Following a day of discussions on sustainability, energy development, and climate change in the Big Tent, Center for Native Ecosystems and Earthjustice will host a panel on what global warming will mean to wildlife, endangered species and the West in the coming years, as well as what can be done about it. The panel will feature leaders from the science, religious, sportsmen and advocacy communities, and Earthjustice's "Irreplaceable Wildlife" exhibit - wildlife photography by world-class photographers that features many of the likely first victims of climate change.

The panel will take place on Wednesday Aug. 27th from 2-3 pm in the Alliance Building's Third Floor conference room.  To learn more about endangered species in the Southern Rockies that will likely be affected by climate change, visit our Climate Change Campaign page.  To learn more about "Irreplaceable Wildlife," go to www.irreplaceablewild.org.

Currently, CRP enrollees who terminate their contract early must reimburse the federal government for the all of the payments received, plus interest, and a penalty of 25 percent of the total rental payments received. The ruling on penalty-free early opt-outs of conservation contracts by U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer will protect up to 24 million acres of fragile lands from immediate crop production. In the wake of record prices for corn, however, (ironically due in part to subsidies for biofuels and the biofuels mandate) long-term conservation of these lands seem unlikely. Already many landowners have chosen not to re-sign their lands in the CRP program, which pays landowners to keep fallow for 10-15 years lands that are highly erodible and marginal for crop production. With more than nine million acres of additional CRP lands due to expire in the next three years, and corn trading at record prices, many of these landowners are expected to decline re-enrolling their CRP lands. While steep corn prices are hurting everyone, from ranchers to the food industry and consumers, according to Sara Hopper of Environmental Defense, putting millions of acres of environmentally sensitive land back into crop production would result in the loss of billions of dollars in taxpayer investments in conservation while providing little, if any, relief from high prices.

To learn more about the Conservation Reserve Program and environmental harm that could come from  landowners  opting  out of the program in large numbers, check out this CRP fact sheet by our friends at Environmental Defense.

Background on the Conservation Reserve Program 

(from US Newswire)

CRP is a federal program designed to reward farmers who take fragile land out of production for 10 to 15 years and instead plant grasses or trees or restore wetlands. Up until now, CRP enrollees who terminated their contracts prior to the end of their 10- to 15-year terms had to reimburse - with interest - the federal government for the rental and cost-share payments they had received, plus pay a 25 percent penalty. Some members of Congress and producer groups had proposed that the USDA waive all these costs for program participants.

Lands are enrolled in CRP precisely because they are environmentally sensitive, highly erodible, and marginally productive cropland. While these lands are generally less reliable for producing row crops, they deliver significant public benefits by retaining soil and preventing erosion, cleansing polluted runoff, providing important wildlife habitat and serving as natural flood barriers. Wetland restorations on CRP lands function as an important safety valve, reducing peak flows during storm events by holding water, filtering it, and slowly releasing it into streams and groundwater.

Today is the solstice – a good time to reflect on what has been and what is to come.

Recently in an interview on radio station KGNU I was asked if the due date for responding to one of the latest salvos from the Bush administration (gutting the Bureau of Land Management’s Special Status Species Manual) was January 20^th.  Ha ha.  Well, if that’s the way you want to look at it, I think the effective due date would actually be November 4^th.

I have only done advocacy work under the Bush administration (started with CNE in 2001), so it’s hard to imagine what life might be like under a different approach to endangered species (e.g., one involving conservation of endangered species...).  I am dreaming of the day when most of my time is spent on working on recovery issues, rather than just beating back the attempts to take away every shred of protection rare plants and animals have managed to hang on to.

As much as I love a good exposé, I would rather be helping Rocky Mountain National Park reintroduce boreal toads (planned for next week!) than be helping shed light on a scandal big enough to make the cover of Newsweek (our evidence that Julie MacDonald ordered the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to deny Endangered Species Act protection for the white-tailed prairie dog made it in there) or cataloging for the Denver Post all of the last ditch attempts the administration has cooking to wreak havoc on the environment in Colorado.  Maybe next year.

In the meantime, here’s what else is on my calendar between now and then which will keep me going, in more-or-less chronological order:

• Fellow Staff Biologist Megan’s wedding
• The Service’s latest announcement about what it plans to do with the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse, an ongoing saga since 2003
• Seeing if our son stays up for his first fireworks display
• Commenting on the “ludicrous” Salt Creek tiger beetle critical habitat proposal (see congressional testimony by Scott Hoffman Black from the Xerces Society)
• Making a concerted effort to see a wood lily
• Commenting on the proposal to remove Maguire’s daisy from the Endangered Species list
• Camping in the San Juan Mountains (my husband is almost done climbing the centennial 13ers, has a few left down there) and maybe looking for the Uncompahgre fritillary
• Meeting the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid in person
• Hosting our son’s first birthday party
• Visiting my grandfather in Pennsylvania and introducing our son to Lake Erie
• Working from home rather than attempting to make it in to Denver during the Democratic National Convention
• Attempting my first half marathon (the Golden Leaf) along with my husband, sister, and brother-in-law (the first time I have used that word for him!)
• Working on a campaign.  We usually shut down the CNE office for a week or two during election years so anyone can work on a campaign of their choice if they wish.

I had to restrain myself to only mention three firsts for our son there.  He has firsts nearly every day, which makes life all the more wonderful.  Yesterday he celebrated both his first aquarium visit and his first baseball game, and he highly recommends both.  A very kind man near us caught a foul ball and gave it to him so he came home with quite the souvenir.

Happy solstice and here’s wishing you all an amazing summer and an end to a culture of cover ups and corruption in endangered species management.  Now go be the change you want to see this fall!

Erin

Since 2006 we here at Center for Native Ecosystems have been dedicated to a new approach in endangered species conservation, reaching out to landowners, ranchers, farmers, agriculture groups, conservationists and other stakeholders on making the next Farm Bill (the single-largest source of conservation funding in the U.S.) work better for landowners and conservation. Since the majority of habitat for threatened and endangered species is on private land in the U.S., and a large proportion of private land in the U.S. being used to grow crops or forest products or to raise livestock, we felt this was an important approach we could no longer ignore.

From the start, we knew this was an ambitious task - the Farm Bill is one of the biggest and most entrenched bills Congress is tasked with taking up (every five years), and ranchers and farmers working together is a fairly new concept.  But with help from our growing network of friends in the agriculture community, new alliances with national agriculture and conservation groups and continuous pressure on Colorado  electeds (many serving on important Farm Bill committees and subcommittees), our goal was to take up a few priority items important to landowners and endangered species and see them through. In a number of ways we succeeded beyond our hopes (see Endangered Species Recovery Act below). We also had setbacks that will hopefully serve us in the future (see 'Sodbuster,' Wetlands Reserve Program and Conference Committee items below) -  in advancing better conservation and climate change policy, advocating for endangered species, and more effectively building relationships between agriculture and conservation communities. In the end, most national conservation groups opposed the final Farm Bill, due to the many changes that happened behind closed doors in Conference Committee, the Farm Bill's potential to negatively impact climate change and provisions (due in large part to inflated corn and commodity prices exacerbated by federal subsidies for corn ethanol production), that promise to open up vast tracks of native grasslands and prairies throughout the Midwest and West. To piece together the briefing report below, we borrowed heavily from two of our favorite Farm Bill partners, American Farmland Trust and  Defenders of Wildlife. 

Center for Native Ecosystems

BRIEFING REPORT

The 2008 Farm Bill: Good, the Bad and the Ugly

6/2/08

The Good

The Farm Bill’s conservation title includes increased funding for conservation programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Stewardship Program and Farm and Ranchland Protection Program.

The new Farm Bill includes the Endangered Species Recovery Act, which will provide tax deductions for private landowners that volunteer to conserve habitat on their lands for threatened and endangered species. Center for Native Ecosystems worked with our conservation and agriculture allies to improve ESRA and ensure its support by the Colorado delegation. Co-sponsoring ESRA in Colorado were Senators Salazar and Allard and Representatives Udall, DeGette, Perlmutter, Musgrave.

The Grassland Reserve and Wetlands Reserve programs have both been reauthorized. These programs conserving threatened ecosystems and wildlife habitat would have lost their funding under current law.

An illegal logging provision will limit unsustainable and illegal logging around the world, protecting forests and forest-dwelling species such as orangutans, while also benefiting domestic timber and paper industries.

The Bad

Enrollment for the Conservation Reserve Program will be reduced from 39.2 million acres to 32 million acres.
The Wetlands Reserve Program will be reduced by about 25% to just 185,000 acres per year.

Cuts to the Conservation Reserve Program and the lack of a Sodsaver provision will likely result in the destruction of millions of acres of grasslands.

 The Ugly

High commodity prices and federal subsidies for corn ethanol production have created intense pressure to plow under remaining native grasslands. Conversion of these lands to corn production not only destroys important imperiled habitats that are home to numerous declining species of birds and other wildlife, it also releases large quantities of carbon stored in grassland soils. A strong Sodsaver provision would have helped counteract these pressures by eliminating federal support and insurance payments on newly broken out land. Sodsaver provisions were included in both the House and Senate bills, as well as the Administration’s farm bill proposal only to be taken out during Conference committee. Now producers in the prairie pothole region will be incentivized to break out their lands for fear their Governors will opt into this program. At least parts of the permanent disaster relief program will likely exacerbate the problem by guaranteeing producer income on even the most marginal of newly broken lands. Taken together with the bill’s significant retrenchment of the Conservation Reserve Program, the net effect will be to add to rather than ameliorate the pressure to plow under fragile native grasslands—destroying habitat while contributing to climate change by releasing carbon stored in the soils.

The Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, which formerly assisted a wide array of landowners in improving and restoring terrestrial and aquatic wildlife habitat, now limits eligible lands to owners of agricultural and private non-industrial forest lands. Important projects such as restoration of in-stream habitat and dam removal will apparently no longer be eligible, nor will projects involving the restoration of non-agricultural privately-owned lands. Further, the newly-added annual payment limitation of $50,000 will hamper the program’s ability to address larger-scale habitat cost share projects. None of these changes appeared in either the House or Senate version of the bill or were ever given a public discussion during the farm bill renewal.

Not only will enrollment for the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) will be sharply reduced, but new restrictions will also be imposed on the length of ownership and payment schedules. This will hamper the program’s ability to protect and restore large-scale wetlands. The Conference Committee also deleted language from WRP, approved by both the House and the Senate, to protect riparian areas. Riparian areas, which protect water quality, wildlife habitat and provide crucial habitat corridors, are threatened throughout the West.

2008 Farm Bill by the Numbers

Conservation Reserve Program
• Reduces acreage cap to 32 million acres
• Land enrolled in CREP and continuous enrollment elements of CRP can be exempted from acreage cap if the county government concurs
• Adds Chesapeake Bay Region as priority area
• Adds flooded farmland and aquaculture ponds to wetland pilot
• Transition assistance to beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers
• Restoration payments for WRP under a cost share agreement limited to $50,000 per year

Wetlands Reserve Program
• Lifts cap to be 3,041,200 acres [implies $1.3 billion in funding for enrolling added acres]
• Establishes term for payment of WRP easements as follows:
            o Valued at $500,000 or less – from 1 to 30 annual payments
            o Valued at more than $500,000 – at least 5 and up to 30 annual payments
• Allows for Secretarial waiver to allow lump sum payment where appropriate
• Limits eligibility for WRP if land changed ownership in past 7 years
• Restoration payments for WRP under a cost share agreement limited to $50,000 per year

Conservation Security Program

• Restructures old CSP into new “Conservation Stewardship Program” including revisions of eligibility for land, producers, and practices
• Adds $1.1 billion over baseline for the new CSP
• Directs enrollment of 12,769,000 acres each fiscal year and requires CSP to be managed so as to cost, on average, $18 per acre
• Funds existing CSP contracts through their full terms

Farm and Ranchland Protection Program
• Restructures program to emphasize use of longer term and renewable cooperative agreements
• Establishes a certification process for eligible entities
• Requires use of an impervious surface requirement in easements, with the eligible entity specifying the nature of the requirement

Grasslands Reserve Program
• Authorizes additional 1,220,000 acres to be enrolled during FY 2009-2012
• Gives priority for enrollment to certain expiring CRP acres
• Acreage translates to about $300 million over the four-year period
• Significant revision of certain program provisions

Environmental Quality Incentives Program
• Includes non-industrial private forest land as eligible and provides linkage with national organic program
• Adds air quality, invasive species, pollinator habitat and animal carcass management to residue, nutrient, and residue management concerns
• Retains the 60 percent requirement for funds devoted to livestock related conservation activities
• Includes payments related to organic production practices
• Revises process for evaluation of offers to improve effectiveness
• Revises payment limit to be $300,000 instead of the current $450,000 during any six-year period, but provides authority for a waiver for projects of special environmental significance

 Conservation Innovative Grant program
• Retains innovative approaches for the grant program
• Adds a carve out for air quality amounting to $37.5 million annually

 Agriculture Water Enhancement Program
• Replaces the Ground and Surface Water Conservation Program and focuses on water quality and quantity through partnership agreements arrived at through a competitive process
• Provides total of $280 million through 2012 for AWEP

 Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program
• Changes limit program to agricultural land, non-industrial private forest land, and tribal lands
• Changes landowners to be limited to owners of above types of land
• Projects addressing State, national or regional conservation initiatives get priority
• Limits payments to $50,000 per year

 Grassroots Source Water Protection Program
• Reauthorizes and adds funding of $20 million per year

Voluntary Public Access (Open Fields)
• Establishes a grant program to enable states and tribes to encourage landowners to make land available to the public for wildlife dependent recreation
• Provides $50 million for the program over a five year period

Funding [other funding covered under specific topics where applicable]
• Budget Authority for FRPP totals $743 million over 5 years
• EQIP funding rising from $1.2 billion in FY 2008 to $1.75 billion in 2012, totaling $7.325 billion
• Continues funding for WHIP at $85 million per fiscal year
• Raises amount for regional equity states to be $15 million per year

Cooperative Conservation
• Adds a cooperative conservation provisions to enable producers to come together with partners to leverage resources and better address common resource concerns
• Covers all conservation programs except CRP, WRP, GRP, and FRPP. [Means it covers EQIP, CSP, WHIP, and some of the smaller programs like Chesapeake Bay]
• Provides for use of 6 percent of program funds to be used for the cooperative conservation efforts

Other
• Requires USDA to report on program enrollments for contacts or easements above certain dollar limits
• Strengthens technical assistance provisions with respect to use of third party providers, including multiyear agreements that are renewable and access to funding through the respective farm bill program
• Provides for new authority for environmental services markets, including creation of a registry and a verification system for producers. Gives priority for protocols for participation in carbon markets
• Establishes a program to enable experienced conservationists to assist with technical services to producers and other aspects of program delivery
• Updates elements of State Technical Committees
• Provides lump sum of $100 million for the Small Watershed Rehabilitation Program
• Reauthorizes and updates the Resources Conservation Act of 1977
• Revises parts of Resource Conservation and Development Program concerning planning process and technical assistance
• Provides $175 million for the Desert Terminal Lakes program under the Interior Department

Conservation Loan Guarantee Program
• In credit title of conference report
• Establishes loan guarantee program to assist producers in financing conservation systems
• Gives priority to beginning and socially disadvantage producers, those converting to organic production systems, and producers applying systems to address compliance requirements

Conservation Easement Tax Deduction
• Extends the conservation easement tax deduction for donations from 12/31/07 until 12/31/09
• Is effective retroactively to January 1, 2008

The House Natural Resources Committee's third hearing today in their ongoing inquiry into political interference in endangered species decisions included testimony from Lyle Laverty in his current role as an Assistant Secretary in the Interior Department. It also included  testimony from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) which has been investigating corruption at the Interior.  The GAO named at least four additional Interior department officials, three of whom are Bush administration appointees, who are connected to inappropriate tampering with decision to extend or deny protections to endangered species.

Endangered Species; US Official: Interior rulings subject to meddling

By MATTHEW DALY

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A congressional investigator asserted Wednesday that at least four Interior Department officials may have inappropriately interfered in decisions on protection of endangered species.

The four officials -- including three Bush administration appointees -- may have put political pressure on lower-ranking employees who were deciding endangered species cases, the Government Accountability Office said.

Robin Nazzaro, a top investigator for the GAO, made the allegation at a House hearing on purported interference by Julie MacDonald, a high-ranking Interior official who resigned last year. (click here to read full article)

On the third Friday of May each year, the nation celebrates Endangered Species Day.  This day offers a great opportunity for people across the country to learn about threatened and endangered species found in their own backyard and throughout the country.  It is also a day to spread the word about the importance of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and how to help species that are in need of the various protections afforded by the ESA.

This year, Endangered Species Day fell on Friday, May 16th.  Over thirty states, and Puerto Rico, held at least one event. Many states held several. These events took place across the nation at venues ranging from zoos, botanical gardens, wildlife refuges, and nature centers to restaurants and whale watching tours.

Center for Native Ecosystems participated in two events here in Colorado. Andrea West, CNE’s Development Associate and I (Paige Bonaker, Staff Biologist) set up shop at the Downtown Aquarium in Denver alongside aquarium staff, Colorado Division of Wildlife and the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program. The day was filled with hundreds of eager kids out on educational field trips as well as parents with little ones not yet in school. Despite the chaotic excitement brought on by kids on the verge of summer vacation, we were able to talk to several people about many of the endangered species found in the region. We highlighted a couple of key action items including a Forest Service land sale proposed on land that is home to the threatened Greenback cutthroat trout (on display at the aquarium) and the need for critical habitat in the Southern Rockies for the threatened Canada lynx. 

Across town, Josh Pollock, Conservation Director for CNE, gave an Endangered Species Day presentation to 3rd and 4th grade students at the Logan School for Creative Learning.  Earlier this year, students at the Logan School held a very successful fundraising drive in the form of a Penny Harvest. Their efforts raised over $1200, and the students voted CNE as one of the recipients of their funds.  The kids were a fantastic and highly-educated audience, and clearly passionate about endangered species issues. Josh taught the students about lynx, black-footed ferrets, and white-tailed prairie dogs, as well as the various threats to these species and their habitat. We were delighted to interact with such enthusiastic students, who have truly inspired us with their early efforts at philanthropy and their advocacy on behalf of endangered species. For more information about endangered species in our region, please visit the species page on our website.

Beginning as a trickle of a high alpine creek in the San Juan Mountains of southwest Colorado, the Dolores River runs through some of the most rugged, remote areas of the state. The river then meanders its way through the sinuous “goosenecks” stretch into the wildlands of eastern Utah, where it ultimately joins the Colorado near Moab. The 200-mile-long river corridor is a stronghold for biological diversity, home to such species as river otter, canyon tree frog, and at-risk native fish like the bluehead sucker and roundtail chub. The unique hanging garden ecosystems contain many wildflowers and the side drainages and canyon rim are home to plants found nowhere else in the world.

The so-called “Ponderosa Gorge” of the Dolores, from just downstream of McPhee Reservoir to the tiny outpost of Slickrock, offers a unique geography of towering red rock walls peppered with riverside groves of giant ponderosa pines.  Set amidst a high desert pinyon-juniper ecosystem, the contrast between the fiery red sandstone and the deep green forests is staggering. We were fortunate enough to experience the Dolores just as it was waking up from a long winter–the riverside flora shone a brilliant spring green.  As we floated downstream, it was like moving forward in time – day by day we began to see more buds and blossoms along the riparian corridor.

The lucky Center for Native Ecosystems staffers to participate in this trip were Megan Corrigan, Dolores Campaign Staff Biologist, Brian Hires, Colorado Field Coordinator, and myself, Andrea West, Development Associate.  Joined by a handful of close friends, we spent four glorious days in early May floating fifty miles of one of the most pristine rivers in the West.  Our days were spent running the Dolores’ playful rapids, scouting for river otters along the banks, and hiking in side canyons looking for rare wildflowers.  We camped among the towering ponderosas, watched a peregrine falcon dive through the air, and reveled in the wild beauty of this rugged canyon.

This amazing ecosystem is under increasing threat from the explosion of oil and gas drilling on public lands in western Colorado and eastern Utah.  A large portion of the Dolores watershed, including crucial habitat for Gunnison sage-grouse and other native species, is targeted for drilling and related construction activities. With 126,000 new oil and gas wells approved or under review in the West, the biodiversity of the Dolores River Basin is under mounting assault. The recent upsurge in uranium mining across the West also presents serious air and water quality threats to this uranium-rich region, and the high-impact infrastructure developments and transportation activities associated with uranium mining stand to fragment and disturb sensitive populations of native species in the area. 

In response to the full-scale assault on this watershed, Center for Native Ecosystems has targeted the Dolores as a priority area for conservation. We are challenging inappropriate oil and gas drilling and obtaining precedent-setting decisions for the regulation of drilling on public lands.  In coalition with a diverse network of conservation groups, outfitters and guides, local citizens, and recreation groups, we are working for permanent protection for the most biologically-sensitive areas of the Dolores basin. With all this in mind, Center for Native Ecosystems staff undertook this Dolores River trip as a way to better understand this diverse ecosystem and ultimately become better advocates for its protection.

Now here we are, back in the office, tugged away from our river paradise. We’re here, however, with a renewed zest for the wild places we work so hard to protect. We might have to wait years until our next Dolores adventure, but we feel so lucky to have experienced this one.  In the meantime, we’ll be here, working diligently to stem the threats to the Dolores Basin and seeking permanent protection for this magical high desert ecosystem. This trip has reinforced our collective sense of commitment to this imperiled area, and we’re not going to let this one go without a fight.

To support our Dolores River Campaign, please visit www.nativeecosystems.org/support-our-work

As a Wyoming Department of Game and Fish official points out in a recent Capser Star-Tribune article, much of the elaborate physical display of the male sage-grouse (what is usually referred to as "strutting") is actually about generating the sound. According to the article, researchers from the University of California-Davis are studying the accoustics of sage-grouse courtship at various lekking grounds in Wyoming. There are previous studies that established that the amplitude of the sounds a male sage-grouse makes is an important factor in mate selection. In fact, some of the "dancing" movements of the males are apparently attempts to focus their sounds in certain directions (i.e towards particular females) and at certain amplitudes (incidentally, one of the ways that Gunnison sage-grouse are distinguished from greater sage-grouse is their different pattern of vocalizations).

All dumb jokes aside about how the right sweet nothings whispered at the right time make all the difference in sage-grouse courtship, this also means that writers attempting to capture the look and feel of a sage-grouse lek site are often left trying to convey some sense of the sounds the males make. Some of those sounds can be powerful and complex. The booming noises males make with their air sacs can be heard a mile away. As the Star-Tribune story points out, the stage upon which the male performs also is also likely a significant influence on the sound quality:

“Environmental acoustics – the soil type and topography of the lek itself – probably play a significant role, too.”

This hints at some reasons why lek sites are so important to protect if we want to conserve this highly imperiled species. As the Star-Tribune story also points out, it may also provide a clue as to why sage-grouse are particularly sensitive to disturbance at these mating sites:

“How the sound carries at a particular site may be a big reason why the birds return to the same lek year after year – or possibly why they abandon a lek if a noisy road or energy development pops up nearby.”

So if the sound of a courting sage-grouse is important, how do those who write about sage-grouse try to capture it?

Well, most don’t. I wouldn’t either, if I could avoid it. The most common sidestep is to refer to it as “booming” (exactly as I did a few paragraphs earlier) or “popping.” A few have even gone so far as to nickname the birds “thunder cluckers.” In general, there is a fine tradition of valiant attempts to characterize the sound of a sage-grouse, often with humorous results:

“a bubbly popping noise…”

“a sort of drawn-out burbling that sounds uncannily like someone gulping underwater…”

“swishing sounds, hoots, and pops. Both sexes makes clucking and cackling noises…”

“when flushed, [sage-grouse make] a course ‘wut’ or ‘kak, kak, kak” call. Males also coo and make popping vocalizations by expelling air through esophageal pouches during courtship…”

This last description is not the most technical out there. That prize has to go to one of the authors of the above-mentioned acoustical studies, who noted that the “explosive use of dual anterior air sacs is unique to the Centrocercus grouse strut display.”

For those brave enough to try to actually spell the sound of a sage-grouse, the results can be wonderful fun. As one author noted dryly after attempting it himself, “it’s a sound not easily put into words.” Among my favorites from articles around the Web:

“Glumph… Glumph… Glumph…”

“Ba-loomp… Ba-loomp… Ba-loomp…”

And my all time favorite: “swish-swish-coo-oopoink!”

As for me, I hope to hear the, er, booming of the sage-grouse myself this spring, but I think I’ll refrain from trying to describe the sound to you.

If you want to hear and see sage-grouse dancing for yourself, try these videos and sound clips (and another).

By the way, given our heavy snowfall this winter, the anecdotal reports from around Colorado are that many lek sites are still under snow and strutting activity may get started a little later this year than usual. We’ll hope that most sage-grouse survived the winter and will still show up eventually, and on the up side the conditions may allow viewing later into the season than is normally possible.

The 'Dear Colleague' letter to the Interior Appropriations Committee leadership that Sen. Salazar signed and Senators Crapo (R-ID) and Lieberman (I-CT) initiated, calls for a modest 2.5 percent increase in funding for endangered species programs over what the President called for in his 2009 budget. According to the letter's cover, "More than 200 already-listed species are on the verge of extinction primarily because too little attention and funding is available for recovery activities." The letter continues, "Failure to provide adequate levels of funding for endangered species operations will only ensure that species slide closer to extinction, decreasing chances for recovery while increasing the costs."

Although underfunding of endangered species programs has been a historic problem, the Bush administration has been overtly hostile to endangered species issues like no other administration: It has extended protections to far fewer endangered species than any other administration, and has then only done so when compelled by courts. It has attempted to undercut effective endangered species policy and hired industry hacks to oversee endangered species programs who then illicitly altered scientific findings to favor industry over conservation. When all these attempts fail or are exposed by the  Washington Post, the Administration's handiest and perhaps most effective tool is failing to fund endangered species programs. We thank  Sen. Salazar, environmental champions like Sen. Wyden (D-WA) and fellow Dear Colleague letter-cosigners (Sens. Crapo, Cardin (D-MD), Lieberman, Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Sanders (I-VT), Stabenow (D-MI) and Wyden), for their efforts to restore adequate endangered species funding. 

Excerpted from Senate Dear Colleague Letter: "The number of candidate species awaiting protection under the Act, many of which have been candidates for years, totals 280. The number of projects reviewed under the consultation program has increased dramatically, from 40,000 in 1999 to more than 67,000 in 2006. Development and implementation of Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), which allow activities to proceed while still protecting species, continues to grow, with funding critically needed to help ensure timely and effective development and monitoring of 500 existing and more than 350 new HCPs that together will cover more than 70 million acres when complete."

Core Endangered Species Programs

The four Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species operating accounts are key to effective implementation of the Endangered Species Act. All four program areas are currently experiencing at least a 30 percent staffing shortage due to budget constraints, an unacceptable vacancy rate.

1. Listing – This account funds the protection of new plants and animals under the Endangered Species Act, as well as habitat critical to recovery. Currently, more than 280 species sit on the candidate waiting list for protection. Candidate species wait an average of 19 years to be listed and since 1975, 64 have gone extinct while waiting – seven times the number of speicies that have disappeared under the full protection of the ESA.
2. Recovery - While the Endangered Species Act has been extremely successful at preventing wildlife from going extinct, the purpose of the Act is to protect and recover endangered and threatened fish, plants and wildlife.
3. Consultation – The consultation program is an important part of the checks and balances system to ensure that endangered fish, wildlife, and plants are protected on the ground. There has been a dramatic increase in demand for consultations recently, jumping from 40,000 in 1999 to 67,000 in 2006. Shortage of personnel in this program area causes delays of project reviews thus creating conflicts between agencies. The consultation budget also funds the Service’s work with non-federal entities for permitting and development of Habitat Conservation Plans; lack of funding prevents the Fish and Wildlife Service from ensuring that these plans are properly developed, implemented and monitored.
4. Candidate Conservation - This program protects species before they are actually listed, thus in theory averting the need to ever list them at all. As mentioned above though, fish, plants and wildlife on the candidate list go extinct at a much higher rate than those with full protection – in part because of severe understaffing for this program.

Additional Endangered Species Programs

Cooperative Endangered Species Fund – This fund provides grants to states for wildlife and habitat conservation activities on non-federal lands for listed and candidate species. At least 65 percent of federally listed species are found on non-federal land. Without the proposed increases states will fall further behind in their ability to independently work to protect at risk species. Crucial conservation activities funded by these grants include: research, species status surveys, habitat restoration, captive propagation and reintroduction, planning assistance, and land acquisition by states for Habitat Conservation Plans and recovery.

Landowner Incentive and Private Stewardship Grants – These grants provide funding for voluntary conservation actions taken by landowners to conserve at-risk plants and animals on private lands, which benefits us all. The Landowner Incentive program awards competitive grants to state and tribal conservation agencies for their work with private landowners and tribal lands, while the Private Stewardship program provides funding directly to individuals and groups implementing private land conservation actions. In 2007, funding was awarded to efforts in 46 states. Regrettably, neither program was funded in the FY ’08 Interior appropriations bill due to budget constraints; these important programs should be re-started in FY ’09. The demonstrated need for these programs has far outstripped available funding in the past – the amount requested for worthy projects on average totaled two to three times the yearly available funding.

BLM Threatened and Endangered Species Management – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) controls habitat that supports more than 300 federally listed or candidate species. This program, along with their Fisheries and Wildlife Management program, funds inventory and monitoring, habitat restoration, endangered species recovery, and other proactive conservation activities vital to maintaining healthy, functioning ecosystems and fish, wildlife, and plant populations. Recently, an average of 30 percent of these funds have been used to pay for the compliance activities of the BLM’s energy, grazing, and other non-wildlife related programs.Traditionally, funding for compliance work has come from benefiting programs. In addition, the programs are substantially understaffed. For example, the BLM has only one biologist per 591,000 acres of land, and more than $60 million is needed annually just to implement actions assigned to BLM in recovery plans for listed species.

Many of Center for Native Ecosystems' campaigns have recently made headline news. From the white-tailed prairie dog to the fragile desert  habitat of eastern Utah, lately we've celebrated important milestones for many of our target species and ecosystems. Yet for every high-profile news story there are countless folks behind the scenes, doing the daily work of saving species from extinction. Behind every landmark legal victory we celebrate stands a corps of dedicated activists, donors, pro-bono lawyers, volunteers and staunch supporters that saw the process through to the very end.

Though we could never adequately thank all those who deserve our gratitude, we at Center for Native Ecosystems would like to recognize a few of our own "unsung heroes" - people and organizations without which our work would simply not be possible. We feel so fortunate to be part of a progressive community of conservation-minded individuals and groups, and the below-mentioned people have given their time, energy, expertise and patient counsel to ensure that our work continues in a robust, forward direction.  Thank you all.

Trey Beck - Trey has provided sustained and generous pro bono support on our web site and our computers for as long as we can remember.

Mindy Harm Benson - Mindy was our crackerjack attorney on the legal action that resulted in a huge, precedent-setting oil and gas ruling last December.  Although the ruling was in 2006, 2007 was the year we converted that ruling into hundreds of thousands of acres of important wildlife habitat withdrawn from oil and gas leasing.

Colorado Division of Wildlife  - The Colorado Division of Wildlife has been an incredibly important wildlife advocate over the past year.  They deserve a special mention for their assertive efforts to keep oil and gas drilling out of core habitat for sage-grouse.

 Naseem Munshi and Mike Tupper - Naseem and Mike have been incredible supporters of our conservation work since the early days. We are so completely thankful for their generosity. 

Jeremy Nichols - Jeremy is doing amazing work with his new Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action cleaning up Colorado's air (and reducing pollution impacts to native plants and wildlife along the way).  He also moonlighted as our Staff Biologist Pinch Hitter while Erin Robertson was on maternity leave.

Bob Spertus - Bob and his family's foundation stepped up to help us years ago when we were in a pinch and have been among our best, most consistent, and most gracious supporters ever since. 

Todd Hagenbuch - As the vice president of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union and a rancher in northwestern Colorado, Todd has been a terrific partner in our efforts to enhance incentive programs that help landowners improve conservation practices.  Our relationship has been especially fruitful during the current Farm Bill renewal process. 

Jay Tutchton - Jay has served admirably on our board of directors and has been one of our most fearless, finest, and successful attorneys in our work to protect imperiled species like the white-tailed prairie dog, Graham's penstemon, porter feathergrass, Preble's meadow jumping mouse, boreal toad, Douglas County pocket gopher, and many others.

Alison Wright - Alison is an awesome member of our exceptional volunteer corps. She's reliable, hard-working, and helping us dig through some of the least exciting but most important work in the office.  All of our volunteers deserve a special mention for their dedication and effort. 

Senator Ron Wyden - Senator Wyden was a key hero in our campaign of the past two years to restore integrity to science at the Interior Department.

Other Colorado electeds supporting the Endangered Species Recovery Act (HR 1422) are Senators Salazar and Allard and Representatives DeGette, Udall and Perlmutter. If passed, ESRA wold provide some $400 million a year in tax credits and incentives to landowners to conserve habitat for imperiled species on their land, where the majority of habitat for threatened and endangered species exists in the U.S. The last several years Center for Native Ecosystems has been working closely with Colorado agriculture groups, ranchers and farmers, conservationists and sportsmen to  improve programs that provide helpful support to  landowners in conserving some of our most imperiled wildlife.

Other conservation priorities for the House/Senate 2007 Farm Bill conference include:

Ensuring adequate funding for conservation in the Farm Bill. The $6 billion over six years for conservation programs designated by the Senate should remain in the final Farm Bill. Even with this modest increase, many conservation programs will be funded far below farmer demand. According to the NRCS, only 27% of all conservation contracts in Colorado were funded in 2004. NRCS turned away 3,874 landowners who volunteered to take measures to improve Colorado’s environment. In 2006, 449 Colorado EQIP applications (representing $11,597,495 in requests for cost-sharing to improve the environment) were unfunded. In2005, 123 Grasslands Reserve Program (GRP) easement applications went unfunded, leaving a total of 437,281 acres of Colorado grasslands without the protection of conservation easements.

Keeping the Senate provision that includes riparian areas on the conservation goals of the Wetlands Reserve Program. Given the relatively larger amount of riparian habitat in Colorado versus areas currently considered wetlands under this program, this change could particularly advance conservation in our state.

Keeping the House funding increase for the Grasslands Reserve Program, a vital program in Colorado in the West for preserving shrinking grasslands ecosystems. The House Farm Bill’s funding increase for the Grasslands Reserve Program should be maintained. This is one of the most important conservation programs in Colorado – both for our ranchers and producers and for protecting and restoring grasslands.

Keeping the Senate Farm Bill provision that provides assistance for proactive non-lethal predator deterrence. This provision assists landowners in putting into place proactive, non-lethal predator deterrence measures through the EQIP program. This provision would help such Colorado producers as sheep growers and ranchers, as well as our native wildlife.

Rejecting any proposals that would impose lower Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) eligibility limits on participants in conservation programs. Lowering AGI limits for conservation programs will undermine the ability of these programs to help farmers, ranchers and forest landowners effectively produce environmental benefits by excluding landowners who might be best positioned to have the greatest positive environmental impact from participating in conservation programs.

Clearly the Farm Bill could do much more to ensure that farmers and ranchers in Colorado and around the country are supported when they offer to share in the cost of improving water quality, improving wildlife habitat and becoming better stewards of their land.  Both our landowners and the natural resources that we all enjoy are depending on it.

For the sixth year in a row, conservation organizations like Center for Native Ecosystems and cities in Colorado and New Mexico have celebrated Prairie Dog Day.  Prairie Dog Day is inspired by Groundhog Day, which also took place this year on February 2nd.  While prairie dogs may not be as skilled at predicting the weather as the renowned Punxsutawney Phil, their fate is closely tied to the fate of the entire prairie ecosystem: as the prairie dog goes, so goes the swift fox, the burrowing owl, the ferruginous hawk, and the critically imperiled black-footed ferret.

There are five species of prairie dogs, and all five are keystone species.  The fate of hundreds of other species, in addition to entire ecosystems, depends in complicated ways on the fate of the prairie dogs.  One species, the Utah prairie dog, is already protected under the Endangered Species Act, yet the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allows the continued destruction of significant numbers of animals and significant habitat every year.  The Mexican prairie dog is also protected under the Act but occurs entirely outside of the U.S.  The other three species, all occurring in the United States, face continued threats and continued declines from oil and gas drilling, overgrazing, and habitat loss.

Joined by Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, the Denver Zoo, Forest Guardians (now WildEarth Guardians), the Prairie Dog Coalition, and others, we hope Prairie Dog Day helps bring increased attention to these ecologically-critical wildlife species and the ecosystems of which they are such a vital part.

In case you missed it, our friend, the black-footed ferret was recently associated with a plagiarism scandal.  No, the black-footed ferret was not the guilty party.  It seems as though romance novelist, Cassie Edwards, used pieces from a story about black-footed ferrets to enhance her novel "Shadow Bear," about a Lakota chief who finds love with a feisty pioneer. 

Okay, so the passages don't actually enhance the story at all.  They are quite scientific compared to the rest of the romantic story line, which only helps to lend credence to the plagiarism accusation.  Judge for yourself.  This is a scene from "Shadow Bear" where the two main characters discuss black-footed ferrets:

"They are so named because of their dark legs," Shadow Bear says, to which Shiona responds: "They are so small, surely weighing only about two pounds and measuring two feet from tip to tail."

Shiona then tells Shadow Bear how she once read about ferrets in a book she took from the study of her father. "I discovered they are related to minks and otters. It is said their closest relations are European ferrets and Siberian polecats," she says. "Researchers theorize that polecats crossed the land bridge that once linked Siberia and Alaska, to establish the New World population."

Not quite the stuff of fairy tales.  Here is the corresponding passage from Paul Tolme's article entitled "Toughing It Out in the Badlands":

Black-footed ferrets, so-named because of their dark legs, weigh about two pounds and measure two feet from tip to tail. Related to mink and otters, they are North America's only native ferret (and a different species than the ferrets kept as pets). Their closest relatives are European ferrets and Siberian polecats. Researchers theorize polecats crossed the land bridge that once linked Siberia and Alaska to establish the New World population.

Hmm... Either way, all of us at Center for Native Ecosystems are just happy that one of the most endangered mammals in North America is getting the attention it deserves.

Listen to as interview with Paul Tolme on NPR's Talk of the Nation.

Taking a look back, here are some of the highlights of our most effective and successful year so far!

•    Protecting the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse and its Front Range Streamside Habitat.  Because of our relentless efforts to force the Bush administration to rely on good science in its decision about Endangered Species Act protection, the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse enjoyed more than two years of additional protection across its entire range and will remain fully protected throughout the Colorado portion of its range.  As a result of our campaign the Department of the Interior also admitted to political meddling in key Preble’s meadow jumping mouse decisions.  This protection is critical, especially in the face of continuing sprawl across Colorado’s Front Range.

•    Defending the Endangered Species Act and Improving Conservation of Endangered Species on Private Land.  Center for Native Ecosystems is building on our tremendous success last year – with the rest of the conservation community – defending the Endangered Species Act against the fiercest attack in at least a decade.  We led the defensive effort in Colorado last year, and while we remain vigilant for signs of renewed attacks we’ve been able to focus instead on advancing Farm Bill provisions and other legislation that improve private land conservation of endangered species.  We are simultaneously building on our impressive network of relationships in the farming and ranching communities.

•    Unmatched Legal Prowess.  We are currently involved in six lawsuits to protect endangered species, including litigation on behalf of white-tailed prairie dog and Gunnison sage-grouse.  When forced to go to court as a last resort, our litigation record is 25-3 – we almost never lose.