CLEANING UP THE BUSH LEGACY

The years 2000 through 2008 — the two presidential terms served by George W. Bush — amount to what might be called the Dark Ages for endangered species across the country. This administration was hands-down the worst in history for listing species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, with only 62 species earning federal protection throughout the entire eight years — compared to 522 under the Clinton administration and 231 under George Bush, Sr. Besides dragging its feet on responding to listing petitions, fighting stubbornly against protecting species in court, and constantly using the “candidate list” to put off protections indefinitely for fast-fading plants and animals, the Bush administration regularly stooped to corrupt tactics that let politics dictate endangered species decisions to put industry interests over conservation. Even for species that did earn Endangered Species Act status under Bush, true protections weren’t guaranteed — take the polar bear for example, which was robbed of protections from global warming by a special "4(d)" rule finalized in late 2008. And in case all that wasn’t enough to ensure Bush’s eco-infamy for ages, just before he left office he finalized changes gutting the rules that have made the Endangered Species Act successful for 35 years. Thankfully, current Interior Secretary Ken Salazar rescinded the rules eviscerating the Act — but he retained the 4(d) rule, which would doom the polar bear to extinction.

Needless to say, the Center was very busy throughout George W. Bush’s regrettable presidency, not only with lawsuits for individual species but also leading the way in exposing the administration’s bad actions to the media and policymakers and pushing the drive to reform. Unfortunately, the mess Bush made of our planet and wildlife-protection laws is a big one, and we’re still cleaning it up.

LITIGATING POLITICAL CORRUPTION

At the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency that implements the Endangered Species Act, the undermining and manipulation of scientific data for the benefit of private interests reached a new height under the Bush administration. By suppressing, twisting, and ignoring information from its own biologists, the administration removed Endangered Species Act protections for at least four species (the cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, gray wolf, West Virginia northern flying squirrel, and desert nesting bald eagle), refused to grant protections to numerous species, such as the Mexican garter snake, Montana fluvial arctic grayling, and the Gunnison’s and greater sage grouse, and withheld essential habitat protection from a long list of species. Many of the illegal decisions were engineered by former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Julie MacDonald, who resigned in disgrace following a scathing misconduct investigation by Interior’s inspector general. In many cases, government and university scientists carefully documented the unauthorized editing of scientific documents, the overruling of scientific experts, and the falsification of economic analyses.

To combat this species-harming corruption, in 2007 the Center kicked off the biggest endangered species litigation action ever undertaken, a campaign for 55 imperiled species and more than 8 million acres of habitat wrongly denied federal protection because of Bush administration political interference. Since we filed our notice of intent to sue for 55 species in August 2007, we’ve sued to protect 54 species and have met with significant success, winning or settling all the completed cases — 30 so far. Twenty-four lawsuits are ongoing.

In response to our suits, the Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed to redo critical habitat designations for 26 species, including the California red-legged frog; California tiger salamander; arroyo toad; vermilion darter; Mississippi gopher frog; four New Mexico invertebrates; the Santa Ana sucker; two Southwest fish; and eight plants from California, Oregon, and North Carolina. The newly proposed critical habitat designation for the California red-legged frog totals approximately 1.8 million acres — quadruple the area previously protected. In addition, thanks to a Center petition and two Center lawsuits, the Service reconsidered listing the rare, highly imperiled Mexican garter snake as an endangered species and determined that protection is warranted. Decisions not to list the Gunnison sage grouse, Thorne's hairstreak butterfly, roundtail chub, and Hermes copper butterfly have also been withdrawn, and the Center successfully halted an attempt to delist the threatened marbled murrelet.

We’ll continue to push for better protection of all the animals and plants wronged through illegal Endangered Species Act decisions influenced by MacDonald and other Bush-era bureaucrats. We won’t end our campaign until we’ve ensured that none of these species’ recovery — or the political interference that led to weakened protections — are swept under the carpet.

Check out a timeline of our campaign and read what the media has had to say.

THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT EVISCERATION  AND POLAR BEAR EXTINCTION RULE

Just before leaving office, the Bush administration dealt a parting punch to endangered species across the nation, issuing two regulations intended to (1) remove the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as an independent, scientific watchdog over potentially species-harming federal projects like timber sales, mines, and dams; (2) exempt all greenhouse gas-emitting projects, including coal-fired power plants and federal fuel efficiency standards, from Endangered Species Act review; and (3) specifically ban federal agencies from protecting the imperiled polar bear from greenhouse gas emissions and oil and gas development. These policies were meant to eviscerate the central Endangered Species Act process — Fish and Wildlife Service oversight — that has protected endangered species for 35 years, and exclude the greatest future threat to endangered species — global warming — from consideration under the Act. The policies drew lawsuits by the Center, other environmental groups, and nine states.

Thankfully, on April 28, 2009 — the very same day the Center delivered more than 90,000 petitions (later to become 94,000) to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar requesting he take action fast — Salazar rescinded the rule blocking Fish and Wildlife Service oversight under the Endangered Species Act. This came after the Obama administration and Congress had promptly taken the first steps toward revoking both damaging Bush regulations: On March 3, President Barack Obama sent out a presidential memorandum ordering agencies to ignore the Endangered Species Act rule, and on March 11, he signed into law an omnibus appropriations bill giving Salazar 60 days to rescind both the Endangered Species Act rule and the polar bear rule with the stroke of a pen. Between the day Salazar was given the power to rescind the rules and the day he restored the Endangered Species Act, he was called upon to save both the Act and the polar bear by 41 members of the House of Representatives; eight senators; 35 members of the California legislature; more than 13,000 scientists; numerous law professors; and more than 200,000 citizens represented by more than 130 conservation organizations.

Devastatingly, a day before his deadline to act for the polar bear, Secretary Salazar announced he was refusing to rescind the lethal rule. The Center will continue our fight to overturn the rule and earn the Arctic giant the true Endangered Species Act protections it needs to survive.

“REFORMATTING” SPECIES OUT OF PROTECTIONS

On August 5, 2008, the Bush administration proposed another rule change affecting endangered species that would change the formatting of the federal endangered and threatened lists to dramatically reduce listed species’ protections. The proposed change would create a new column heading of “Where listed” that would essentially mandate protection for a species only in its current range. A column for a species’ entire historic range — the area in which a species should be protected — would be considered an "information-only column."

Because most endangered species have lost substantial portions of historic range, this rule could condemn many species to extinction. Take, for example, the gray wolf, which was listed as endangered in the lower 48 states and as threatened in Minnesota in 1976 — if this supposed “formatting” change had been in place then, the wolf could not have been listed in the lower 48 states where it wasn’t found. Likewise, if the change had been enacted after the California condor went extinct in the wild, the magnificent bird would have only been protected in zoos.

The amendment reflects a policy shift that was articulated in a 2007 memorandum from Interior’s solicitor, which argues that the Fish and Wildlife Service must only consider and protect the current range of endangered species. The positions argued in the memo and put in place by the August 5 proposed amendment are clearly inconsistent with the language and intent of the Endangered Species Act.

Unfortunately, though this proposed rule has been pushed to the sidelines, it hasn’t gone away and could still potentially be finalized. The Center is keeping a close eye on the current administration to make sure it isn’t.