

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The greater sage grouse saga is but just one salvo in the U.S. frontier war--pitting fossil fuel extraction against environmental conservation--but the Obama administration's announcement on Tuesday that it would not issue Endangered Species protections for the iconic bird made clear who won this battle: the oil and gas industry.
In a statement Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Department of the Interior framed the decision as a win for the sage grouse, highlighting what they described as an "unprecedented" public-private conservation effort between ranchers, energy developers, conservationists, and states.
And while some environmental organizations are celebrating this partnership, conservationists are sounding the alarm.
Randi Spivak, director of public lands at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that she would grade the overall sage grouse conservation campaign a solid "D."
"Greater sage grouse have been in precipitous decline for years and deserve better than what they're getting from the Obama administration," Spivak said in a press statement. "While there are some important improvements for sage grouse in the new federal land-management plans, they still ultimately fall short of what's needed to ensure these birds' long-term survival."
The chicken-sized bird ranges across 11 western U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. Sage grouse once numbered in the millions but now have an estimated population of 200,000 to 500,000.
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science."
--Randi Spivak, Center for Biological Diversity
Spivak explained to Common Dreams that the conservation plan was developed as a compromise with certain stakeholders, such as livestock ranchers and the oil and gas drilling industry, in mind.
For example, despite recommendations from the federal government's own scientists to grant sage grouse mating zones a four-mile buffer, the conservation plan in Wyoming--where 40 percent of the existing population resides--only calls for a 0.6 mile perimeter for non-surface occupancy, or horizontal drilling. Both the noise and drilling itself impacts the sage grouse, causing the birds to abandon these crucial areas, known as "leks."
Further, there were a number of instances where lands initially considered a "priority habitat," due to the high concentration of the birds, were stripped of that designation by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) after being challenged.
Spivak said, "It's interesting to see the oil and gas industry up in arms about the plan, but I look at it and see that [the government] didn't withdraw a single acre. They can still drill."
The BLM also failed to address the impact that livestock grazing had on the species, particularly through spreading non-native "cheat grass," which facilitates uncharacteristic wildfires, in turn further threatening the sage grouse's survival.
As an "indicator species," the survival of the sage grouse is emblematic of the strength of the region's fragile ecosystem, which has been under increasing threat from the competing issues of climate change and ecological destruction through overgrazing and development.
"The sage grouse is the canary in the coalmine for the whole sage brush ecosystem," Spivak explained. She said there are 350 species dependent on that system: "songbirds, pronghorn deer, snakes, rabbits, a whole complement of wildlife... "
While the new government plan may slow the rate of decline, Spivak said there is no room for this sort of compromise in seeking sage grouse protection. "This is a pass/ fail. If they get it halfway, it's still a failure."
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science," she concluded.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The greater sage grouse saga is but just one salvo in the U.S. frontier war--pitting fossil fuel extraction against environmental conservation--but the Obama administration's announcement on Tuesday that it would not issue Endangered Species protections for the iconic bird made clear who won this battle: the oil and gas industry.
In a statement Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Department of the Interior framed the decision as a win for the sage grouse, highlighting what they described as an "unprecedented" public-private conservation effort between ranchers, energy developers, conservationists, and states.
And while some environmental organizations are celebrating this partnership, conservationists are sounding the alarm.
Randi Spivak, director of public lands at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that she would grade the overall sage grouse conservation campaign a solid "D."
"Greater sage grouse have been in precipitous decline for years and deserve better than what they're getting from the Obama administration," Spivak said in a press statement. "While there are some important improvements for sage grouse in the new federal land-management plans, they still ultimately fall short of what's needed to ensure these birds' long-term survival."
The chicken-sized bird ranges across 11 western U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. Sage grouse once numbered in the millions but now have an estimated population of 200,000 to 500,000.
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science."
--Randi Spivak, Center for Biological Diversity
Spivak explained to Common Dreams that the conservation plan was developed as a compromise with certain stakeholders, such as livestock ranchers and the oil and gas drilling industry, in mind.
For example, despite recommendations from the federal government's own scientists to grant sage grouse mating zones a four-mile buffer, the conservation plan in Wyoming--where 40 percent of the existing population resides--only calls for a 0.6 mile perimeter for non-surface occupancy, or horizontal drilling. Both the noise and drilling itself impacts the sage grouse, causing the birds to abandon these crucial areas, known as "leks."
Further, there were a number of instances where lands initially considered a "priority habitat," due to the high concentration of the birds, were stripped of that designation by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) after being challenged.
Spivak said, "It's interesting to see the oil and gas industry up in arms about the plan, but I look at it and see that [the government] didn't withdraw a single acre. They can still drill."
The BLM also failed to address the impact that livestock grazing had on the species, particularly through spreading non-native "cheat grass," which facilitates uncharacteristic wildfires, in turn further threatening the sage grouse's survival.
As an "indicator species," the survival of the sage grouse is emblematic of the strength of the region's fragile ecosystem, which has been under increasing threat from the competing issues of climate change and ecological destruction through overgrazing and development.
"The sage grouse is the canary in the coalmine for the whole sage brush ecosystem," Spivak explained. She said there are 350 species dependent on that system: "songbirds, pronghorn deer, snakes, rabbits, a whole complement of wildlife... "
While the new government plan may slow the rate of decline, Spivak said there is no room for this sort of compromise in seeking sage grouse protection. "This is a pass/ fail. If they get it halfway, it's still a failure."
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science," she concluded.
The greater sage grouse saga is but just one salvo in the U.S. frontier war--pitting fossil fuel extraction against environmental conservation--but the Obama administration's announcement on Tuesday that it would not issue Endangered Species protections for the iconic bird made clear who won this battle: the oil and gas industry.
In a statement Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Department of the Interior framed the decision as a win for the sage grouse, highlighting what they described as an "unprecedented" public-private conservation effort between ranchers, energy developers, conservationists, and states.
And while some environmental organizations are celebrating this partnership, conservationists are sounding the alarm.
Randi Spivak, director of public lands at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that she would grade the overall sage grouse conservation campaign a solid "D."
"Greater sage grouse have been in precipitous decline for years and deserve better than what they're getting from the Obama administration," Spivak said in a press statement. "While there are some important improvements for sage grouse in the new federal land-management plans, they still ultimately fall short of what's needed to ensure these birds' long-term survival."
The chicken-sized bird ranges across 11 western U.S. states and two Canadian provinces. Sage grouse once numbered in the millions but now have an estimated population of 200,000 to 500,000.
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science."
--Randi Spivak, Center for Biological Diversity
Spivak explained to Common Dreams that the conservation plan was developed as a compromise with certain stakeholders, such as livestock ranchers and the oil and gas drilling industry, in mind.
For example, despite recommendations from the federal government's own scientists to grant sage grouse mating zones a four-mile buffer, the conservation plan in Wyoming--where 40 percent of the existing population resides--only calls for a 0.6 mile perimeter for non-surface occupancy, or horizontal drilling. Both the noise and drilling itself impacts the sage grouse, causing the birds to abandon these crucial areas, known as "leks."
Further, there were a number of instances where lands initially considered a "priority habitat," due to the high concentration of the birds, were stripped of that designation by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) after being challenged.
Spivak said, "It's interesting to see the oil and gas industry up in arms about the plan, but I look at it and see that [the government] didn't withdraw a single acre. They can still drill."
The BLM also failed to address the impact that livestock grazing had on the species, particularly through spreading non-native "cheat grass," which facilitates uncharacteristic wildfires, in turn further threatening the sage grouse's survival.
As an "indicator species," the survival of the sage grouse is emblematic of the strength of the region's fragile ecosystem, which has been under increasing threat from the competing issues of climate change and ecological destruction through overgrazing and development.
"The sage grouse is the canary in the coalmine for the whole sage brush ecosystem," Spivak explained. She said there are 350 species dependent on that system: "songbirds, pronghorn deer, snakes, rabbits, a whole complement of wildlife... "
While the new government plan may slow the rate of decline, Spivak said there is no room for this sort of compromise in seeking sage grouse protection. "This is a pass/ fail. If they get it halfway, it's still a failure."
"In the end, this decision seems more based on political science than biological science," she concluded.