Example of Why the State Role under the Endangered Species Act should not be changed

Example of Why the State Role under the Endangered Species Act should not be changed: The state role in preserving wildlife diversity especially for predators such as the Mexican wolf is crucial.  As has been documented in the agonizingly slow Mexican Wolf recovery effort, lack of state cooperation can derail plans of the USFWS even when that organization is run by administrations such as Clinton and Obama that theoretically support the recovery of wolves. The Mexicanwolves.org NGO has released an eye-opening report on the role of states in the recovery of Mexican wolves---its review covers Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado. It details how each of these states has acted to oppose and/or undermine wolf recovery despite the fact that a large minority of their populations support wolf recovery—even in areas where the wolves would reside. It shows how the revised plan for Mexican wolf recovery of the USFWS has been affected by states—the USFWS plan diverges from the “best available science” and instead sides with the states on the following crucial issues:
 
Comparison of “Best Available Science” versus State position versus USFWS draft plan:
 

1. Science says that population goal for the southwestern states would be at least 200 each state and Mexico for total of 750 stable for 8 years. State goal is 325 total—wolves above this limit to be killed. 320 wolves in Arizona and New Mexico and 170 in Mexico over 8 years.
2. Geography: Science says that U.S. can support several hundred wolves over Arizona, New Mexico, Grand Canyon, and Southern Rockies—that only about 100 can be supported in Mexico. State position is that most wolves should be located in Mexico. USFWS plan does not allow wolves north of I40.
3. Connectivity: Science says that removal from ESA protection should only occur when “natural dispersal” meets reproduction needs for stable population through good connectivity. State position would not allow wolves above I40. USFWS plan has nothing on connectivity issue.
4. Human-caused mortality: Science says that should be less than 20% over 8 year period. Arizona proposes more killing of wolves for attacking livestock. USFWS plan discusses mortality issue but sets not criteria.
5. Adequate regulatory protection: science says states must provide adequate protection and demonstrate capacity to do so. States do not specify protection. USFWS plan holds that effective regulations already exist.

 
This document and discussion is especially important as the Republican-dominated Congress is pushing to “update” (i.e., weaken) the Endangered Species Act and all of the Republican proposals give priority to states in making decisions about endangered species and listing (and delisting) especially of controversial species like wolves.  If these “updates” to ESA pass, science will been undermine and the threats to species such as Mexican wolves will doom the recovery effort. Check out the report:
Four States’ Efforts to Derail Wolf Recovery: Whose side are they on? Four States’ Efforts to Derail Wolf Recovery Mexican Wolves are in real trouble. http://mexicanwolves.org/uploads/Four_States_Derail_Wolf_Recovery.pdf
​