Gunnison Sage Grouse is mentioned, but it isn't even under consideration for listing yet) - but repeated references instead to "new conventional and renewable energy projects"! Here's the Interior Secy himself:
While you ponder that, and pause to appreciate how much change this green administration has brought to the way business is now done, let me share this video about the grouse:
This decision has, understandably ruffled some feathers and I'm sure you'll find much more in-depth commentary and analysis elsewhere in the wildlife conservation blogosphere over the coming days. For instance, on the one hand, here's Audubon's attempt at a positive spin about how this means working more closely with state and private agencies to improve habitat and conservation planning; and on the other is this grouse from the Center for Biological Diversity, which was one of the petitioners forcing the USFWS to list the species on behalf of its particularly threatened Mono Basin population.
Being more of a distant sympathizer of the Grouse with little first hand knowledge, I won't attempt to offer any detailed response to what the USFWS decided today. I do, however, want to point to that touch of cognitive dissonance I mentioned earlier, as seen in the rest of the USFWS' press release. Remember they said that listing the Greater Sage Grouse was "precluded by the need to address higher priority species first." Oh... so you mean you are going to focus your limited resources on something even more endangered? OK, we can live with that, we are used to being asked to prioritize and compromise. We are grateful that you are at least adding this species to the candidate list, with hope of increased protection when you have more money on hand. Now would you mind telling us what those other species are that have higher priority, so we can try to help with them as well? Lets read the rest of the press release, shall we? Go ahead, read it again! What you'll find is no mention of another higher priority species (the Gunnison Sage Grouse is mentioned, but it isn't even under consideration for listing yet) - but repeated references instead to "new conventional and renewable energy projects"! Here's the Interior Secy himself:
“The sage grouse’s decline reflects the extent to which open land in the West has been developed in the last century,” said Salazar. “This development has provided important benefits, but we must find common-sense ways of protecting, restoring, and reconnecting the Western lands that are most important to the species’ survival while responsibly developing much-needed energy resources."In other words, continued oil exploration and new so-called alternative energy projects - all part of the ever expanding western development package responsible for endangering the Grouse (Salazar agrees) - get higher priority than the bird, which must hang its fate on our ability to "responsibly develop" those energy resources that the Grouse has unfortunately evolved to live on top of!
While you ponder that, and pause to appreciate how much change this green administration has brought to the way business is now done, let me share this video about the grouse:
0 comments:
Post a Comment