Western Watersheds Project ESSENGER · Western Watersheds Project ... Dr. Ralph Maughan ... Karen...

MESSENGERWestern Watersheds Project

Vol. XXIII, No. 2 Fall 2016

Working to protect and restore western watersheds and wildlifethrough education, public policy initiatives and legal advocacy.

♺ Printed on 100% Post Consumer Waste ♺

A WOLF IN W

ESTERN WASHINGTON, © ERIC FROMM

ER, COURTESY FLICKR CREATIVE COMM

ONS

www.westernwatersheds.org

Profanity Peak WolvesKilled for Livestock

Ag Industry AbandonsFrivolous Trespass

Lawsuit

Boulder-White CloudsAllotment Retired!

Advisory Board

Dr. John CarterDebra DonahueMartin Flannes

Dr. Steven HermanDr. Don JohnsonLouise Lasley

Jon MarvelDr. Elizabeth Painter Dr. Tom PringleTodd Shuman

Louise Wagenknecht

Western Watersheds Project State and Regional Offices

Main Office ..........................P.O. Box 1770 • Hailey, ID 83333

(208) 788-2290 • [email protected]

Executive Director • [email protected]

Boise ....................................P.O. Box 2863 • Boise, ID 83701


Arizona .......738 N. 5th Avenue, Suite 200 • Tucson, AZ 85705


California ............................P.O. Box 2364 • Reseda, CA 91337

[email protected]

Wyoming, UT & CO ........P.O. Box 1160 • Pinedale, WY 82941


Montana..........................P.O. Box 1135 • Hamilton, MT 59840


Oregon ..........126 SE Alberta St, Ste 208 • Portland, OR 97211


WWP’s Fax Number is (208) 475-4702

Western Watersheds Project StaffErik Molvar ....................................................Executive DirectorGreta Anderson ................................................Deputy DirectorMelissa Cain ....................Bighorn Habitat Protection Campaign

CoordinatorKen Cole ..............................................................Idaho DirectorJeremy Greenberg ........................................Operations DirectorJosh Osher ......................................................Montana Director

and Public Policy ConsultantJonathan Ratner ................Colorado, Wyoming & Utah DirectorKristin Ruether ....................................................Senior AttorneyPaul Ruprecht ...................................................... Staff AttorneyErik Ryberg .......................................................... Legal CounselLaura Welp ................................................Ecosystems Specialist

Board of DirectorsDr. Ralph Maughan ......................................................PresidentGeorge Wuerthner ................................................Vice PresidentKelley Weston................................................Secretary-TreasurerKaren Klitz ....................................................................DirectorKaren Perry ....................................................................DirectorMike Halloran Esq. ........................................................DirectorDr. Bruce Hayse ............................................................Director

2 Messenger

Table of Contents

Welcome Erik Molvar! Travis Bruner & Jon Marvel WWP hires a qualified and passionate Executive Director.

Ag Industry Abandons Frivolous TrespassLawsuit Greta Anderson

Flimsy suit blows up in ranchers’ faces.

Boulder-White Clouds Allotment Retired! Kristin Ruether 60,000 acres in central Idaho are saved!

Justin Pidot Receives Sagebrush Sentinel

Profanity Peak Wolves Killed for LivestockPaul Ruprecht

Most of a Washington wolf pack is slaughtered as a result of intentional cattle mismanagement.

WWP takes on Wildlife Services Kristin Ruether WWP stands up to the government’s brutal killing machine.

National Park Service Abandons its Mission Jonathan Ratner Even our National Parks are not safe from industrialized cattle ranching on public lands.

Utah BLM Almost Does the Right Thing,But Doesn’t Laura Welp

Desert tortoise are sacrificed through the guise of cooperation.

WWP in DC Josh Osher

Western Watersheds ProjectMESSENGER

4

5

6

7

10

11

12

14

15

Fall 2016 3

WWP extends special thanks to the following supporters, each of whomcontributed $100 or more to our efforts over the last year. This generous

assistance helps to preserve and restore habitat for many species.Jeff AbelBob and Fraida AlandJohn AlcockDoug and Ellen AlvordGreta Anderson and Steev HiseJohn Andrick and Bev McBrienMartha ArveyMina M AustinDennis and Lynn BairdRanko BalogSteve and Salli BauerDavid BeckerPeter and Carole BeedlowArthur A Benson IILeo and Rosemary BensonSharon and Bruce BensonRobert L. Beschta & CharlaineBeschta TrustDoug BeusThe Wayne & Betty BickleyCharitable TrustSharla and Ronald BilchikHope and Wes Bisbing Family TrustTom and Florence BlanchardJanice BowersSheila BowersGreg and Kathy BoylstonRoss and Julia BrunerThomas and Betty BudlongNancy A BullKaren ByingtonJames M. ByrnesLorie CahnCarianne CampbellTimothy CampbellAndre CasanaveJohn and Nancy Cassidy FamilyFoundationNancy ChaseRadcliffe and Cheryl ChestonRonald E. ChizmarEloise ChristensenTed ChuJames & Barbara CiminoFoundationJim CodaLindy CoganBill CollinsCommunity Foundation of Jackson HoleCharles ConnCox Family FundJames S CoxNick CoxCross Charitable FoundationConnie CunninghamRichard CurtisKarin DaviesPaul and Marilyn DavisSteve and Mary Deffé

Eugene DeMineLouis and Kathleen DerschDebra Donahue and Chip RawlinsCharlie DonnesMichele and Lloyd DorseySusan and David DrownE&H Humbly Bumbly FoundationMichael and Linda EngleJonathan EpsteinRichard ErmanF1 Key FoundationRoxanne and Tom FactorLynette Fannon-LimkinMary FayDaralene and John FinnellRandy FischerMartin FlannesConor FlynnJerry FlyntTim FordRobbie and Carole FreundWoody and Margery FriedlanderMarlene Fritz and John GriffinKevin and Tina FrostadJerome Fulton and Mary Wills FultonJulie Ann Giacobassi and Zach HallSusan H GillilandMonica GlickmanJohn C GoetzTaylor and Bill GoforthThe Good Works InstituteFred GoodsellTerri GoonJohn and Vicky GrahamCarol GreenAnn GreeneAlan GregoryCJ GribblePaul GriffinAndrew GutmanRalph and Louise HaberfeldWilliam HagdornVirginia S. and Michael J. Halloran Charitable FundSusan and Ken HanawaltJon and Vicki HannaCristina HarmonGinger HarmonAnn HarveyDavid L HaynesBruce HayseHecht 2008 Grantor Charitable Lead Annuity TrustJune HeilmanTom HeinrichPatricia HelveyDaniel Herrig

Harrison HilbertMelinda HirschFrederic C. HoffmanDaniel and Barbara HurlbuttJames HurttErnest F Hyde JrKen and Anne JacksonKevin JamisonMarilyn JasperDale and Robin JensenAndrew JohnsonArthur JohnsonDon and Suzanne JohnsonJones Family CharitableFoundationKevin KaneJay KaplanSteve and Cynthia KearnsBruce KeatingJanet KeeLarry KeeneyMichael KenneyJerry G and Viesia M KirkBill KlitzKaren Klitz and Ralph AdamsKnobloch Family FoundationMIke and Lynn KoeppenRichard KolbrenerDaniel KozarskyRichard and Karen KrogerKen and Ginna LagergrenAndy and Gusti LaidlawRick LamplughDiana LandisInge-Lise and Jack LaneMark Langner and Lynn InouyeMark LehmkuhleJill LenhardtDr. Charles A LenknerSteven Leuthold Family FoundationCarole J Lewis and Ted WalczakDavid LiebGreg LindDeborah and Peter LipmanLive Oak FoundationRichard E and Barbara J LounsburyBill and Josephine LoweElise LufkinMartin LukesMichelle MacKenzieSuzan R. Mackler FundMaki FoundationPam MarcumBrandon MarkRon and Cay MarquartPaul MartinJonathan H. and Stefanie MarvelRalph and Jackie MaughanCynthia McAfee

Oralie McAfeeJames D. McClureHi and Ann McComishRyan McDermottAl and Lee McGlinskyJoe and Trina McNealMike McQueenMark MeringSaralaine MilletRebecca MirskyGlenn Monahan and Nancy SchultzDave MooreChristopher MorrisJohn and Myra MummaRichard NaseLinda and Stephen NashChuck NealAnn and Kent NelsonMike NemacheckLoren L and Dorothy R NewmanBruce NicolJodi NorrisBruce NorvellBrian O'ReillyNancy OrrThomas OsoskiPeter and Jean OssorioBruce OstermannPat and Joan PalmerVistara ParhamGrace PerezKaren and Hank PerryPesky Family FoundationScott H. PhillipsNuri and John PierceRichard PrangeJonathan ProctorMike Quigley and Bonnie OlinDebra RandolphTom Ribe and Monique SchoustraKathy and Dave RichmondBC RimbeauxCarlyn RingRichard RingelstetterRichard and Carmen RobertsLisa and Stephen RobertsonBill and Sharon RobinsFred and Jeanne RoseWayne and Kristine RuddSusan RudnickiKristin RuetherBarbara RupersJeff and Judy RuprechtDebra Salstrom and Richard EasterlySagebrush Habitat Conservation FundMark SalvoWayne Salvo

Sangham FoundationJohn and Eliza SchmidtKen SchneiderOlivia ScottClee and Mary SealingKen and Louise SeilerBeth SellarsRobert D. and Marsha SellersThe Shapiro Family Charitable FoundationLeon Shaul and Kathleen JensonTorrey ShaweT.R. and Emily ShelbyB.J. SmithDon SmithSomalwar Family FundWill and Karen SomersSperling FoundationJanice StangerJeffrey Steinberg and Sherry Warner-SteinbergDavid StellingC&F Stremmel Family TrustJames G. StewartNancy StokleyHelen Stone and Ben ScheppsWalter H SykesMeredith and Tory TaylorTim ThomasTerra Nova FoundationTroy ThomasThomas ThorpMichael ToddThomas Todrank and Karen McPeakDr. Charles TrostTara TroutnerDennis and Sue UmshlerSteve and Amy UnfriedDyrck and Karen Van HyningThe Von Der Heyden Family FoundationCharles J. WaagCharlie WalterDick Walton and Susan NewellDean and Susan WarrenWiliam WatermanKelley Weston and Kathleen DiepenbrockMichael WickesMartin A and Carol L WilkeJennifer WilliamsWhitman CollegeWood River FoundationYellowstone to Unitas ConnectionGordon YoungerRobert and Patience ZiebarthTom ZieberTheresa ZmolaBen Zuckerman

Welcome Erik Molvar!

By Travis Bruner and Jon Marvel It is our great pleasure to welcomeErik Molvar, the new Executive Directorof Western Watersheds Project. Erikhas a long history of activism in theWest, especially on protecting sage-grouse habitat, and we’ve always beenimpressed with his work. His desire tolead WWP into the future is a greatboon for the organization and the imper-iled landscapes of America’s publiclands.

Erik brings over fifteen years ofexperience working in the conservationnonprofit arena to this leadership role.He’s worked most recently for our allies,WildEarth Guardians, and spent eightyears as Executive Director of theBiodiversity Conservation Alliance (BCA)in Wyoming. WWP and BCA workedtogether on several projects and certainlyshared a vision and commitment forprotecting species and watersheds fromindustrialization and destruction. WWPalso worked closely with Erik at WildEarthGuardians on sage-grouse land man-agement plan amendments and legislativelobbying in D.C. Many of WWP’s currentstaff have experience working with Erikalready, and he’s a good fit with theorganizational culture and spirit. Erik’s educational background inWildlife Biology (B.S., Univ. Montana)and Wildlife Management (M.S, Univ.Alaska at Fairbanks) and his personal

interests in hiking, flyfishing, hunting,and skiing also mean that he bringsextensive scientific evidence and personalperspective to issues facing westernwildlife species and their habitat.Additionally, Erik is interested in historichome renovations and painting. He hasthree children, ages 16, 14, and 9 wholive in Laramie, and his partner of fouryears, Lori Howe, is a published poetand PhD candidate. Being the ED of WWP is a toughjob, and the leadership role of such ahard-hitting group can, at times, feellike one is being used for target practice.But WWP’s strong staff, thoughtfulBoard of Directors, smart and savvyAdvisory Board, and our many interestedand engaged members makes it so thatthe ED isn’t alone at the top. We thinkthat Erik’s energy and intellect will inspiregreat things.

Welcome, Erik! Travis Bruner provides strategic and diplo-

matic leadership on the Four ForestsRestoration Initiative as the Arizona

Forests Program Manager for the GrandCanyon Trust.

Jon Marvel is enjoying retirement and fight-ing to conserve public lands on the Board of

Directors for the Sagebrush HabitatConservation Fund.

4 Messenger

New WWP Executive Director marches in solidarity with the Standing Rock Lakotaagainst the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Ag Industry AbandonsFrivolous TrespassLawsuit

By Greta Anderson

Good news! We’veprevailed in theWyoming lawsuitbrought by anti-WWPattorney Karen Budd-Falen and a small cellof Wyoming ranchers

who sought to stop our important grazingmonitoring work in the state. In June 2014, the ranchers broughta frivolous lawsuit that alleged trespass,sullied our reputation in the media, andhoped to force WWP to pay hundredsof thousands of dollars in punitive dam-ages and severely restrict our access topublic lands. This was done in retaliationfor WWP’s Wyoming office havingrevealed extreme water quality impactson public watercourses, pollution arisingfrom private grazing operations. Armed with maps and wild specu-lation, the ranchers and Budd-Falen

accused WWP of having trespassed tocollect the water samples as a way ofgetting at WWP’s financial stability.Attorney Budd-Falen admitted as muchin a subscription-only interview withLivestock Weekly in July 2015. She dis-closed that she “figured out a way, thatin certain circumstances,” there is a wayto sue “radical environmental groups,”and described that she thought it wasfun to try to attack our work. She alsogloated about having sought WWP’sfinancial data, and suing for monetarypunitive damages, with the hope that

such penalties would be “the only thing[WWP] is going to listen to.” When it became clear last springthat the court wasn’t going to order anypunitive damages because WWP didnot, the ranchers quickly moved to settlethe case. WWP admitted to minor, inci-dental, and inadvertent trespass on roadswhere ownership boundaries were unclear.The ranchers got nothing more than anagreement that WWP won’t access publiclands through restricted private acreage– the same rules that apply to everyother person driving in the West. Settling this case and getting it offour docket means we can go back todoing the important work of documentingwater quality violations, habitat impacts,and trespass grazing abuses caused bycattle and sheep operations on publiclands. And, it means we can now turnour focus on overturning the State ofWyoming’s data censorship statutes thatremain a disturbing threat to scientificwork on public lands in Wyoming. WWPis currently appealing the adverse decisionissued last spring in that case. Thanks to all WWP’s members andsupporters for sticking with us throughthese troubling and frivolous legal alle-gations!

Greta Anderson is WWP’s DeputyDirector. She lives in Tucson, AZ.

Fall 2016 5

Cattle pollute waterways with toxic bacteria in Wyoming

© JONATHAN RATNER/WW

P

Boulder-White CloudsAllotment Retired!

By Kristin Ruether

For decades, WWPfounder Jon Marvel eyeda stunning 432-acre ranchnear the mouth of Idaho’sEast Fork Salmon River,boasting over a mile ofEast Fork frontage and

set against dramatic cliffs across the river.The property held the grazing permits foralmost 60,000 acres of federal public lands,much of it in the wild East Fork watershed,where WWP had gotten its start biddingon state land grazing leases. Jon saw thepotential to create a grazing-free refuge inthis important landscape, and in early 2000when the ranch went up for sale, he and aWWP supporter hatched the ambitiousidea of purchasing the ranch and retiringthe associated grazing permits. This plan encountered more roadblocks,by more opponents, over a longer periodof time, than anyone could have imagined.But after sixteen years of relentless tenacityby WWP, its supporters, volunteers, andattorneys, that dream has largely become areality. In August 2016, the BLM SpudCreek allotment was officially and permanentlyclosed to livestock grazing; and four of thefive other allotments are also effectivelyclosed. What follows is a brief history ofhow it happened. After the ranch was purchased in 2000by Valley Sun LLC, the property was chris-tened as the “Greenfire Preserve.” WWPhired an energetic ranch manager, StewChurchwell. Stew and volunteers beganrestoring the property, including removingmiles of barbed wire fencing and creatinggaps in the property boundary fence forwildlife passage. The Greenfire Preserve had the permitsfor three Forest Service grazing allotments– the Salmon River Breaks, Spud Creek,and Obsidian – and three Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) allotments – SpudCreek, Thompson Creek, and BradshawBasin (jointly held with other permittees). Under arcane Forest Service rules, anew grazing permittee must “validate” agrazing permit by turning out 90% of thepermitted numbers of livestock on theallotment. Valley Sun and WWP investigatedoptions for validating the permits, such aspurchasing cattle from the NatureConservancy to place on the allotments forone day. Those options did not work out,meaning the Forest Service permits werenever officially transferred to Valley Sun. However, long-term rest creates a certainbureaucratic inertia. With the allotmentsrested for years, WWP received commitmentsfrom the Forest Service to conduct an envi-ronmental analysis before reopening anyof them to grazing by another permittee.Thus far, the agency hasn’t mustered theeffort to do so. In fact, in 2012, the small600-acre Obsidian allotment was permanentlyclosed by the Sawtooth National Forest

Supervisor. WWP held a work party toremove all the internal fencing. BLM’s rules are theoretically more for-giving of grazing rest. They allow a permitteeto apply for permission to rest an allotmenteach year for reasons including conservation,and for the first few years, BLM approvedWWP’s request to do so. But in 2008, BLMbegan to deny Greenfire Preserve permissionto take conservation non-use, claiming therewas no justification to do so. In 2009, BLMformally cited Valley Sun for taking unau-thorized non-use, and simultaneously issueda decision allowing a neighboring rancherto graze Spud Creek. Valley Sun and WWPaggressively fought these actions, and quicklyachieved success in blocking the decisionto allow the neighboring rancher to graze. At the same time, livestock interestslobbied the U.S. Attorney’s office for assistancein harassing Valley Sun and WWP.Astoundingly, they were successful. DOJbegan a criminal investigation into whetherfalse statements were made to the federal

6 Messenger

Frog Lake, White Cloud Mountains in the Sawtooth National Recreation Area

© FREDLYFISH/WIKIM

EDIA COMM

ONS4

Fall 2016 7

government, a charge that threatened prisontime of up to five years. The purportedfalsities were early statements that ValleySun and WWP made when seeking per-mission for non-use, implying they wereconsidering acquiring cattle (as noted, com-pletely true). With the assistance of a stellarlegal team including famed criminal attorneyDavid Nevins and Laird Lucas, the prose-cution’s case quickly collapsed. After that ugly incident, BLM tried tocancel the Greenfire grazing permits outrightin 2010 for a variety of reasons includingthe failure to graze it with livestock. Butwith the assistance of Advocates for theWest, an administrative law judge twiceruled against the agency, halting the cancellationpending a hearing. BLM finally saw thewriting on the wall and withdrew its can-cellation decisions in February 2011. Soonthereafter, Valley Sun waived back theThompson Creek permit on BLM’s promiseto keep it closed, and BLM reissued theSpud Creek and Bradshaw Basin permitsto Valley Sun, which continued to take non-use. Finally, in 2015, Congress passed theSawtooth National Recreation Area andJerry Peak Wilderness Additions Act, awilderness bill that included a grazing retire-ment provision affecting 750,000 acres. (SeeSpring 2016 Messenger for more info.) Inspring 2016, Valley Sun LLC (now ownedby the Younger family), with the assistanceof the Sagebrush Habitat ConservationFund, waived the Spud Creek permit backto BLM. BLM officially retired the permitin a short letter on August 23, 2016, justover 16 years after the purchase of theGreenfire Preserve. Our favorite phrase inthe letter? “[A]ny and all livestock use ofthe Spud Creek Allotment . . . will be foreverterminated.” WWP is grateful to everyone who madethis ambitious dream happen.

Kristin is WWP’s Senior Attorney and rep-resented Valley Sun and WWP in challeng-ing BLM’s Greenfire permit cancellations

while she worked at Advocates for the West.

Justin Pidot receives the 2016Sagebrush Sentinel Award!

It is with great pleasure and honor that Western WatershedsProject recognizes Justin Pidot as the recipient of the 2016Sagebrush Sentinel Award! In particular, Western Watersheds Project is indebted toJustin for his impressive legal representation and expertisedefending our work in Wyoming. Western Watersheds Project

immeasurably benefitted from Justin’s pro bono representation both inchallenging the State of Wyoming’s Data Censorship Statutes and defendingWestern Watersheds Project against a frivolous trespass suit in the state. Thetruth is, without Justin, Western Watersheds Project might be struggling towork in Wyoming, but with his help we are on the offensive! The Sagebrush Sentinel Award is given annually to an individual whohas shown an outstanding commitment to preserving the environment. Theaward was established in honor of Jon Marvel, the founding director ofWestern Watersheds Project. Jon’s steadfast and tenacious environmentalismchanged the West, and has inspired many of us to continue challenging thestatus quo extractive vision that has been fragmenting and degrading thelandscape for centuries. As the 2016 Sagebrush Sentinel recipient, Justin’s name will be added tothe plaque developed by local Hailey artist Tom Teitge, and displayed onlineat www.westernwatersheds.org/sagebrush-sentinel.

Congratulations Justin and Thank You!

Justin sea kayaking in Glacier Bay National Park

The north border of the Spud Creek Allotment runs adjacent to the Salmon River.

Years of rest have allowed Spud Creek to recover from grazing.

© WW

P© W

WP

LegendSpud Creek Allotment

© WW

P© W

WP

© KEN COLE/WW

P

Profanity Peak WolvesKilled for Livestock

By Paul Ruprecht

Each year, govern-ment agencies kill thou-sands of nativepredators across theWest as a subsidy toranchers who graze live-stock on our public

lands. As this practice increasingly comesto light, condemnation of it continuesto grow. Late this summer, public angerand disgust boiled over when Washington’sDepartment of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW) gunned down members ofthe Profanity Peak wolf pack after thewolves preyed on cows grazing in theColville National Forest. While not anisolated incident, this slaughter nonethelessillustrates why killing wildlife to benefitthe livestock industry is so misguided. First, nearly all of the Profanity Peakpack’s territory is Forest Service publiclands in the rugged and remote KettleRange. The area is currently proposedas wilderness in the Colville Forest Planrevision. It is a place where wolves shouldbe free to act like wolves. Second, thepermittee whose cows were killedunloaded the cattle only four miles fromthe pack’s den. Cows and calves weremilling around the den within days. Hethen placed salt blocks, which attractcows, on the wolf pack’s rendezvoussite (the area where the pups wait whilethe adults are hunting). Livestock displacethe favored prey of wolves: elk and deer.Small wonder, then, when wolves attackcows instead. Six cows were confirmed killed orinjured by the Profanity Peak wolves inJuly and early August. In response,WDFW authorized killing the entirepack of 11–12 wolves. Wolves havenever been reintroduced to Washington;they have begun to repopulate the state

on their own from Canada and sur-rounding states. To date, the populationhas only reached 90 wolves. In otherwords, WDFW gave the go-ahead toeliminate over 10% of the wolves inthe state—for killing a half dozen cowson public land, for which the ownerwas already compensated. And this wasnot the first time that the rancher involvedhas caused wolf killings. In 2012, WDFWkilled the nearby Wedge Pack after con-flicts with his cattle. The Forest Service shares the blamefor this killing. Nothing requires theColville National Forest to authorizegrazing in areas where livestock are likelyto come into conflict with wolves. Butauthorizing livestock in areas like theKettle Crest and expecting wolves toavoid them—then trapping and shootingthem from helicopters when they donot—is truly senseless. Adding to the controversy, somegroups, including Defenders of Wildlife,the Humane Society of the United States,and Conservation Northwest, supportedthe killing. The Washington Cattlemen’sAssociation issued a statement expressingtheir “gratitude and appreciation” tothose groups for doing so, and praising

their “courage.” And then WashingtonState University issued a shameful apologyfor the accurate statements of a respectedecologist at the university’s Large CarnivoreConservation Lab about the grazingpermittee’s sloppy operation. On September 1, several environ-mental groups, including WWP, andapproximately 100 citizens rallied outsidethe Department of Natural Resourcesbuilding in Olympia, demanding a haltto the ongoing wolf killings, and callingfor wildlife managers to prioritize wildlifeover the private profits of ranchers.The senselessness of livestock grazingin wolf habitat was a message repeatedduring the day. It is a message that WWPrepeats loudly and frequently, and willdo so until the balance tips towardsallowing wildlife to be wild in wild places. WDFW suspended the hunt at theend of the grazing season, after havingkilled 7 of the pack's wolves. Anotherwolf, a pup, is also presumed to havedied, leaving only four wolves in thepack.

Paul Ruprecht is WWP’s Staff Attorney.He lives in Portland, OR.

10 Messenger

In September, citizens rallied outside the Department of Natural Resources building inOlympia, demanding a halt to wolf killings.

© BROKS FAHY/PREDATOR DEFENSE

WWP takes on WildlifeServices

By Kristin Ruether

In what has become asick annual tradition,the U.S. Departmentof Agriculture’s“Wildlife Services” aeri-ally gunned down 20wolves in central Idaho’s

Clearwater National Forest earlier thisyear. This is in addition to the dozensof wolves the agency kills at the behestof livestock ranchers around Idaho eachyear—and the hundreds of wolves nowkilled by private hunters and trappersevery year. WWP and allies are fighting back.On June 1, we filed a federal court caseagainst Wildlife Services for violatingfederal requirements to analyze its wolfkilling actions. Wildlife Services’ killing is conductedunder the auspices of a 2011 documentthat purported to analyze the environ-mental impacts of the agency’s wolf-killing across Idaho. But a close reviewreveals the plan is flawed and outdated.It was written when wolves were stillprotected under the Endangered Species

Act—before Congress shamefully orderedwolves delisted via a legislative rider. Itassumed that wolves would either remainlisted, or that a 2008 Idaho Fish andGame Department (IDFG) plan tomaintain 500 or more wolves wouldremain in effect. But that assumption was wrong. Infact, after delisting IDFG reverted toan obsolete 2002 plan drafted by theLegislature, calling for a mere 15 wolfpacks, or about 150 wolves, in the state. To implement that goal, IDFG hasinstituted liberal wolf hunting andtrapping seasons that result in the killingof hundreds of wolves every year (256in 2015). It has also issued new elk man-agement plans that call for aggressivereductions of wolf populations whereelk are not meeting IDFG’s artificialpopulation objectives—even inWilderness. Wildlife Services did not considerany of these serious cumulative impactson Idaho wolf populations. In addition,a wealth of new science has revealedthat killing wolves has unintended con-sequences. In fact, one study foundthat killing wolves can actually increasecattle depredation, as intact wolf packsare less likely to prey upon livestockthan lone wolves. This calls into question

the basic premise of Wildlife Services’killings for ranchers. New information has also emergedregarding wolves’ importance to trophiccascades, or the effects of large predatorsthat ripple across the ecosystem. Forexample, the presence of wolves alterselk activity, which in turn protects ripariansystems where elk browse. So removingwolves can cause widespread watershedimpacts, something the federal agenciesshould consider. WWP is pressing Wildlife Servicesto supplement its analysis of its Idahowolf-killing program and conduct a fullEnvironmental Impact Statement.Importantly, we are asking the court toorder Wildlife Services to stop killingwolves in Idaho until it has done so. WWP and our allies (Center forBiological Diversity, Friends of theClearwater, WildEarth Guardiansand Predator Defense) are representedby Advocates for the West and WWPattorneys. We’re proud to bring somemuch-needed scrutiny onto WildlifeServices, which has traditionally operatedbehind the scenes, and are hopeful thisaction will lead to less persecution ofwild Idaho wolves.

Kristin Ruether is WWP’s Senior Attorney.She lives in Boise, ID.

Fall 2016 11

A Wildlife Services trapper sics his dog on a trapped coyote.

© WILDLIFE SERVICES

National Park ServiceAbandons its Mission

By Jonathan Ratner

The mission of theNational Park Serviceis to “[p]reserve unimpairedthe natural and culturalresources and values of theNational Park System forthe enjoyment, education,

and inspiration of this and future generations.” Well, that is the theory at least. While most national parks do notallow livestock grazing, thirteen parksstill do. For the last 5 years, WWP’sWyoming Office has been dealing withtwo of these in Utah: Glen CanyonNational Recreation Area, which hasthe largest grazing program of any Parkat 762,361 acres, and the adjacent CapitolReef National Park. Through extensive acquisition ofrecords from both Parks and our owndata collection, WWP has found thatwhen livestock use and the NationalPark Service’s conservation missionclash, it is really no contest. The NationalPark Service abandons its mission andgrovels at the hooves of the sacred cow. Capitol Reef National Park containssignificant portions of the habitat oftwo rare and federally-protected cactithat are harmed by livestock grazing.Cattle are jeopardizing the very existenceof these species yet has the Park hasfailed to muster the courage to put itsmission ahead of appeasement of thelivestock industry. The Park Service had never botheredto even conduct an environmental analysison the impacts of its grazing programon Park resources until they were suedby WWP in 2014. After announcing itwould undertake a new review, the Parkissued new interim grazing permits undera “Categorical Exclusion,”(CE), a typeof cursory analyses that also breaks the

law. WWP amended its case against NPSfor these additional violations. The agency has recently begun ananalysis of its grazing program but,from the outset, it enshrines livestockgrazing as a “right” and not a “privilege,”exceeding even the Bureau of LandManagement and Forest Service. Thenew analysis trots out the usual ‘solutions’to livestock-caused degradation such asthe industrialization of wildlands withfences, pipelines and water developments,without recognizing that these are live-stock-caused degradation too. WWP recently collected vegetationdata inside and outside of 30-year livestockexclosures at Capitol Reef to help demon-

strate the severe impact livestock grazingis causing to Park resources. Grazedareas had less then 57 percent of thevascular plant diversity of exclosures,and 260 to 1,325% more bare groundthan the protected areas! Biological soilcrust, another critical component ofsoil stability, was also decimated in thegrazed samples. Many areas are showing severe soildisturbance and erosion. Yet, nearly ahalf century after the establishment ofthe Park, the Park Service has donenothing but watch as our national heritageis destroyed. The legislation that established GlenCanyon National Recreation Area gives

12 Messenger

On the Soda allotment, a solar water pump has acted as a livestock exclosure for the pastten years. Inside, the Indian ricegrass is healthy and vigorous at two feet tall and root

crowns over a foot in diameter.

Complete devastation caused by cattle.


P© JONATHAN RATNER/W

WP

Fall 2016 13

the Bureau of Land Management respon-sibility for only “the administration ofgrazing leases,” but in the entire historyof this Park, the Bureau of LandManagement has instead controlledevery aspect of grazing on its 762,361acres, with disastrous results. One irritated Superintendent in the1970’s wrote: “The point I am trying to make isthat although BLM is directed to admin-ister any grazing leases which are author-ized by the Service, the jurisdiction overthe lands involved, and consequentlythe determination as to the lands to begrazed is vested in the National ParkService. Somewhere in our discussion

with BLM, this important distinctionin authority is being disregarded or over-looked, and I believe it must be clearlyrecognized as a foundation upon whichany meaningful cooperation betweenthe two agencies must be based” (empha-sis in the original). Clearly he was not supported by hissuperiors, and so the impacts of livestockcontinued to this day. Records reviewedby WWP from the late 1960’s to presentshow that the Park Service is fully awareof the degradation of Park resources,but is not engaging in any way to improvethe situation. Historical documents even showthat the Park Service is fully aware that

archeological resources are being destroyedby livestock use but has not preventedit. Almost ten years ago, the Bureau ofLand Management illegally permittedthe drilling of a well and the bulldozingof a stock pond on Park lands. Nosurvey work was done prior to approvalbut some years after the drilling, thePark Service did a survey of the areaand concluded: “The effects of cattle grazing areanathema to the archeological record.Although it may not be politically possibleto permanently withdraw the SodaAllotment from grazing, not doing sois a death warrant for scientific studyand preservation of its archeologicalrecord.” In a 2003 report on the grazing pro-gram, the Park Service found a stunning65% of the archeological sites it assessedwere categorized in the “moderate” and“severe” categories of livestock impacts,which the report defined as: “A moderate impact is one that willresult in irreparable damage to theintegrity of the resource and the lossof information if action to correct theimpact is not taken within 5 years. Sitesidentified as having severe impacts receivethat rating because the resource hasbeen so badly damaged by grazing activ-ities that the resource will be significantlydamaged or irretrievably lost if actionis not taken within 2 years.” Thirteen years later, the report isgathering dust and no actions have beentaken. Impacts to foundational biologicalresources are similarly being ignored. Its a painful and unfortunate reality,but even the National Park Service, ourmost esteemed land management agency,spinelessly supplicates before the mythicalholy cow.

Jonathan Ratner is WWP’s Wyoming,Colorado & Utah Director. He lives in

Pinedale, WY.

Outside of the pump exclosure, average root crowns are around two inches and grazedheavily. Many plants have been ripped out by the roots.

Beautiful vistas in Capitol Reef National Park.

© ERIK MOLVAR


P

14 Messenger

Utah BLM AlmostDoes the Right Thing,But Doesn’t

By Laura Welp

It was difficult forthose of us reviewingthe Bureau of LandManagement's (BLM’s)Draft EnvironmentalImpact Statement (EIS)to believe: Plans for

two new BLM administered NationalConservation Areas (NCAs) appearedto be prioritizing natural resource pro-tection over development in the southernUtah! Emphasis, unfortunately, on “draft”. The Omnibus Public LandsManagement Act (OPLMA) of 2009created two Natural Conservation Areas(NCAs) on the St. George Field Office,and the BLM had to prepare an EIS todescribe and analyze new managementpriorities. One of the most importantfeatures of the Draft EIS was to keepintact the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve forthe threatened Mohave Desert tortoise,despite pressure from local Washington

County officials to bisect it with a high-way. The reserve has been in place for20 years. In the early 1990s, St. Georgewas booming and developers were makingmillions. As the area built up, peoplenoticed that the desert tortoise populationwas plummeting, and the species waslisted as Threatened under the EndangeredSpecies Act. Washington County andthe federal government came up withan agreement that would allow devel-opment of over 350,000 acres of landoutside the proposed reserve and thekilling of 1,169 tortoises. In exchange,the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve would becreated to protect 61,000 acres of occu-pied and potential tortoise habitat fromdevelopment. Two decades later, the city is com-plaining about the traffic congestionthat came with all that development.They want to build a 6,350-acre utilityand transportation corridor smack inthe center of the reserve. And they saythe BLM promised to allow them to dothat in the Omnibus law, which createdthe Red Cliffs NCA to protect the reserve. Actually, OPLMA just requires BLMto “identify 1 or more alternatives for

a northern transportation route in theCounty” when they develop a travelmanagement plan. In the Draft EIS,BLM adhered to that stipulation andincluded a right-of-way through thereserve in one of their alternatives.However, just because the Omnibus leg-islation required them to include suchan alternative didn't mean the BLM hadto choose that alternative. And theydidn't. Their analysis showed that a roadwould undermine the purpose of thetortoise reserve, invalidate the county's1996 agreement, and run counter to theOmnibus law. It would also go againstagency guidance for managing NCAs,which prioritizes resource protectionover development. Not choosing the city's preferredalternative made the bureaucrats andpoliticians of Utah realize they couldnot automatically dictate the terms ofthe EIS this time. In response, they heldraucous, contentious, and confrontationalpublic meetings until the BLM gavethem their way. The proposed plan nowincludes a transportation corridor throughcritical desert tortoise habitat. The draft EIS also reduced grazingin some parts of the Beaver Dam WashNCA to restore degraded vegetationand provide more forage and protectionfor desert tortoises. The success ofrevegetation projects, already low, iseven lower when livestock grazing con-tinues while seedlings and young plantsare trying to get established. Even thisreasonable precaution was too muchfor local officials. They apparently laborunder the misapprehension that whenthe BLM says it's going to manage grazingaccording to its laws, policies, and pro-cedures, that means the agency can'treduce grazing to protect other resources.Likewise, the BLM seems to labor underthe misapprehension that they must dowhat the locals tell them to do, becausethey actually increased the number ofAUMs in the current version of the doc-

©DTRO/USFWS

Mojave Desert Tortoise

Fall 2016 15

ument. The draft EIS also allowed for theretirement of grazing allotments whenthey were voluntarily relinquished byranchers. The current EIS removes thatprovision, stating that relinquished allot-ments will not be retired but may beallocated to uses other than grazing. Butif the BLM won't defend voluntary relin-quishments in this EIS, how likely arethey to reallocate allotments to somethingother than grazing in the future?

Oh, BLM. You came so close toalmost doing some of the right things.Just as you were about to clear the lowbar of responsible public lands man-agement, local self-serving interestscame down hard and you caved to thepressure. Now, not only have you turnedaway from the best available science tofavor development, but you've torn abig hole in any incentive for those con-cerned about conservation to come tothe table. It doesn't work to go back

on a hard-won agreement and thenexpect the same people to trust younext time. The supertanker of grazingpolitics has slammed into the frail craftof cooperation, leaving the wreckageof the 2009 OPLMA compromise float-ing in its wake. WWP protested the proposed deci-sion on October 3.

Laura Welp is WWP’s EcosystemsSpecialist. She lives in Phoenix, AZ.

WWP in DC By Josh Osher

WWP's dedication to nativewildlife and healthy ecosystemsoften requires venturing beyondour beloved western landscapesand into the political wildlands ofWashington, DC. Several timeseach year, I travel to DC for meet-ings with Congressional staff andadministration officials to advocate

for policies that strengthen the public's right toweigh in on land management decisions, prioritize science-based decision making, and ensure the integrity of ournation's most important environmental laws. These visits often involve a combination of advocacy for forwardthinking policy proposals such as voluntary permit retirement and fighting against an ever increasing array of policyriders that serve to further entrench extractive industries and undermine critical environmental protections. Most of my work in 2016 has been a reprise of the past several years. Greater sage-grouse conservation is almostalways the first item on the agenda. WWP is one of only a few organizations that even mentions that impact ofcontinued livestock grazing on the sagebrush ecosystem, and our efforts to highlight this issue have certainly helpedto educate and inform policy makers as they confront the oft told falsehoods promoted by the livestock industry.This year's focus has been on ensuring that federal planning efforts are improved rather than abandoned, while alsotrying to restore the backstop of Endangered Species listing that Congress eliminated by appropriations riders for thepast two years. Among the dozens of anti-wildlife riders proposed in this year’s appropriations bills are several that have a directimpact on WWP's work and mission. Three of the most troubling provisions involve requiring the federal agenciesto issue new permits for vacant grazing allotments without public input or adherence to other environmental laws andregulations; allowing sheep ranchers to have veto power over federal land managers when determining if domesticsheep need to be removed to protect native Bighorn Sheep; and preventing the federal government from enteringinto conservation agreements that involve the transfer of water rights as mitigation for development or the improvementof watershed function. While educating Congressional staff about these issues is a vital component for preventing destructive riders, itis only one part of the overall strategy. It is equally important for members of Congress to hear directly from you,their constituents, about these issues. Please take the time to call or email your Congressional Representatives,particularly Senators, and tell them to oppose all anti-wildlife riders in the FY2017 appropriations bills. Additionally,please express your support for the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

Josh Osher is WWP’s Montana Director and Public Policy Coordinator. He lives in Hamilton, Montana.

© MARTIN FALBISONER

WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECTP.O. Box 1770Hailey, ID 83333

NON-PROFITORG.

U.S. PostagePAID

Boise, IdahoPermit No 220

~Address Service Requested~

Thank You for Your Continued Support!

Every day the public lands, streams and wildlife throughout the West benefit because of the work done by WesternWatersheds Project. The agency management plans we challenge, the allotments we monitor, and the lawsuits we fileall help to protect and restore our western public lands.

• Any size donation is greatly appreciated and makes a difference! Everything WWP does to influence therestoration of western public lands is based on a vision that western North America may be one of the only placeson earth where enough of the native landscape and wildlife still exists to make possible the restoration of a wild naturalworld.• Make a gift of appreciated stock. Talk to your accountant or financial planner about the potential tax benefitsof making this type of donation. • A gift through careful estate planning can make a lasting difference for WWP. A bequest, an arrangementmade in a donor’s will, is a simple and uncomplicated approach to planned giving. Other methods to facilitate aplanned giving donation include: charitable remainder trust, charitable lead trust and gift annuity. It may be wise totalk to your accountant or financial planner to fully understand the potential tax benefits of different giving options. • Help others learn about WWP! Recently, WWP supporters hosted events in Pocatello, Idaho and Berkeley,California to help us spread the word about our important work. You can host an event too and WWP will help. We’llsupply informational materials, send out email/printed invitations combining your guest list with local WWPsupporters, and even have a WWP representative attend a “meet & greet” which can be customized to your area ofinterest or concern.

The Western Watersheds Project Messenger is printed usingvegetable-based inks on carbon neutral, 100% post-consumer waste.

Western Watersheds Project ESSENGER · Western Watersheds Project ... Dr. Ralph Maughan ... Karen...

Documents

Transcript of Western Watersheds Project ESSENGER · Western Watersheds Project ... Dr. Ralph Maughan ... Karen...