Endangered Species & Wetlands Report

Here’s the text of an FWS press release that just came out:

Contacts: Tom Buckley, (505) 248-6455, Tom_Buckley@fws.gov
Bruce Sitko, (928) 367-4281, bsitko@azgfd.gov

The National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory in Ashland, Oregon, has determined that Mexican wolf mp1242 died as the result of a gunshot wound.

On November 23, 2011, Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) personnel on the Mexican Wolf Interagency Field Team (IFT) were contacted by a member of the public who reported seeing an injured Mexican wolf in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests south of Big Lake, Ariz. The IFT located and observed the wolf the next day by tracking its radio collar signal. They identified it as mp1242, a young male that was born earlier in 2011 into the Bluestem Pack. After confirming the wolf was injured, the IFT initiated efforts to capture the animal and evaluate its injury.

The IFT captured mp1242 on December 3 and found that it had an injured rear leg and was in poor body condition. In phone consultation with a veterinarian, project personnel attempted to implement life-saving measures en route to the veterinarian office, but the wolf died of its injuries.

“I am disappointed and concerned by this news of another wolf dying due to gunshot wounds,” said Benjamin Tuggle, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Southwest Regional Director. “It is hard for me to rationalize the illegal killing of these wolves or any other endangered species. They are the natural heritage we are hoping to leave to future generations.”

“We are bringing the full weight of the law to bear on these illegal activities and will continue to focus on this impediment to recovery,” said Tuggle.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) law enforcement agents, in collaboration with the AGFD have opened an investigation. All of the Service’s available regional law enforcement resources are being utilized.

A reward of up to $10,000 is being offered for any information leading to the apprehension of the individual or individuals who may be responsible for the death of this wolf. Individuals who have information are urged to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Law Enforcement in Albuquerque, New Mexico at (505) 346-7828 or in Alpine, Arizona. at (928) 339-4232, or AGFD Operation Game Thief hotline at (800) 352-0700. Killing a Mexican gray wolf is a violation of the Endangered Species Act, punishable by up to a $100,000 fine and/or up to a year in prison.

Mexican wolf reintroduction is a joint effort by the Service, AGFD, White Mountain Apache Tribe, USDA Forest Service, USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service – Wildlife Services, and other stakeholders, including Graham, Greenlee and Navajo Counties in Arizona.

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated professionals and commitment to public service. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service works cooperatively with the American public to continue the conservation legacy of America’s great outdoors. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen, visit www.fws.gov.

Latest issue is here

Recent news links:

• GAO releases report on “quantity, quality, and management of water produced during oil and gas production (full report in PDF)
• In 2-1 ruling, Ninth Circuit orders Forest Service to take another look at Sierra Nevada plan (2/3)
• Budget released: Obama Administration keeps FWS funding steady, proposes hike in listing, cut in critical habitat (entire Greenbook)
• Excerpt from Endangered Species section, page 9: “In addition to the $2,932,000 that would be shifted to listing from within the subcap for critical habitat designation for already listed species, the service is requesting an increase of $1,500,000. Settlement agreements and a multi-year work plan approved by a federal district court in 2011 have allowed the service to address our backlog of listing determinations for candidate species, including critical habitat designations concurrent with the listing. This redistribution and increase of funding for listing will be used to meet the terms and conditions of these settlements and allow the service to address the highest biological priorities of the listing program for the years ahead. The funding increase in listing will allow the service to publish approximately 13 additional proposed or final rules in FY 2013.”

KESSLER TOSSES COUNTERPART NFP REGS

A federal judge has invalidated regulations from 2003 designed to “streamline consultation on proposed projects that support the National Fire Plan” (Defenders of Wildlife v. Salazar, 04-1230 GK, D.D.C.). (Opinion and order here.) The “joint counterpart” regulations were issued by six federal agencies — BLM, the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the Department of the Interior; the Forest Service (in USDA), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (or NOAA Fisheries) in the Department of Commerce. Ruling on a motion for reconsideration of her 2006 opinion, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler in Washington, D.C., concluded that “there is no evidence” to support either of the rationales offered in the final adoption of the regulations. (Here are Kessler’s 2006 opinion and order.)

She said the government “seemed to recognize” that its argument that fire consultations were taking too long was unjustified.

“There is simply no evidence in the record that the Section 7 consultation process actually resulted in any delay to any National Fire Plan project,” she said. “The government itself seemed to recognize that fact in its Final Rule when it said that ‘the issue is not whether the regulatory process has delayed NFP projects, but rather whether it can be streamlined so as to expedite the projects.”

In fact, she said, “there is undisputed evidence in the record that the pre-existing consultation procedures had, in the very recent past, been streamlined so as to expedite the processing of NFP projects without sacrificing the safeguards contained in those procedures.”

“By the time the Government adopted the final Regulations, it conceded that the preexisting, recently streamlined, Section 7 consultation processes were working: that streamlined process significantly improved coordination between the consulting agencies, and that ‘[t]hese types of streamlining processes can work well to meet statutory timelines.’ 68 Fed. Reg at 68259.”