MISSOULA, Mont. — On Tuesday, a federal district court ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service made a mistake when it denied the Montana Arctic Grayling Endangered Species Act protections.
The court found the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service relied on a grayling restoration effort in the Ruby River, despite lacking evidence the population is viable.
They also relied on a conservation agreement ending in 2026, that protects the population in a stretch of the Big Hole River.
In the United States, graylings only exist in Michigan and the upper Missouri River in Montana.
The Center for Biological Diversity sent out the following:
A federal district court in Montana ruled Tuesday afternoon that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service erred in denying Montana’s Arctic grayling population protection under the Endangered Species Act. Tuesday’s decision came in response to a lawsuit brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, Western Watersheds Project and Butte resident Pat Munday, with representation by Earthjustice.
In its ruling, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana faulted the Service for relying on a grayling restoration effort in the Ruby River despite a lack of evidence that the struggling population is viable. The agency also relied on a conservation agreement to protect the last surviving river-dwelling population found in a short stretch of the Big Hole River even though the agreement expires in 2026.
“Promises to restore grayling to more rivers than the Big Hole, where they’re on the brink of extinction, haven’t panned out, so this ruling is an important win,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s long past time for the Fish and Wildlife Service to protect these beautiful, precious fish under the Endangered Species Act.”
As noted in the court’s opinion, Montana’s 1995 restoration plan promised “at least five stable, viable populations distributed among at least three major river drainages.” Instead the state has only carried out a restoration effort in the Ruby and has yet to establish a viable population there.
Once found throughout the upper Missouri River drainage above Great Falls, native populations of Montana’s Arctic grayling are now limited to a short stretch of the Big Hole River, Ruby River, Ennis Reservoir on the Madison River and the Centennial Lakes. All of these populations face threats from a variety of sources, including irrigation withdrawals that reduce flows and raise stream temperatures, climate change, and habitat degradation due to livestock grazing, roads and agriculture.
“This decision is welcome news for Montana’s Arctic grayling, a uniquely beautiful fish whose last native population in the lower 48 states barely hangs on in a small part of our state,” said Patrick Kelly, Montana & Washington director with Western Watersheds Project. “After decades of baffling resistance to listing the Arctic grayling — including multiple legal settlements and prior court losses — the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must now adhere to the law and base their determination on the best available science, free from economic and political pressures. As climate change continues to wreak havoc on Montana’s rivers and streams, Arctic grayling cannot afford further delays.”
The Service first identified the need to protect the grayling in 1982. The agency was petitioned to protect the species in 1991, leading to a finding in 1994 that protection was warranted but precluded by other priorities. The grayling was considered a candidate for listing as an endangered species until 2014, when the agency reversed course and denied protection based on the state conservation agreement and alleged increased numbers. The conservation groups successfully challenged this denial, but in 2020 the Service doubled down and again denied protections. Tuesday’s court ruling overturns that decision.
“This decision follows a similar 2018 opinion from the 9th Circuit that held the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had no basis for denying protections to the dwindling grayling population in the Upper Missouri River Basin,” said Sean Helle, one of the Earthjustice attorneys who argued the case. “We urge the Service to list the Arctic grayling under the Endangered Species Act so that it has a chance at long-term survival.”
Grayling have been introduced in more than a dozen lakes outside their native range. But lake-dwelling fish provide little security for the native population of these primarily river-dwelling fish, as studies have found they can’t survive in flowing water.
“I fish the Big Hole River often and grayling are truly the jewel of the river,” said Pat Munday, a professor at Montana Tech who authored a popular book about the Big Hole River. “It is incredibly sad that we must sue to get the Fish and Wildlife Service to follow the law and protect our natural heritage.”
Protection under the Endangered Species Act would require a federal recovery plan to be created to address chronic low flows in the Big Hole River, among other threats.
Background
A member of the salmon family, the Arctic grayling is a beautiful fish with a prominent and colorful dorsal fin. The species thrives in cold freshwater streams and rivers across Canada and Alaska.
Historically, river-dwelling populations of Arctic grayling existed in only two places in the lower 48 states: Michigan and the upper Missouri River of Montana. Populations in Michigan went extinct by the 1930s, and populations in Montana had become restricted to the Big Hole River and a few lakes by the end of the 1970s. Studies demonstrate that Montana’s grayling are genetically distinct from populations in Canada and Alaska.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=66b5fb3457be4c05af14648086187a76&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnbcmontana.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Fmontanas-artic-grayling-could-get-endangered-species-protection&c=14986512634958310235&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2024-08-07 04:31:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
