Perhaps no other species than the greater sage-grouse better embodies the ongoing struggle between federal rules and state efforts with respect to protecting creatures and plant life whose livelihoods are threatened.
The ground-dwelling bird has widespread habitat across 11 Western states, each of which has seen an increase in development that encroaches on the grouse, to negative effect on its populations. This trend caught the attention of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, which will make a final decision on whether to list the bird as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act by Sept. 30.
In the meantime, a region-wide coalition has partnered for years with landowners, farmers, ranchers, state governors, wildlife management agencies and conservation groups to craft management plans, habitat exchanges and other on-the-ground strategies to improve the grouse’s lot in the developing West. Now, the Western Governors’ Association wants to use its experience with the grouse and other threatened species to help re-tune the ESA for better results all around. The conversation is warranted, with great potential.
In the local, state and regional attempts to improve sage-grouse habitat, and therefore ward off a federal listing, the wide-ranging stakeholders have built a well-stocked toolbox for landowners to use. Conservation easements provide some financial incentive for landowners to keep sage-grouse habitat from any future development, and can be written with protective prescription for the bird – including commitments to keep any construction out of grouse breeding and nesting areas, plans for conifer removal to restore the sage brush habitat that the birds prefer, fence-marking or removal to keep predators away and grazing rotation to keep habitat vibrant.
These efforts, vibrant in Colorado for both the greater sage-grouse, and closer to home, the Gunnison sage-grouse – a related species listed as “threatened” despite successful local conservation work – have developed with the input of significant research from Colorado Parks and Wildlife scientists, as well as that of independent conservation biologists. There is no similar effort from the federal Fish and Wildlife Service, hence the frustration among Western states – including Colorado, which is suing FWS for its Gunnison sage-grouse listing decision – that are undertaking costly, broad-based, culture-changing work to protect these birds.
The fundamental issue is how to balance the regulatory implications of the Endangered Species Act – which is in place, presumably, to protect critters and plants at risk of oblivion but does not necessarily carry with it the resources to do so – against state and local on-the-ground efforts. If the question is, “What is the best thing for the sage-grouse?” the answer is more complex than “list it as threatened or endangered.” Instead, the conversation should quickly turn to what needs to be done to improve, restore or gain habitat to support vulnerable grouse populations. There, the non-ESA efforts are showing results.
Therein lies the opportunity for the Western Governors’ Association to spark a needed discussion about the efficacy of species protection efforts – both from WGA’s members and the federal government. The goal of the work must be to strike a useful and actionable balance between the stick of the Endangered Species Act and the carrot of collaborative efforts among stakeholders locally, statewide, regionally and with federal agency partners. There is a growing body of evidence on how to do this well, and plenty of examples of how to do it poorly. It is time for an updated playbook – Colorado and its Western neighbors are right to call for a revision.
