Endangered Species: Bison Bears and Wolves-the Science and the Policy

1. Endangered Species: Bison Bears and Wolves-the Science and the Policy Matthew A. Cronin, Ph.D. University of Alaska Fairbanks School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences 11February 2013

2. ESA impacts on resource useTimber, mining, oil, fishing, farming, livestock Northern Spotted Owl-Timber Polar Bear-Oil Steller Sea Lion-Fishing Klamath salmon-Farming Coastal California gnatcatcher-Building Grizzly bear-Livestock Wolf-Livestock Hunting Sage Grouse-Oil, Livestock

3. Sullivan vs Haskett • D. Sullivan Alaska Attorney General: “…in the coming months as environmental groups attempt to list more species under the ESA and shut down resource development in the OCS and Tongass National Forest…” ADN 12/13/09

4. Sullivan vs Haskett • G. Haskett U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Director: • “Many people fear that ESA listings will curtail development in Alaska, but there is no evidence that this ever has been or will be the case” • ADN 12/26/09

5. Amazing • No evidence ESA might affect resource development? • Sullivan’s point was also made by anyone ever dealing with the ESA

6. Caribou on the North Slope • Not ESA, but similar use of selective science to stop resource development • National Research Council report 2003 concluded decline between 1992 and 1995 was due to oil field impacts • Didn’t note the large increases in the herd in other periods

7. Caribou 6000 to 67000 during North Slope oilfield operations

9. Wildlife in the Tongass National Forest • No ESA listings but threat of listing goshawk and wolf subspecies influence TLM Plan • Creation of OGR and move to exclusive second growth harvest • Identification of nebulous “Endemics”

10. ESA in Alaska Polar bears Goshawk Beluga whales Wolf Other Whales Murrelet Steller sea lions Loons Sea otters Seals Walrus

11. Are Polar Bears Threatened with Extinction? No: Polar bears are not currently threatened and has healthy populations

13. Alaska Grizzly Bear

14. Montana Grizzly Bear

15. FWS concludes they are threatened with extinction Using Models of global warming and SUMMER sea ice disappearance led to models that polar bears will decline across their entire range to the point of near extinction

16. The impact Polar bears are threatened by arctic sea ice loss, which is attributed to climate change, which is attributed to human greenhouse gas emissions, so greenhouse gas emissions are to be regulated. This will affect many parts of the American and Alaskan economies

17. Best Available Science:Data Quality Number populations declining = 5 Number populations stable = 5 Number populations increasing = 2 Number population unknown = 7 Total number of worldwide populations =19.

18. Worldwide population number has increased 2-3X in last 40 years 20,000-25,000 in 2006, 21,500-25,000 in 2002, 21,000-28,000 in 1995, 25,000 in 1984-1989, 8,000-10,000 in 1965-1970

19. Population predictions with Models Decline in the size of the total population of more than 30% within the next 35 to 50 years. 30% decline is not a threat of extinction

20. Polar bears have survived several previous warming periods with no summer Arctic Sea Ice

21. State of Alaska • Lawsuit to challenge the Polar Bear ESA Listing • Reviewing Recent Critical Habitat Designation • Attempting to Work Cooperatively on the Relevant Science

22. Alaska Wood Bison

24. Plains Bison

28. Does it matter?Plains bison survive in Alaska and plains X wood bison herd survives in Canada

29. Wood bison subspecies on the ESA list is preventing (re) introduction of wood bison to interior Alaska Plains bison are petitioned for ESA listing in lower 48 States

32. Wolf • Wolf DPS on ESA list in northern Rocky Mt States until recently • Wolf DPS in Great Lakes States on ESA list until recently • Mexican wolves subspecies on ESA list • Wolf subspecies in southeast Alaska petitioned for ESA listing • “Eastern Wolf” proposed by FWS as a SPECIES

33. ESA Problems • The review system of ESA documents within the federal agencies is closed • Government agencies frequently use science selectively for the ESA, but Recent examples of Balanced Science from Gov’t • The ESA has been dramatically expanded because it includes subjective subspecies and populations • ESA now allows predicting with models future “Endangerment”

34. The Wildlife SocietyADVOCACYSTATE AND FEDERAL WILDLIFE AGENCIES Partner with Environmental groupsCBD

35. The entire system of review of science in the ESA process is closed. FWS or National Marine Fisheries Service-NMFS creates a petition or receives a petition from environmental groups to consider a species for ESA listing.

36. FWS reviews the petition, decides if it’s warranted, prepares a Status Review and a Proposed Rule and selects peer reviewers of them. FWS then reviews the peer reviews and produces a final Status Assessment and Proposed Rule.

37. FWS then selects peer reviewers of Proposed Rule and solicits public comment. FWS then reviews the peer reviews and public comments and produces a final rule. FWS can dismiss or ignore public comments and peer review comments without accountability.

38. FWS or NMFS has the role of author, editor, and reviewer for their own documents.

39. The potential for litigation challenges to FWS decisions in this process is slanted because courts give deference to agencies in assessing science and management information.

40. Federal Deference “Although plaintiffs have proposed many alternative conclusions that the agency could have drawn with respect to the status of the polar bear, the Court cannot substitute either the plaintiffs’ or its own judgment for that of the agency. Instead, this Court is bound to uphold the agency’s determination that the polar bear is a threatened species as long as it is reasonable, regardless of whether there may be other reasonable, or even more reasonable, views. : “Although plaintiffs have proposed many alternative conclusions that the agency could have drawn with respect to the status of the polar bear, the Court cannot substitute either the plaintiffs’ or its own judgment for that of the agency. Instead, this Court is bound to uphold the agency’s determination that the polar bear is a threatened species as long as it is reasonable, regardless of whether there may be other reasonable, or even more reasonable, views.

42. Subspecies and Populations are not well-defined and Designations for ESA Listings are often Arbitrary

43. Current ESA Defines “Species” as a Species, Subspecies, or Distinct Population SegmentAgencies also invented the TermEvolutionarily Significant Unit(ESU)

44. ExamplesSubspeciesNorthern Spotted OwlWolf in Southeast AlaskaMexican WolfGoshawk in Southeast AlaskaWood bison

45. ExamplesPopulationsSalmon Stocks in Washington, Oregon, California (e.g. Klamath)Grizzly and Wolf in Lower 48 StatesSouthwestern Alaska Stock Sea OtterWestern Alaska Stock Steller Sea LionBeluga Whales in Cook Inlet

46. Conclusions • The Current ESA is Deceptive Because it Includes Undefined Subspecies and Populations and now Allows Predictions • Pro-ESA listing bias in the government agencies is a serious problem • Use of Models to predict Endangered Species is becoming common and not good science

47. Different Industries, agriculture and citizens need to work together to make ESA consistent with American principles “We must indeed all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”Benjamin Franklinremark to John Hancock at the signing of the Declaration of Independence 4 July 1776

48. State or Federal Authority? “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” (10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution)

49. 5thAmendment to the U. S. Constitution“…nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

50. Anticipating ESA? • “I know of no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution.” • Ulysses S. Grant, Inaugural Address, 4 March 1869