FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reverses Course on Saving Endangered Wildflower

Interference suspected

Today the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service withdrew its proposal to protect Graham's penstemon under the Endangered Species Act.

Graham's penstemon. Photo by Susan Meyer.

Today the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service abruptly withdrew its proposal to protect an endangered wildflower under the Endangered Species Act. 

In January 2006, the Service proposed to add Graham’s penstemon to the endangered species list and to designate critical habitat for its recovery.  Instead of finalizing protections, the Service today suddenly claimed that it had been mistaken in determining that the wildflower was threatened.

Graham’s penstemon, a member of the snapdragon family with brilliant lavender flowers, only inhabits oil shale outcrops in the Uinta Basin of northeastern Utah and adjacent Colorado.  The penstemon was first considered for Endangered Species Act protection in 1975, when the Smithsonian drafted the first list of plants to be protected under the Act.  It had been an official Candidate for protection until today’s decision.

“Instead of finally protecting this endangered wildflower, the Service caved in so that the BLM can keep approving oil and gas drilling, no matter what it destroys,” said Erin Robertson, Staff Biologist for Center for Native Ecosystems. 

The Service admitted in today’s announcement that 88% of the populations are in areas where active oil and gas exploration is already taking place.  It also acknowledged today that all three of the formal peer reviewers of the Service’s January proposal to protect the penstemon “felt that our proposed rule justified listing” (71 Fed. Reg. 76026 (Dec. 19, 2006)). 

The January listing proposal cited the following threats:  “Habitat destruction and degradation as a consequence of energy development throughout the species’ range pose a serious threat to long-term viability.  Habitat loss and fragmentation also will exacerbate threats arising from very low natural population numbers and restricted distribution; natural phenomena such as drought and wildlife grazing; livestock grazing; and horticultural collection” (71 Fed. Reg. 3164 (Jan. 19, 2006)).

"As energy development in the region rapidly progresses, protection of this wildflower and the designation of its critical habitat is badly needed to ensure that conflicts are avoided and that its habitat is not inadvertently destroyed,” said Tony Frates of the Utah Native Plant Society.

The Bureau of Land Management controls three-quarters of the penstemon’s occupied habitat, and the agency’s Washington Office was a vocal opponent of listing.  The Service’s announcement today stated, “we have relied heavily on BLM’s comments in this final notice withdrawing the proposed rule to list [Graham’s penstemon] as threatened” (71 Fed. Reg. 76026 (Dec. 19, 2006)).

The BLM’s comments were vague and did not commit to new conservation actions for the penstemon:  “While we cannot describe what the specific conservation measures will be, because they are yet to be developed, they will incorporate effective conservation measures for [Graham’s penstemon] and other species” (p. 6 of BLM’s formal response to the Service on the January listing proposal).  Today’s announcement also admitted that the BLM has not signed any formal agreement to conserve the penstemon yet.

“Empty promises will not save this beautiful wildflower from wells and roads,” said Robertson.

“The Uinta Basin is home to many rare wildflowers that are a part of Colorado’s unique natural heritage,” said Dave Anderson, of the Colorado Native Plant Society.  “The Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision is very surprising considering the enumeration of threats in the January proposal.”

“We have little faith that the BLM – driven by the Bush administration’s destructive energy policies – could protect the penstemon from oil and gas leasing and development,” said Stephen Bloch, of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.  “When you add in the very real threat that oil shale and tar sands development poses, there is no justification for the Service’s claim that ‘all is well’.”

Center for Native Ecosystems, Utah Native Plant Society, Colorado Native Plant Society, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, and American Lands Alliance petitioned the Service to protect the penstemon in 2002.  When the Service ignored the petition, the coalition was forced to ask the courts for help.  The Service agreed in a court settlement to propose protection by January 2006 and finalize listing this month.

This decision is the latest in a string by the Bush administration illegally denying endangered species protections.  In October the Washington Post reported on widespread political interference in endangered species decisionmaking.  Representatives Nick Rahall (D-WV) and Jay Inslee (D-WA) have pledged to investigate the situation when the new Congress convenes, and the Department of Interior’s own Inspector General has reportedly already begun his own investigation.

For other examples of recent endangered species listing decisions tainted by political interference, see http://www.nativeecosystems.org/newsroom/bush-administration-political-appointee-reverses-endangered-species-protections-for-nation-s-wildlife/

For copies of the January proposal, today’s withdrawal, the petition to list the penstemon, or a high-resolution photo, please visit

http://www.nativeecosystems.org/species/grahams-penstemon/index_html/

###