Bears near US-Canada border merit endangered status
Animals and plants can be considered endangered even if they are not on the brink of extinction. That is how a judge ruled in overturning the U.S. government's re-classification of a small population of grizzly bears. The bears are living in the forests of Montana and Idaho near the Canada border.
The ruling was made by U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen. The ruling affects the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It is blocked from narrowing the definition of an endangered species. That is for its future decisions. It cannot be done without explaining why it wants to make the policy change.
The federal Endangered Species Act defines an endangered species as one that is "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
In 2014, the Fish and Wildlife Service made a judgement. It thought that 40 to 50 Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bears living in the mountainous, remote part of Montana and Idaho are not endangered. They felt this because they are not "on the brink of extinction." This reason was used only once before. It was used to justify keeping polar bears from endangered status.
The federal agency used that reasoning to upgrade the status of Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bears. The status was upgraded to "threatened." This came after the bears spent decades on a waiting list. They were waiting to to be classified as "endangered." This led to a lawsuit from the conservation group Alliance for the Wild Rockies.
Christensen ruled that the government effectively changed its policy without explaining it or seeking public input. He reinstated the Cabinet-Yaak bears' status. The reinstated status warranted classification as an endangered species. This put them back on the waiting list.
The federal agency first used the "brink of extinction" reasoning in 2008. It used a memo to explain its decision not to list the polar bear as an endangered species.
The judge said that memo was only supposed to apply to polar bears. It did not set a new policy for defining endangered species. But that the agency tried to apply it to the Cabinet-Yaak bears.
The ruling affects future listings. The Fish and Wildlife Service must prove that the federal law allows the "brink of extinction" reasoning. It must provide an explanation of why that reasoning is needed.
"It will apply to all other species when the FWS is considering if a species should be listed as endangered." This is according to Mike Garrity. He is the executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.
A Fish and Wildlife Service spokeswoman did not immediately respond.
The Cabinet-Yaak bears are one of six grizzly populations. The populations are in the Northern Rockies from Washington state to Wyoming.
All are considered threatened. However, one group is not included. Those excluded are 700 grizzlies living in and around Yellowstone National Park. That is about 300 miles (480 kilometers) southeast of the area with portions of three national forests where the Cabinet-Yaak bears live.
The U.S. government declared Yellowstone grizzlies recovered. It lifted federal protections for them last month.
The government agency ruled in 2014 that the Cabinet-Yaak population had stabilized. It no longer needed to be considered as an endangered species. The agency acknowledged their numbers were still far short of the 100 bears targeted for a recovered population. It still merited "threatened" status.
A "threatened" classification provides many protections. The protections include laws against killing or hurting them. The protections also include their habitat.
Until that 2014 decision, the Fish and Wildlife Service classified Cabinet-Yaak bears as warranting endangered species status. But it ruled that other troubled species had a higher priority. These include red-crowned parrot in Texas and the Puerto Rico harlequin butterfly.
So the bears spent decades on a list with hundreds of other species. They were all waiting for their turn.
The Alliance for the Wild Rockies argued the bears are still endangered. The reason: their population is less than half of the recovery target.
The conservation group also argued that they are isolated from other bear populations. The group says and the bears face serious threats from human activities. These activities include mining and logging.