animal-world-3065318_1920.jpg

Judge Rules Feds Improperly Refused to Protect Wolverines

April 4, 2016

Cottonwood joined a coalition of conservation organizations to challenge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s refusal to protect imperiled wolverines under the Endangered Species Act. On April 4, 2016, the federal district court for Montana rejected the Service’s decision to deny protections for wolverines, ruling that the Service improperly ignored science and violated the Endangered Species Act. The Service was forced back to the drawing board with the directive to make use of the best available science in the making of their decision.

Wolverines are known as “southern polar bears,” thriving in cold environments with snow year-round. Tragically, science has shown that climate change may eliminate nearly two-thirds of their snow-bound habitat within 75 years. Today, only 250-300 wolverines remain in the lower 48, already making them some of the most endangered species in the United States.

The Service originally identified climate change and small population size as the primary threat to wolverines. This identification was backed by published, peer-reviewed research, the larger scientific community - including the Society for Conservation Biology – an independent scientific panel, the majority of experts who reviewed the decision, and the Service’s own biologists. Following the science, the Service originally proposed listing the wolverine as a “threatened” species under the ESA in 2013. However, the agency later reversed course and chose not to protect wolverines, citing too many “uncertainties” in scientific literature.

In April 2016, the court held the agency accountable for its decision to discount the best available science about climate impacts on wolverines.

“[T]he Service’s decision against listing the wolverine as threatened under the ESA is arbitrary and capricious. No greater level of certainty is needed to see the writing on the wall for this snow-dependent species standing squarely in the path of global climate change. It has taken us twenty years to get to this point. It is the [Court’s] view that if there is one thing required of the Service under the ESA, it is to take action at the earliest possible, defensible point in time to protect against the loss of biodiversity within our reach as a nation. For the wolverine. That time is now.” Opinion at page 83.

Quotes from the conservation community on this landmark court opinion for wolverines:

“Today’s win is a victory not just for wolverine but for all species whose fate relies on the scientific integrity of the Fish and Wildlife Service. We call on the agency to stop playing politics and start living up to its mandate to protect our country’s most imperiled species.” —Bethany Cotton, wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians

“We hope the Fish and Wildlife Service wastes no more time in granting wolverines Endangered Species Act protection. This rare species deserves all the help it can get as we hit record-setting temperatures here in Montana.” —Keith Hammer, chair of Swan View Coalition.

“Cascadia Wildlands is very encouraged by the court’s rejection of political game playing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As with all species, wolverines deserve conservation and protections based upon sound science. This legal victory sets the stage for further reform of a deteriorating U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the installment of protections for this struggling species across the West.” —Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands

“We need to do everything we can to protect wolverines and wolverine habitat in the face of climate change and a snowballing extinction crisis. Our actions should be rooted in precaution and the best available science—not political nitpicking.” —Greg Costello, executive director of Wildlands Network

“With only 300 wolverine spread across the Western U.S., it is refreshing to see the court appreciates the precarious state of wolverine populations and confirm the findings of the Fish and Wildlife Service’s own biologists that the species merits ESA protection.” —George Wuerthner, ecologist


Press Room:

Read the full Western Environmental Law Center Press Release

Case Files:

Read the Filed Complaint

Read the Listing Decision