Contact
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Ian Petersen, Owner Map Your Adventure and Thurston Mountain Biker
Ronna Frank, Thurston Hills Resident
Doug Heiken, Oregon Wild

Judge rules against Thurston Hills timber sale for failure to protect trails

SPRINGFIELD, OR — For the second time in three years, a logging proposal slated to clearcut over 100 acres of forest from the Thurston Hills designated recreation area on the edge of Springfield has been deemed illegal by a federal judge. The Court’s Findings and Recommendations come after years of campaigning by affected landowners and wildlands and recreation enthusiasts working alongside attorneys litigating on behalf of Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild. Landowners living adjacent to Thurston Hills and citizens of Springfield and Eugene have opposed the project since its inception, due to the increased risk of wildfire and the diminished recreational value that clear-cut logging would bring to the area.

Ronna Frank, a community member living on 79th street near the project said:

“It’s been such a relief to hear that the forest I think of as my backyard won’t be destroyed by Seneca Jones Timber Company and the Bureau of Land Management. It never made sense to me why they would want to log such a small but beloved area of forest that’s so close to town when there’s so much other land in the state that isn’t so healthy and so loved. What is even more infuriating is that the public agency readily acknowledges the increased fire risk to our neighborhood associated with the clearcuts they proposed. I am so relieved this reckless project has been shot down again.”

The legal battle over Thurston Hills has centered around the heightened fire risk associated with industrial logging and tree plantation forestry, and the BLM’s failure to protect the area’s recreation values. Seneca Jones and the BLM were attempting to log directly over planned mountain bike and hiking trails that will connect with the existing mountain bike trails on Willamalane’s Thurston Hills Natural Area and the broader Rivers to Ridges recreation vision for the cities of Eugene and Springfield. The Court held for the second time that BLM and Seneca failed to preserve the trails from harvest as originally ordered by a federal judge in 2019.

Ian Petersen, owner of Map Your Adventure and a local mountain biking enthusiast said:

“I am so ready for the BLM to stop trying to clearcut Thurston Hills and just build these much-anticipated trails. This area is destined to become a world-class mountain biking location but not if the BLM clearcuts it. Hopefully the agency will now proceed with expanding the trail system and remove the clearcutting component.”

In 2019, the original timber sale proposal was also defeated in court on the grounds that the BLM failed to properly disclose information on the fire risks associated with the sale. When the sale was revived late last year, the only substantive difference was that the BLM chose to acknowledge the fire risk, without changing the proposal to mitigate the hazard. In light of the recent Holiday Farm Fire which displaced many families upriver from Springfield, this careless regard for our community is disgraceful.

Nick Cady, the Cascadia Wildlands Legal Director, said:

“The science is clear that older forests are more fire resistant than areas that get clearcut and replanted with dense, resinous saplings. That is why it was unfathomable that the BLM was proposing to clearcut the Thurston Hills. The public agency should be in the business of making our public forests more fire resilient, not increasing fire risk to our communities with reckless logging plans.”

Documents released by the BLM’s own scientists show that the logging proposal would drastically increase fire hazard risk for many years:

The fuels specialist reported that the change from a “mature” to an “early successional” stand structural stage would change the associated stand-level hazard from low to moderate/high. AR 2292. The stands would go from a timber model to a slash fuel model with higher predicted flame length, fire duration, and intensity and decreased ability to control a fire, with the greatest risk of a fire start during the first 5 years following harvest. Id.; see also AR 4178–95, 1040–53. Over the next 10 to 40 years, stands would transition through stages associated with high stand-level fire hazard rating and go from a slash fuel to a brush fuel type, which are more volatile and susceptible to high fire-caused mortality rates. AR 2293. These potential fires would have high flame lengths, rates of spread, and intensity and would be difficult to initially attack and control. Id. Overall fire hazard would increase for 5 to 20 years following planting, then drop from high to moderate after the next treatment. Id.

Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild said:

“It’s time for BLM to give these public forests the protection they deserve — for recreation, community livability, water quality, community fire resilience, climate stability, and habitat.”

Additional resources:
Read more about the sale here. Find photographs of the sale here. Find the timber sale documents here.

Cascadia Wildlands defends and restores Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets.

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

###

The post Recreation and Wildlands Enthusiasts Celebrate as Local Clearcut Proposal Defeated in Court for a Second Time first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contact:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity
Danielle Moser, Oregon Wild
Bob Sallinger, Portland Audubon

Lawsuit Filed to Protect North Oregon Coast Red Tree Voles

Tree-Dwelling Vole Threatened by Logging, Wildfire, Climate Change

PORTLAND, Ore.— Conservation groups filed a lawsuit today challenging a decision by the Trump administration to deny the north Oregon coast population of red tree voles protection under the Endangered Species Act.

In response to a 2007 petition from the groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found the vole warranted protection in 2011, but that such protection was precluded by listing other species. That determination was repeatedly reaffirmed until 2019, when the Trump administration abruptly reversed course and denied protections.

Red tree voles on Oregon’s north coast have been devastated by logging, wildfires and inadequate protections on state and private lands.

“We hope the Biden administration takes a close look at this politically driven decision, which is nothing more than another gift to the timber industry that ignores science,” said Noah Greenwald, the Center for Biological Diversity’s endangered species director. “Protecting the red tree vole means protecting the few remaining old forests on Oregon’s north coast. This benefits not just the vole, but also hundreds of other plants and animals, clean water and our climate.”

Red tree voles live nearly their entire lives in trees and are closely associated with old-growth forests. As one of very few mammals that can subsist entirely on conifer needles, tree voles rarely venture from the treetops to the ground, making them exceedingly vulnerable to logging and forest fragmentation. They have been nearly eliminated on the north coast by the long history of logging and wildfires in the region, including on the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests.

“Clearcut logging has reached record highs across the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests, and recent proposals from the Oregon Department of Forestry seek to explicitly ensure that forests are logged before they can become old-growth,” said Danielle Moser of Oregon Wild. “It’s not enough to just protect what remaining red tree vole habitat there is across Oregon’s north coast forests. We must allow some of the overcut tree plantations to mature, recover and become old-growth forests once again.”

The Oregon Department of Forestry is developing a habitat conservation plan that includes the tree vole but relies on very scant information about where it still remains, providing little assurance that the tree vole and the large blocks of old forest it lives in will be allowed to recover.

“Oregon’s north coast has been extensively logged, and the old forest that remains exists in small, isolated patches that shelter increasingly vulnerable populations of tree voles,” said Nick Cady, legal director of Cascadia Wildlands. “Not only do we need to protect what little habitat exists, but proactively restore larger patches of habitat to allow connectivity between the small, existing populations.”

“The plight of the red tree vole along with other species such as the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet speak to the fact that the protections that are in place for Oregon’s older forests remain inadequate,” said Bob Sallinger, conservation director for Portland Audubon. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must follow both the law and the science and provide the red tree vole the protections they warrant before they disappear entirely from Oregon’s North Coast.”

Today’s lawsuit was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands and Portland Audubon.

###

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.7 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Cascadia Wildlands is a grassroots conservation organization that defends and restores Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. We envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and vibrant communities sustained by the unique landscapes of the Cascadia bioregion.

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Audubon Society of Portland was founded in 1902 to promote the understanding, enjoyment and protection of native birds, other wildlife and their habitats.

The post Lawsuit Filed to Protect Red Tree Vole first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contact:
Dylan Plummer, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 531-1858, dylan@cascwild.org

Potentially fatal blow for fracked gas export terminal and pipeline proposed in Oregon

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] — Today, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) upheld the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s denial of a key permit for the proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal and Pacific Connector fracked gas pipeline. The Jordan Cove LNG project cannot move forward without a Clean Water Act approval from the state of Oregon.

This is the latest in a series of regulatory losses for Jordan Cove LNG, representing a huge blow to the 15-year-old proposal that has been vehemently opposed by Tribes, impacted landowers, fishermen, climate advocates, and others. The project has also not qualified for other critical state, federal, and local permits needed to move forward.

In its summary of today’s meeting, FERC wrote: “The order finds that Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector never requested certification with respect to the Commission authorizations for the Jordan Cove Energy Project and that the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality could not have waived its authority to issue certification for a request it never received.”

“The FERC decision is very encouraging. It is certainly our hope that Pembina will give up on this devastating project once and for all,” said Chairman Don Gentry of the Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin Tribes.

“The evidence in the record was clear, FERC had no choice other than to deny Pembina’s request to waive Oregon’s 401 water quality authority,” said impacted Douglas County landower Stacey McLaughlin. “Any approach to seeking approval of its Pacific Connector Pipeline and Jordan Cove Energy Project without proper permits compromises the safety of Oregon’s landowners. Pembina is proving it cannot be trusted—this is not a characteristic seen in a ‘good neighbor.’”

“The headwinds for the Jordan Cove project continue to blow strongly. FERC’s decision to uphold Oregon’s authority to deny a water quality certification for the project demonstrates that measures are in place to protect the Coos Bay estuary and rivers of southern Oregon,” said marine biologist and Coos County resident Dr. Jan Hodder.

“Today’s unanimous FERC decision shows that when our communities come together and speak out, we win! Thousands of southern Oregonians have raised their voices to stop this project for years and will continue to until the threat of Jordan Cove LNG is gone for good,” said Hannah Sohl, executive director of Rogue Climate. “Now we must focus on creating good, local jobs in clean energy and energy efficiency in Oregon.”

“Today’s decision is a huge win for clean water and healthy communities who’ve been fighting this harmful project for nearly 15 years,” said Robyn Janssen, director of Rogue Riverkeeper. “FERC’s decision to uphold Oregon’s 401 denial gives me hope that this is the end for Jordan Cove LNG.”

“Today’s decision confirms Oregon’s right to protect its communities and waters from big polluters like the proposed Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas terminal and pipeline,” said Andrew Hawley, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “We have battled this harmful behemoth for decades and defeated it at every turn. With everything we know today about climate change this project must never again rise from the ashes.”

“Jordan Cove LNG would have threatened the drinking water of nearly 160,000 Oregonians. Today’s FERC decision is a win for public health,” said Damon Motz-Storey, Healthy Climate Program director at Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility. “Oregon’s right to deny Clean Water Act permits on the basis of unacceptable harm to our water resources is vitally important. This is a day to celebrate.”

“For 15 years this climate-polluting proposal threatened landowners, waterways, forests and imperiled species across southern Oregon,” said Dylan Plummer, grassroots organizer with Cascadia Wildlands. “Today, we can finally breathe a sigh of relief, and tomorrow we will redouble our efforts to end this project for good.”

“The latest rejection of the Jordan Cove project is yet another victory for our clean water and our communities. We’ve said time and again that this project will never be built, and today’s announcement is just further proof of that,” said Sierra Club senior attorney Nathan Matthews.

“Jordan Cove LNG was poised to become the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions in our state of Oregon should it have been approved, responsible for 15 times more emissions than the now-closed Boardman coal plant’s annual emissions. This project was a disaster in waiting for the climate and communities in its path, and today’s news from FERC is a welcome relief after years of fighting this dirty project,” said David Turnbull, strategic communications director at Oil Change International. “Let’s hope this is the start of a new era at FERC, where communities and our climate are protected rather than ignored in the face of industry demands.”

The post Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Upholds Oregon’s Denial of Key Jordan Cove LNG Permit first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contact:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746
Kelly Nokes, Western Environmental Law Center, 575-613-8051
John Mellgren, Western Environmental Law Center, 541-359-0990
Erik Molvar, Western Watersheds Project, 307-399-7910
Lindsay Larris, WildEarth Guardians, 310-923-1465

Today, a coalition of Western wolf advocates challenged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to prematurely strip wolves of federal protections in the contiguous 48 states, in violation of the Endangered Species Act.

The most recent data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and its state partners show an estimated 4,400 wolves inhabit the western Great Lakes states, but only 108 wolves in Washington state (with only 20 outside of eastern Washington), 158 in Oregon (with only 16 outside of northeastern Oregon), and a scant 15 exist in California. Nevada, Utah, and Colorado have had a few wolf sightings over the past three years, but wolves remain functionally absent from their historical habitat in these states.

“Wolves are a keystone species whose presence on landscapes regulates animal populations and improves ecosystem health – something the Service has acknowledged for at least 44 years,” said Kelly Nokes, Western Environmental Law Center attorney. “Allowing people to kill wolves in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana has already stunted recovery in those states. Applying this same death sentence to wolves throughout the contiguous U.S. would nationalize these negative effects, with potentially catastrophic ripple effects on ecosystems where wolves have yet to fully recover.”

In delisting wolves, the Service ignored the science showing they are not recovered in the West. The Service concluded that because in its belief there are sufficient wolves in the Great Lakes states, it does not matter that wolves in the West are not yet recovered. The Endangered Species Act demands more, including restoring the species in the ample suitable habitats afforded by the wild public lands throughout the West. Indeed, wolves are listed as endangered under state laws in Washington and California, and wolves only occupy a small portion of available, suitable habitat in Oregon. Likewise, wolves have only just begun to recolonize their historical, wild, public lands habitat in much of the West, including in Colorado and the southern Rockies.

“From a scientific standpoint, wolves are nowhere near being recovered in the western United States,” said Erik Molvar, a wildlife biologist and executive director with Western Watersheds Project. “The federal government has the obligation to keep wolves protected until robust and secure populations are in place throughout the West, and we intend to ensure that wolves get the legal defense they need against premature delisting.”

“We have seen what happens when ‘management’ of wolves is returned to hostile state wildlife agencies disinterested in maintaining robust, stable, and genetically diverse wolf populations,” said Lindsay Larris, Wildlife Program director at WildEarth Guardians. “Idaho, which allows an individual to kill up to 30 wolves annually, saw the slaughter of nearly 600 wolves and wolf pups in a recent 12-month period and now other states are gearing up to allow wolf hunting and trapping this fall. Returning this type of unscientific and barbaric ‘management’ to states at this early juncture would spell disaster for true gray wolf recovery, plain and simple.”

The conservation groups have long been active on wolf recovery issues in the American West, including working with Western states to develop science-based wolf management plans, mounting cases to rein in rogue federal government wolf-killing programs, promoting recovery efforts in the Southwest for critically imperiled Mexican gray wolves, and working with local governments and landowners to deploy non-lethal tools that prevent wolf-livestock conflicts.

“With only a handful of wolves in California, western Oregon, and western Washington, wolf recovery is still precarious on the west coast,” said John Mellgren, Western Environmental Law Center general counsel. “A rush to delist the species across the entire country runs counter to the Service’s own peer review, and tells West Coast states that wolf recovery in their part of the country does not matter. We look forward to presenting the science to a federal court.”

While the Trump administration may believe it can disregard science to promote purely political listing decisions, the law does not support such a stance. The best available science says gray wolves are not recovered, and the coalition looks forward to having a court hear their science-based arguments for why wolves still need of Endangered Species Act protections to truly recover across the species range.

“In just the last year, we lost an icon to wolf recovery when OR-7 passed away. He and his mate represent the first generation of wolves in western Oregon in nearly a century,” said Joseph Vaile with the conservation group Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center based in southwest Oregon. “Delisting is clearly premature and obviously politically driven. It’s a last-ditch effort by the Trump administration to strip away protections for recovering wildlife.”

“Removing Endangered Species Act protections for any species should be based science, not politics, and the science tells us wolves are not there yet,” said Chris Bachman, Wildlife Program director at The Lands Council. “The gray wolf remains functionally extinct in 85% of its historic range, with 70% of suitable habitat remaining unoccupied across the lower 48 states. Legal protections must remain in place for the gray wolf to allow wider dispersal across a significant portion of its range.”

“Wolves were nearly exterminated from the lower 48. We should be celebrating the species’ ongoing recovery and the incredible success stories of the Endangered Species Act,” said Nick Cady, Legal Director with Cascadia Wildlands. “Instead, wolves have become another victim of the polarization and political game-playing in Washington D.C., and conservation groups are left battling to stem rising calls for active eradication of the species. Conservation of native species formerly enjoyed widespread bipartisan support. The actions of this administration toward wildlife are shameful.”

“The finger on the trigger of wolf slaughter is driven by anti-government fanatics who foment fear, lies and mistrust. The Endangered Species Act makes such hostility to wild nature more difficult, more closely watched,” said Timothy Coleman, director of Kettle Range Conservation Group and former member of the state Wolf Advisory Group. “Eighty-five percent of wolves we know were killed in Washington were in the Kettle River Range where gray wolf was delisted from the Endangered Species Act in 2009, though it remained state listed endangered. Had it remained Endangered Species Act-listed, entire wolf families would not have been repeatedly killed in northeast Washington. Regionally, this has meant wolves are not dispersing to Mount Rainier and Olympia National Park, or other public lands in the Pacific Northwest.”

“California’s wolves are just starting to return home,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director at the Environmental Protection Information Center. “A politically driven delisting puts wolf recovery in jeopardy by stripping protections at the moment they are needed most.”

“We must learn to coexist with gray wolves. These highly intelligent and social animals play a key role in balancing entire ecosystems,” said Kimberly Baker of the Klamath Forest Alliance. “Federal protection is paramount to safeguarding this nation’s rightful heritage.”

The coalition of western wildlife advocates launching this legal challenge includes WildEarth Guardians, Western Watersheds Project, Cascadia Wildlands, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC), The Lands Council, Wildlands Network, Klamath Forest Alliance, and Kettle Range Conservation Group, represented by the Western Environmental Law Center. A separate lawsuit is planned by Earthjustice representing national wildlife groups.

The post Western Wolf Coalition Challenges Nationwide Wolf Delisting first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Susan Jane Brown, Western Environmental Law Center, 503-914-1323, brown@westernlaw.org
Tom Wheeler, EPIC, 206 356 8689, tom@wildcalifornia.org
Bethany Cotton, Cascadia Wildlands, 503-327-4923, Bethany@cascwild.org

Today, with six days remaining in the Trump administration, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a final rule eliminating 3.4 million acres of critical habitat for the northern spotted owl in Washington state, Oregon, and California. This decision comes one month after the Service announced that the species should be uplisted from threatened to endangered, but the agency is too busy to provide these desperately needed protections. The elimination of 42% of the endangered species’ critical habitat would likely result in extinction for the northern spotted owl in the U.S. This final rule results from a sweetheart settlement between the Trump administration and the timber industry.

“On one hand, you have biologists acknowledging that northern spotted owls are extremely close to extinction and more must be done to prevent the extinction of the species,” said Susan Jane Brown, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “On the other, you have the Trump administration catering to the demands of an out-of-touch timber industry. Placing commercial interests ahead of the continued existence of this iconic species is shameful, and thankfully, not permitted by the Endangered Species Act.”

Today’s final rule adds insult to injury by brazenly defying the Endangered Species Act to facilitate enormously expanded logging in northern spotted owl critical habitat, in particular on the entirety of Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands, known as the O&C Lands, comprising 2.4 million acres. WELC and our partners will challenge this final rule in court to prevent the near-assured extinction of the northern spotted owl.

“Here in southern Oregon this is a death sentence for owls,” said George Sexton, conservation director for Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center. “This decision is intended to speed the clearcutting of the last remaining fragments of old-growth forests on Bureau of Land Management public lands.”

“The Trump administration claimed in December it was too busy to reclassify the owl as endangered. Today, it voluntarily removed millions of acres of critical habitat as a last-gasp gift to the timber industry,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of EPIC. “This brazen hypocrisy would be staggering, if we hadn’t gotten used to it over the past four years of the Trump administration.”

“The Fish and Wildlife Service is charged with recovering imperiled species like the declining northern spotted owl, not with prioritizing private timber interests,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands. “We must return to following the law and the science if we are to prevent the extinction of iconic wildlife like the owl.”

General background:
Timber harvesting in the Northwest has resulted in a widespread loss of spotted owl habitat across its range, which was a main reason for prompting the listing of the species in 1990. Owls depend on habitat provided by the dense canopy of mature and old-growth forests; unfortunately, those forests are still a target for logging throughout the bird’s historic range. The northern spotted owl is already functionally extinct in its northernmost range, with only one recognized breeding pair left in British Columbia.

In response to a court order, in 1990 the Service listed the northern spotted owl as threatened, citing low and declining populations, limited and declining habitat, competition from barred owls, and other factors in the bird’s plight. Even after its listing, northern spotted owl populations have declined by 70%, and the rate of decline has increased.

Additional background from the Service (source):
“Habitat loss was the primary factor leading to the listing of the northern spotted owl as a threatened species, and it continues to be a stressor on the subspecies due to the lag effects of past habitat loss, continued timber harvest, wildfire, and a minor amount from insect and forest disease outbreaks.”

“On non-Federal lands, State regulatory mechanisms have not prevented the continued decline of nesting/roosting and foraging habitat; the amount of northern spotted owl habitat on these lands has decreased considerably over the past two decades, including in geographic areas where Federal lands are lacking. On Federal lands, the Northwest Forest Plan has reduced habitat loss and allowed for the development of new northern spotted owl habitat; however, the combined effects of climate change, high severity wildfire, and past management practices are changing forest ecosystem processes and dynamics, and the expansion of barred owl populations is altering the capacity of intact habitat to support northern spotted owls.”

“Based on our review of the best available scientific and commercial information pertaining to the factors affecting the northern spotted owl, we find that the stressors acting on the subspecies and its habitat, particularly rangewide competition from the nonnative barred owl and high-severity wildfire, are of such imminence, intensity, and magnitude to indicate that the northern spotted owl is now in danger of extinction throughout all of its range. Our status review indicates that the northern spotted owl meets the definition of an endangered species. Therefore, in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act, we find that listing the northern spotted owl as an endangered species is warranted throughout all of its range. However, work on a reclassification for the northern spotted owl has been, and continues to be, precluded by work on higher-priority actions—which includes listing actions with statutory, court-ordered, or court approved deadlines and final listing determinations.”

The post USFWS cuts northern spotted owl critical habitat by 42% in likely death sentence for species first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746, nick@cascwild.org

Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a finding on the northern spotted owl’s listing status, spurred by a lawsuit filed last week by wildlife advocates. The finding states “reclassification of the northern spotted owl from a threatened species to an endangered species is warranted but precluded by higher priority actions to amend the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. We will develop a proposed rule to reclassify the northern spotted owl as our priorities allow.”

The advocates’ complaint, filed last week, came after the Service failed to take multiple actions required by the Endangered Species Act to protect the northern spotted owl from extinction over the course of nearly a decade.

“On the one hand, you have biologists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledging that northern spotted owls are extremely close to extinction and more must be done to prevent the extinction of the species,” said Susan Jane Brown, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “On the other, you have the Trump administration catering to the demands of an out-of-touch timber industry. Placing commercial interests ahead of the continued existence of this iconic species is shameful, and thankfully, not permitted by the Endangered Species Act.”

“While we are glad that the Service has acknowledged the reality—northern spotted owls are rapidly going extinct—today’s announcement is also illustrative of the failures of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center. “The Service only acted under threat of lawsuit and the agency still managed to squirm out of any real action by complaining it has too much work to do. Delay and inaction are precisely how we are driving the spotted owl to extinction.”

Timber harvesting in the Northwest has resulted in a widespread loss of spotted owl habitat across its range, which was a main reason for prompting the listing of the species in 1990. Owls depend on habitat provided by the dense canopy of mature and old-growth forests; unfortunately, those forests are still a target for logging throughout the bird’s historic range. The northern spotted owl is already functionally extinct in its northernmost range, with only one recognized breeding pair left in British Columbia.

“We know that climate change and the loss of high-quality habitat are imminent threats to the spotted owl,” said Joseph Vaile, climate director at Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center. “If we wait years or decades for federal officials to address these issues, it will be too late.”

“The owl is biologically determined to be endangered, yet the agency continues to find excuses do nothing,” said Kimberly Baker, executive director of the Klamath Forest Alliance. “The Endangered Species Act demands action from the Service, not excuses.”

“The Fish and Wildlife Service says the spotted owl deserves protection as an endangered species but can’t be bothered to actually do it,” said Doug Heiken with Oregon Wild. “This makes no sense. The Service has already made the finding that the owl is endangered of extinction. The owl is already listed as threatened. The owl already has critical habitat, and already has a recovery plan. How much more work is it to move the check mark from the threatened column to the endangered column and start giving the owl the protection it deserves?”

“Despite today’s announcement that the northern spotted owl is ‘unofficially endangered’ and likely to go extinct, the Service has prioritized working against its recovery under the Trump administration,” Brown said. In August 2020, the Service settled a timber industry lawsuit by proposing to eliminate more than 200,000 acres of northern spotted owl critical habitat. Before January 20, 2021, the Service will make a decision that may diminish designated northern spotted owl critical habitat on a scale that dwarfs the aforementioned reduction proposal. “We will wait and see what further decisions the Service makes regarding the fate of the spotted owl before deciding how we move forward in light of today’s announcement,” Brown said.

In response to a court order, in 1990 the Service listed the northern spotted owl as threatened, citing low and declining populations, limited and declining habitat, competition from barred owls, and other factors in the bird’s plight. Even after its listing, northern spotted owl populations have declined by 70%, and the rate of decline has increased.

Additional Background from the Service’s Announcement Today:

“Habitat loss was the primary factor leading to the listing of the northern spotted owl as a threatened species, and it continues to be a stressor on the subspecies due to the lag effects of past habitat loss, continued timber harvest, wildfire, and a minor amount from insect and forest disease outbreaks.”

“On non-Federal lands, State regulatory mechanisms have not prevented the continued decline of nesting/roosting and foraging habitat; the amount of northern spotted owl habitat on these lands has decreased considerably over the past two decades, including in geographic areas where Federal lands are lacking. On Federal lands, the Northwest Forest Plan has reduced habitat loss and allowed for the development of new northern spotted owl habitat; however, the combined effects of climate change, high severity wildfire, and past management practices are changing forest ecosystem processes and dynamics, and the expansion of barred owl populations is altering the capacity of intact habitat to support northern spotted owls.”

“Based on our review of the best available scientific and commercial information pertaining to the factors affecting the northern spotted owl, we find that the stressors acting on the subspecies and its habitat, particularly rangewide competition from the nonnative barred owl and high-severity wildfire, are of such imminence, intensity, and magnitude to indicate that the northern spotted owl is now in danger of extinction throughout all of its range. Our status review indicates that the northern spotted owl meets the definition of an endangered species. Therefore, in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act, we find that listing the northern spotted owl as an endangered species is warranted throughout all of its range. However, work on a reclassification for the northern spotted owl has been, and continues to be, precluded by work on higher-priority actions—which includes listing actions with statutory, court-ordered, or court approved deadlines and final listing determinations.”

###

The post USFWS: Northern spotted owls are endangered, but we’re too busy to help first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746, nick@cascwild.org
Matthew Bishop, Western Environmental Law Center, 406-422-9866, bishop@westernlaw.org 

Coalition lawsuit: Science says wolverines need protection

Today, a coalition of wildlife advocates challenged the Trump Fish and Wildlife Service’s (the Service’s) decision to deny protections to imperiled wolverines under the Endangered Species Act. This is the second time the Service has prioritized politics over science for wolverines, which number about 300 in the contiguous U.S.

The groups in today’s filing defeated the Service in court in 2016, forcing the agency back to the drawing board with a directive to apply the best science. Four years later, the Service has returned with the same decision to deny wolverine protective status, despite no new scientific support for such a determination.

“This is yet another chapter in this administration’s war on science,” said Matthew Bishop, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center. “Public records reveal the Service decided not to protect wolverine from day one and then worked backwards to figure out how to make the decision stick. It’s really unfortunate.”

In April 2016, a federal judge sided with conservation groups, agreeing that the Service’s August 2014 decision not to list wolverine as threatened was arbitrary and contrary to the scientific literature. The court held: “[T]he Service’s decision against listing the wolverine as threatened under the ESA is arbitrary and capricious.

“No greater level of certainty is needed to see the writing on the wall for this snow-dependent species standing squarely in the path of global climate change. It has taken us twenty years to get to this point. It is the [court’s] view that if there is one thing required of the Service under the ESA, it is to take action at the earliest possible, defensible point in time to protect against the loss of biodiversity within our reach as a nation. For the wolverine, that time is now (Opinion at page 83).”

The court also noted clear evidence of political interference in the Service’s reversal. “Why did the Service make the decision [to not list the wolverine]?…Based on the record, the Court suspects that a possible answer to this question can be found in the immense political pressure that was brought to bear on this issue, particularly by a handful of western states (Opinion at page 56).”

Before its decisions to deny wolverines endangered species protections, the Service identified climate change, in conjunction with small population size, as the primary threat to the species’ existence in the contiguous U.S.

The wolverine relies on snow year-round. With its large paws, it can travel easily over snow, and often relies on deep snow for hunting. Snow is also a “freezer” that permits the wolverine to store and scavenge food. One study found 98% of all wolverine den sites in places with persistent snowpack.

Published, peer-reviewed research, the independent Society for Conservation Biology, the majority of experts who reviewed the decision, and the Service’s own biologists all verified this finding.

The Service proposed listing the wolverine as a “threatened” species under the ESA in 2013. At the eleventh hour, however, the Service reversed course and chose not to protect wolverine, citing too many “uncertainties” in the scientific literature. This dubious about-face led the court to reverse the decision.

Today’s complaint aims to ensure the Service utilizes the best available science when making listing decisions, and provide wolverines the protective status they desperately need and deserve.

“This is something we were really hoping to avoid after the court’s 2016 decision,” said Bishop. “I was cautiously optimistic the Service would get it right this time and we’d be focusing our time and energy on developing a conservation strategy, recovery plan, critical habitat, and possibly reintroduction efforts for wolverine. Instead, we’re back in court challenging an agency that continues to put politics over science.”

The groups on today’s complaint include WildEarth Guardians, Friends Of The Bitterroot, Friends Of The Wild Swan, Swan View Coalition, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands, Alliance For The Wild Rockies, Cottonwood Environmental Law Center, George Wuerthner, Footloose Montana, Native Ecosystems Council, Wildlands Network, Helena Hunters and Anglers Association.

Background:

Wolverine number just 250-300 individuals in the contiguous U.S. and are dependent on high elevation habitat with deep winter snows. Imperiled by climate change, habitat loss, small population size and trapping, wolverine were first petitioned for Endangered Species Act protections in 2000. The Service found the petition did not contain adequate information to justify a listing. A federal court overturned that decision in 2006. The Service then issued a negative 12-month finding in 2008, which was challenged in court resulting in a settlement that led to a new finding that wolverine should be protected under the ESA, but that other priorities precluded the listing at that time. A landmark settlement, which resolved the backlog of imperiled species awaiting protections, then guaranteed a new finding for wolverine. In February 2013, the Service proposed listing the wolverine as “threatened” under the ESA. In August 2014, however, the Service reversed course and issued a decision not to list the species, contradicting its own expert scientists’ recommendations. In April, 2016 the court overturned the Service’s decision not to list, reinstating wolverine’s status as a candidate species and requiring a new final rule. Today’s decision is the result.

###

The post Lawsuit Filed to Protect Imperiled Wolverine first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contact:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746, nick@cascwild.org

Lawsuit filed against USFWS for failing to follow through with protecting the northern spotted owl

Today, a group of wildlife advocates filed a complaint in federal district court against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the Service) for falling to take multiple actions required by the Endangered Species Act to protect the northern spotted owl from extinction.

In 2015, wildlife advocates petitioned the Service to increase protections for the owl by “uplisting” the species from threatened to endangered due to declining habitat, effects of climate change, and competition from the invasive barred owl. The Service stated uplisting is warranted, committing to publish an analysis of the issue that would also satisfy a legal obligation to complete a five-year status review of the species. Since then, the Service has produced no such analysis, nearly a decade has passed since the last northern spotted owl species status review, and the northern spotted owl continues to slide towards extinction.

“The word for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s approach to northern spotted owl recovery is ‘negligent,’” said Susan Jane Brown, Wildlands Program director with the Western Environmental Law Center. “We’re at an inflection point for these iconic birds: With urgent action they can recover, but without it they could be wiped off the face of the Earth. Nine years of dithering from our wildlife managers is unjustifiable.”

“All the best available information suggests that the spotted owl is going extinct and doing so quickly,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center. “The most recent survey data shows that the owl is in decline across its entire range and that the rate of decline is increasing. If we don’t act now and with great urgency, the other thing our grandchildren will inherit is the story of how we failed this owl.”

Timber harvesting in the Northwest has resulted in a widespread loss of spotted owl habitat across its range, which was a main reason for prompting the listing of the species in 1990. Owls depend on habitat provided by the dense canopy of mature and old-growth forests; unfortunately, those forest stands are still a target for logging throughout the bird’s historic range. The northern spotted owl is already functionally extinct in its northernmost range, with only one recognized breeding pair left in British Columbia.

“The mature and old-growth forest habitat that this species depends on is continually diminished, particularly from logging on our public lands. Every year there are fewer and fewer reproductive owl pairs,” stated Kimberly Baker, executive director of the Klamath Forest Alliance. “Despite this fact, the Service has allowed habitat destruction to continue for nearly a decade without considering population numbers on a regional scale. It’s beyond time for the Service to check the owl’s status and guard them from extinction.”

“Climate change-driven wildfires and the barred owl are new threats to the spotted owl,” said Joseph Vaile, climate director for the southwest Oregon-based Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center. “These new threats demand that we save every bit of ancient forest owl habitat that we have left.”

“Over the past four years, federal land managers have begun targeting mature and old-growth forests that provide essential habitat for northern spotted owls, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has whole-heartedly endorsed this logging,” said Nick Cady with Cascadia Wildlands. “We have converted enormous swaths of old-growth rainforest into fiber farms and timber plantations. This is one reason we are witnessing catastrophic fires and older forest species are going extinct. We over did it in the past, and the agency charged with putting on the brakes is green-lighting the most intensive logging we have seen in decades.”

“An endangered listing is a first step toward better protecting spotted owls and their old forest habitat,” said Dave Werntz, science and conservation director at Conservation Northwest.

In 1990 and in response to a court order, the Service listed the northern spotted owl as threatened, citing low and declining populations, limited and declining habitat, competition from barred owls, and other factors in the bird’s plight. Even after its listing, northern spotted owl populations have continued to decline, and the rate of decline has increased. In August 2020, the Trump administration settled a timber industry lawsuit by proposing to eliminate more than 200,000 acres of northern spotted owl critical habitat, further precluding this magnificent raptor’s recovery.

The organizations challenging the Service’s dilatory actions are the Environmental Protection Information Center, Cascadia Wildlands, Conservation Northwest, Klamath Forest Alliance, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Oregon Wild, and Audubon Society of Portland. They are represented by the Western Environmental Law Center.

###

The post Time’s up: Feds missed deadlines for years, harming imperiled northern spotted owls first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contact:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, 314-482-3746, nick@cascwild.org

Today, a coalition of conservation organizations filed a complaint in federal court challenging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (the Service’s) decision to forgo recovery planning for threatened Canada lynx.

Recovery plans are important tools required by the Endangered Species Act, often referred to as the “roadmap” for conservation because they spell out what the agency needs to do to recover a species and how best to do it. Recovery plans also include metrics that must be met before the Service may deem a species recovered.

In 2013, conservation organizations sued the Service for failing to prepare a recovery plan for threatened lynx, following nearly 14 years of delay. The court agreed and directed the agency to prepare a recovery plan by January 2018.

A month before the January 2018 deadline, however, the Service decided to forgo preparing a recovery plan on the theory that lynx are already “recovered” and no longer threatened in the contiguous U.S. The Service said it would therefore focus its time and energy on delisting and removing protections for the species, rather than recovery planning.

“The Trump Administration is playing political games with iconic species that are in serious risk of extinction,” said Nick Cady with Cascadia Wildlands. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s own scientists determined lynx were not recovered and that proactive efforts are needed to curb significant, ongoing habitat loss from climate change and related warming and longer fire seasons. The conservation of endangered species used to enjoy widespread bipartisan support, and recovery decisions were rooted in science.  It looks like nothing is sacred anymore, and lynx are one of many species paying the price.”

Background

Lynx and their habitat are threatened by climate change, wildfires, logging, development, motorized access and trapping, which disturb and fragment the landscape. Lynx rely heavily on snowshoe hare, and like their preferred prey, are specially adapted to living in mature boreal forests with dense cover and deep snowpack. Climate change may also increase hare predation from other species, resulting in increased competition and displacement of lynx.

Since designating Canada lynx as threatened under the Endangered Species Act 20 years ago in 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has gone to extraordinary lengths to deny protections to the big cat. The agency had to be sued to list the species, amend the species’ listing status (to cover all of its range in the contiguous United States), prepare a recovery plan, and to designate critical habitat. WELC litigation prompted many of these actions.

###

The post Missing lynx: Advocates challenge Feds’ refusal to prepare recovery plan first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

This work was only possible with your support – THANK YOU!

The court ruled that FDA failed to analyze the serious risks to endangered salmon and other environmental impacts of this novel GE fish. The court declared FDA’s failures violated both the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. Genetically engineered animals create unique risks and regulators must rigorously analyze them using sound science, not stick their head in the sand as the officials did here. In reality, this engineered fish offers nothing but unstudied risks. The absolute last thing our planet needs right now is another human-created crisis like escaped genetically engineered fish running amok.

The most important part of the court’s decision yesterday was its resounding rejection of FDA’s far-reaching argument that the agency had no duty to protect against the environmental impacts of the GE salmon, or any future GE animal. Thanks to our lawsuit, FDA has to make a new GE salmon decision that accounts for and protects against those dangers. And it has to do the same for any future GE animals.

Yesterday’s victory was the result of over 4 years of hard-fought litigation: In 2016, Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Earthjustice — representing Cascadia Wildlands and a broad client coalition of environmental, consumer, commercial, and recreational fishing organizations — sued the FDA for approving the first-ever commercial genetically engineered animal, an Atlantic salmon engineered to grow twice as fast as its wild counterpart. The genetically engineered salmon was produced by AquaBounty Technologies Inc. with DNA from Atlantic salmon, Pacific king salmon, and Arctic Ocean eelpout. This marks the first time any government in the world has approved a commercially genetically engineered animal as food.

Studies have shown that there is a high risk for genetically engineered organisms to escape into the natural environment, and that genetically engineered salmon can crossbreed with native fish. “Transgenic contamination” — where genetically engineered crops cross-pollinate or establish themselves in nearby fields or the wild — has become common. These contamination episodes have cost U.S. farmers billions of dollars over the past decade. In wild organisms like fish, the damage would be even severe. 

Currently there are no genetically engineered fish being sold in the U.S., and if any fish were to be sold, it would be required to be labeled as genetically engineered. And thanks to pressure from Cascadia Wildlands members like you, dozens of retailers such as Kroger have already pledged to NOT sell GE salmon!

Lawsuits such as these take many years and thousands of hours.
Thank you for helping make this victory possible!

The post Victory! Court rules GE Salmon Approval Unlawful! first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.