This is a shortened form of a piece at Substack, to which I gave an introduction four weeks ago.
First, the USFWS? For those unknowing of federal acronyms and shorthands, especially in land management and related agencies, that’s the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
They’re the folks who run the system of national wildlife refuges. Especially in states with little public land, like here in Tex-ass and especially with little free public land in nature outside of cities, national wildlife refuges are a magnet for nature lovers. Unfortunately, these places aren’t so pristine.
Often, they’re heavily managed for the “hook and bullet” crowd — hunters (especially duck hunters) and fishermen. This may include use of irrigated water from non-environmental damned dams. It may include “overseeding” winter rye or wheat to keep geese, also part of the “bullet” crowd to some degree, from going even further south for winter. Ponds and berms for these birds, and for migratory shorebirds like sandpipers, plovers and such, can and will be manipulated.
That’s one of the two key facets of this piece.
Second? They’re the federal agency that handles Endangered Species Act listings. That is, should the grizzly bear, in the Lower 48, be listed as “endangered.” As part of this, at times, they will recommend a “delisting,” or at least a downgraded listing, like moving the grizzly from “endangered” to “threatened.” Often, this is under outside political pressure. However, sometimes, USFWS does this on its own.
Related to that is USFWS often using a “threatened” listing in the face of lawsuits by more active environmental organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity, to try to hold off a listing as fully endangered. And, yes, USFWS does this a LOT, for garden-variety environmentalists who don’t know. This is often, especially with the USFWS Southwest Region, done in the service of the oil and gas industry. That’s just the start.
They also have, more than once, at regional or national headquarters, improperly filed an ESA listing — often enough to make one wonder if it’s deliberate.
In addition, with animals like the Gunnison’s sage grouse, USFWS has often been slow to accept the biological science that what has been considered a subspecies is actually a separate species, and ergo, one thin enough on the ground that it may need ESA listing.
Finally, with both animals and plants, an ESA listing — IF it’s to be of any value — required designating critical habitat for the protection of the species. FWS is especially a foot-dragger on this.
And with that, stay tuned for the follow-up in a week.
