 |
History
August 22, 1991
12 conservation groups filed a petition to list the North Cascades lynx population
in Washington as an endangered species. The Director of the USFWS denied the
petition on the following two reasons:
- There did not appear to be a "significant" decline in the number of lynx
throughout the species range -- which included Canada and Alaska; and
- The Washington lynx population was not a 'species" subject to the protection
of the ESA because it wasn't a "distinct population segment" due to the fact
that it did not appear to be isolated from other parts of lynx range in British
Colombia.
December, 1993
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agrees to launch a multistate search for the rare
lynx. A forest-dwelling cat that once inhabited mountains throughout North America,
the lynx now survives mostly in Canada and Alaska, with perhaps 100 animals in
Washington and several dozen in Idaho and Montana. Environmental groups fear that
logging, hunting and trapping may be pushing the elusive cat towards extinction.
In 1991, the Bellingham, Wash.-based Greater Ecosystem Alliance petitioned the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife to list the lynx population in Okanogan County as endangered. The
agency refused in 1992, but in an out-of-court settlement earlier this year agreed
to study lynx populations throughout the Northern Rockies. The study is due in
November '94, after which there will be time for public comment.
(source: High Country News -- December 27, 1993 Vol 25 No. 24).
March 11, 1993
The main office in Region 6 (OR and WA) of the USFWS which encompasses a significant
portion of the lynx' historical range, responded to the petition denial by sending a
memorandum to the Director stating the justifications used in denying the listing
petition were inconsistent with justifications used in the past. Expressing concerns
that the way in which the justifications were applied may have serious implications
for many currently listed species and for potential future petition listings, it
requested the Director to "immediately rescind or amend" the listing decision "to
ensure a consistent and biologically sound approach to listings, petition findings, ..."
After a second filing of a lawsuit and a settlement agreement, on July 9, 1993,
the USFWS published its second finding on the North Cascades petition in which it
reaffirmed its previous decision that the Washington lynx population is not a
listable "species" because it is not "a distinct population segment."
April 23, 1994
Four individuals and one conservation group filed a petition with the USFWS to list
the Canada lynx as endangered or threatened throughout its entire range in the lower
48 states. The petition presented substantial evidence that four of the five listing
criteria -- present and threatened habitat destruction, overutilization, inadequacy
of regulatory mechanisms, and other natural manmade factors -- had been met. According
to the petition, intensive logging, road building, and fire suppression within the
current range of the lynx population in the contiguous U.S. had eliminated and fragmented
habitat for the lynx and its primary prey, the snowshoe hare. In addition, the petition
contended that overharvesting from trapping and hunting along with inadequate regulatory
protections have further devastated the lynx population. The petition also explained that
the lynx" inherent characteristics -- i.e., its naturally low population densities; its
heavy reliance on one prey species, the snowshoe hare; and its need for large home ranges
-- make it especially vulnerable to extinction.
August 26, 1994
USFWS found that "the petition presented substantial information indicating the
requested action for the contiguous population may be warranted..." Since the USFWS
made a positive finding on the lynx petition, it was required to review the status
of the species throughout its current and historical range and make a final
determination as to whether the lynx warranted listing under the ESA.
October 1994
After finishing a comprehensive status review of the species, Region 6 of the USFWS
prepared an extensive proposed rule which stated there was substantial scientific
evidence to warrant listing one population (Northeast, Great Lakes, and Southern
Rockies) as endangered, and a second population (Northwest and Northern Rockies) as
threatened. They found that four of the five statutory listing criteria had been met.
Regions 3 and 5, along with the USFWS's Washington State field office, all endorsed
Region 6's proposed rule to list the lynx. In addition, numerous biologists and lynx
experts also supported listing the lynx under the ESA. Despite the overwhelming
evidence, on November 10, 1994, the USFWS Acting Director sent a memorandum to Region
6's Director, stating that it had reviewed the proposed rule and found that the lynx
did not warrant listing under the ESA for two reasons --
- the proposed rule did not provide any conclusive evidence of biological
vulnerability or real threats to the species in the contiguous 48 states, and,
- the proposed listing did not follow the guidelines set forth in a draft
policy under consideration by the USFWS regarding what constituted a "distinct
population segment" listable under the ESA.
The draft population policy, which is still undergoing public notice and comment,
has not been formally adopted by the USFWS.
December 27, 1994
Contrary to the overwhelming evidence, the USFWS denied the petition to list
the lynx under the ESA.
March 27, 1995
Defenders of Wildlife, the Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Greater Ecosystem
Alliance and other groups gave notice of their intent to sue the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) for the agency's failure to list the Lynx as a threatened
or endangered species in the United States. Defenders noted the failure was
inconsistent with findings made by FWS field biologists who provided the
scientific information necessary to show the Lynx warranted listing.
March 27, 1997
Federal district court Judge Gladys Kessler rules against the Department of
the Interior (DOI) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for failing
to adequately consider all evidence indicating that the lynx should be
listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In the 38-page opinion by
Judge Gladys Kessler, the failure to list the lynx was found inconsistent
with scientific findings made by the FWS' own field biologists.
May 22, 1997
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges the elusive cat has suffered
significant population losses in the lower 48 states, but refuses to declare
the lynx as an endangered species. "Unfortunately, our resources are limited,
and other species are in worse condition," said Ralph Morgenweck, director of
Fish and Wildlife Service's Denver regional office.
It is crystal clear that the motivation behind the decision not to list the
lynx was purely political -- biology never factored in. The USFWS has acted
in an arbitrary and capricious manner which is a violation of the Administrative
Procedures Act, and has consistently violated the Endangered Species Act. Thus
another lawsuit has been filed. Environmental groups must continue to aggressively
pursue the listing of the lynx and other threatened species. We must also publicly
chastise the federal government for its politicization of biology, and for
ignoring its responsibility to protect animal and plant life as mandated by law.
author's note:
Material based on main components contained within the following page:
Wild Rockies' Predator Project:
Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Lynx
|
