Feb 12, 2025

Contact: Susan Holmes- (202)329-1553 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Wednesday, reports emerged that Donald Trump has nominated former Wyoming Game and Fish Director Brian Nevsik as the next Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Nesvik’s nomination has been referred to the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the federal agency charged with protecting endangered species and migratory birds and manages nearly 860 million acres of national wildlife refuges. Roughly 8,000 people work to carry out its mission to “conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats…”

Statement by Susan Holmes, Executive Director 

“Nesvik’s nomination is devastating news for wildlife and endangered species. During his time as Director of Wyoming Fish and Game, he repeatedly called for weakening the Endangered Species Act, oversaw a 50% increase in hunting tags for mountain lions and black bears, and testified before the U.S. Congress that grizzly bears should lose endangered species protections, “by whatever means is necessary.” Last year, his Commission received global condemnation for imposing only a minimal fine when a Wyoming man used a snowmobile to run down and brutally torture a young female wolf. There is no doubt that if confirmed as Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, he will do the Trump Administration’s bidding to advance unchecked drilling, mining, and logging of fragile wildlife habitats. He will sacrifice our precious endangered species for industry profits at every turn. It will be a war on wildlife that will wreak havoc on the protection and recovery of species from grizzlies to sea turtles to monarch butterflies.”

The post Trump Administration Declares a War on Wildlife with Nomination of Brian Nesvik appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

On February 28th of this year–just 26 days after the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service denied gray wolves protections–Cody Roberts of Daniel Wyoming tortured and killed a female yearling gray wolf after running her down with a snowmobile and taping her mouth shut.

This abhorrent act of cruelty cannot become normal or acceptable. The wildlife that you and I fight for every day face enough threats from habitat loss, climate change, and over consumption by lawful hunters. Torture cannot be added to that already-grave list.

Share this story to build pressure on decision-makers to act.

While this disgusting action likely shocks you as much as it does me, Mr. Roberts is currently facing a mere $250 fine for possessing a live wild animal. To put a fine point on that: running a wolf to exhaustion with a snowmobile and incapacitating her, taping her mouth shut, parading the still-live wolf around a bar, and finally killing and skinning her do not violate state law. Only the possession of the live animal is a low-level infraction.

Wyoming’s Governor,¹ the local sheriff,² the Director of the state’s fish and wildlife agency, and former U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Director Dan Ashe³ have issued statements condemning this brutal attack. But to date, the current Director of the USFWS, Martha Williams, and her boss, Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland, have had no comment.

The USFWS could have prevented this. We worked for more than two years to organize support for the protection of gray wolves in Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana under the Endangered Species Act.⁴ Scientists, legal experts, activists, biologists, and Tribal representatives advocated to Secretary Haaland and Director Williams in support of protection.

And let’s be clear: Wyoming’s designated “predator zone,” 85 percent of the state where wolves can be shot on sight (without even a hunting license,) should never have been approved by the USFWS as an acceptable wolf management plan. Such a classification sends a message to the public that state wildlife officials consider wolves a pest and enables the type of horrific treatment of wolves that we witnessed last week.

As I wrote above, their decision to deny those crucial safeguards preceded this act of cowardly torture by just 26 days. I do not know if Mr. Roberts felt empowered by the USFWS deciding that these wolves did not warrant protection–but I do know that the agency could have acted before it and it can surely act now.

Today, I am asking you to share this story. The more people who know what happened to this wolf, the more the Administration will feel pressure to act. Please post to social media or share this story with a friend.

We will be in touch soon with additional actions that we can all take to protect wolves in the Northern Rockies and Colorado from similar acts of torture.

Thank you for your commitment to wildlife and wild places.

Sincerely,

PS. Are the links not working? Please take action to share this story on this page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/wolves-are-not-safe

1. https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/04/08/gov-gordon-joins-outrage-over-torment-of-wyoming-wolf/

2. https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2024-04-08/wolfs-capture-alleged-abuse-by-wyoming-man-condemned-highlights-legal-limitations

3. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/10/wyoming-wolf-bar-animal-abuse

4. https://www.endangered.org/statement-of-endangered-species-coalition-on-todays-announcement-by-the-u-s-fish-and-wildlife-service-to-deny-federal-protections-to-gray-wolves-in-the-northern-rockies/

The post Wyoming Wolf Tortured and Killed. USFWS Must Act. appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

This year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is making progress on restoring grizzly bears to two ecosystems in the West, where grizzlies have long been absent: the North Cascades in north-central Washington, and the Bitterroots along the Montana-Idaho border. ESC has field staff working on the ground in both regions. 

In the Washington, the National Park Service is leading the planning process to reintroduce grizzly bears into the North Cascades National Park. Because this ecosystem is far removed—and therefore isolated—from its counterparts further east in Idaho and Montana, the capture and translocation of a handful of grizzly bears over a long period of time is necessary to reestablish a healthy, self-sustaining population here. ESC has been engaged in the public process around the North Cascades. We are supportive of efforts to reintroduce grizzly bears into this area, as well as efforts to educate residents and visitors on how to live and recreate in grizzly bear habitat in ways that minimize grizzly bear interactions with people and livestock.

Over in the Bitterroot Ecosystem, the FWS was recently ordered by a court to restart the long-stalled-out process of considering how to restore grizzly bears to the mountains of western Montana and north-central Idaho. Twenty years ago, the FWS developed and released a plan to reintroduce grizzlies here, but it was scrapped as a result of political meddling by the Bush Administration. Unlike in the North Cascades, however, during the past two decades a handful of grizzly bears have migrated naturally into the Bitterroots. Unfortunately, they haven’t remained, and we don’t know for sure if there are any grizzly bears currently living there, especially female bears necessary to grow a population. Now the FWS must reconsider whether or not to reintroduce grizzlies to the Bitterroots, or to allow a population to reestablish naturally. ESC is carefully considering the best approach to recovering grizzly bears in the Bitterroots. We aren’t sure that an aggressive reintroduction program in such a politically-charged region will be the best way forward for bears. Regardless of the path chosen by the FWS, the conservation of key wildlife corridors and the careful management of bear attractants (garbage, livestock, pet food, etc) around the edges of the recovery area will be critical to ensure successful recovery. 

Finally, the FWS is currently considering petitions from the states of Montana and Wyoming to remove Endangered Species Act protections for the growing bear populations around Yellowstone and the Northern Continental Divide. Recently-passed legislation and other policy changes in Montana for wolves, grizzly bears and large carnivores generally give us great pause when considering the ability or desire of Montana to continue to responsibly conserve grizzly bears without strong federal oversight. Furthermore, past attempts to delist grizzly bears have demonstrated a lack of willingness by the FWS to put strong sideboards into rules that would hold the states’ accountable for grizzly bear conservation post-delisting. Therefore, ESC opposes delisting of grizzly bear populations in these recovery areas at this time. As one of the slowest-reproducing mammals on the planet, grizzly bear populations will always be sensitive to mortality, and thus will require continuous, strong conservation measures. As such, any delisting rule or post-delisting regulatory framework MUST include robust and enforceable standards to ensure that grizzly bears thrive into the future. ESC will continue to push for such measures, if any when the USFWS proposes delisting, while advocating for increased landscape connectivity, as well as funding for wildlife crossing projects, attractant management, and other coexistence measures.

The post Grizzly Bear Recovery in the West: What’s on Tap in 2024 appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

Statement of Endangered Species Coalition on Today’s Announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Deny Federal Protections to Gray Wolves in the Northern Rockies

Missoula, Mont.–In response to numerous petitions filed more than two years ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today announced that it has declined to reinstate Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in the Northern Rockies. The Coalition issued the following statement:

“We are disappointed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is refusing to hold the states accountable to wolf conservation commitments they made a decade ago,” said Susan Holmes, Executive Director for the Endangered Species Coalition. “In the years since wolves were delisted, Idaho and Montana have enacted increasingly aggressive wolf-killing measures, including trapping, snaring, 11-month-long seasons and more, all of which threaten to roll back one of America’s greatest wildlife restoration achievements.”

The Endangered Species Coalition supports the proposed development of a national Wolf Recovery Plan, and we look forward to engaging in that process.

###

The post Statement of Endangered Species Coalition on Today’s Announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Deny Federal Protections to Gray Wolves in the Northern Rockies appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

Thanks to smartphones and applications (apps), we can easily swipe and tap for everything we need right from the comfort of our couch and have it delivered to our door. From food to friends to fantasy vacations, we humans now have it all at our fingertips.

But wildlife can’t be slackers–no one delivers to a nest or den.

• Turtles don’t have Tinder to find mates, they have to travel to breeding areas.
• Deer can’t use Doordash when they get hungry, they have to forage for food.
• Opossum don’t have Priceline to help them get away from predators.
• Armadillo can’t use Zillow to find a new home, they have to search for territory.
• Foxes can’t Facetime when they want to communicate with family, they have to find them.

To get what they need to survive and thrive, animals need to leave home and move around their habitat to meet their daily and lifetime needs. And too often that travel puts them in harm’s way.

On the Move

Wildlife move in daily, seasonal, annual, and lifetime cycles. Within a single day, they may only leave home to find food. Seasonally, wildlife move to adapt to changes in weather. And over the course of a lifetime, animals move extensively throughout their habitat for the many stages of life.

Some animals spend their entire life in a small area, while others may travel hundreds of miles a year. For example, an urban squirrel may find all the food, nesting material, and mates they need within a single city block. Alternatively, some pronghorn travel 300 miles roundtrip each year to follow available vegetation.  

For wide ranging species like the pronghorn, getting from point A to point B and back often means having to navigate over several dangerous roads and highways. More than four million miles of concrete criss-cross the U.S. Our impressive infrastructure makes it easy for us to get around, but creates a deadly gauntlet for wildlife. In fact, an estimated 1-2 million large animals are killed by motorists every year; one animal every 26 seconds.  

Wildlife Bridges

Not as easy as getting a Lyft, but innovative solutions for restoring wildlife movement have emerged over the last three decades. Wildlife biologists teamed up with highway engineers to design/build/create wildlife crossings to allow animals to cross over or under roadways, never having to enter the right-of-way. Wildlife crossings include bridges, enlarged culverts, and tunnels combined with fencing along roads to funnel animals to the crossings. These structures have proven to be the most effective measure to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions. Some examples of successful wildlife crossing projects in the United States include:

WYOMING: The Trapper’s Point project near Pinedale, Wyoming, which includes six underpasses and two overpasses, has become world-renowned for reducing pronghorn and mule deer collisions and for protecting the “path of the pronghorn” migration corridor.

FLORIDA: Florida has taken a proactive approach to protecting the endangered Florida panther, constructing over 60 wildlife crossings and installing accompanying fencing targeted at making it safer for panthers to cross the road. According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, “Panther deaths caused by vehicle collisions have been sharply reduced in areas where crossings and fencing are in place.”

COLORADO: The Colorado Highway 9 Crossing Project with two overpasses and five underpasses has reduced wildlife-vehicle collisions by 87 percent in the first year. Success rate for mule deer has ranged from 82 percent in an underpass to 98 percent on an overpass.

Thanks to smartphones and applications (apps), we can easily swipe and tap for everything we need right from the comfort of our couch and have it delivered to our door. From food to friends to fantasy vacations, we humans now have it all at our fingertips.

But wildlife can’t be slackers–no one delivers to a nest or den.

• Turtles don’t have Tinder to find mates, they have to travel to breeding areas.
• Deer can’t use Doordash when they get hungry, they have to forage for food.
• Opossum don’t have Priceline to help them get away from predators.
• Armadillo can’t use Zillow to find a new home, they have to search for territory.
• Foxes can’t Facetime when they want to communicate with family, they have to find them.

To get what they need to survive and thrive, animals need to leave home and move around their habitat to meet their daily and lifetime needs. And too often that travel puts them in harm’s way.

On the Move

Wildlife move in daily, seasonal, annual, and lifetime cycles. Within a single day, they may only leave home to find food. Seasonally, wildlife move to adapt to changes in weather. And over the course of a lifetime, animals move extensively throughout their habitat for the many stages of life.

Some animals spend their entire life in a small area, while others may travel hundreds of miles a year. For example, an urban squirrel may find all the food, nesting material, and mates they need within a single city block. Alternatively, some pronghorn travel 300 miles roundtrip each year to follow available vegetation.  

For wide ranging species like the pronghorn, getting from point A to point B and back often means having to navigate over several dangerous roads and highways. More than four million miles of concrete criss-cross the U.S. Our impressive infrastructure makes it easy for us to get around, but creates a deadly gauntlet for wildlife. In fact, an estimated 1-2 million large animals are killed by motorists every year; one animal every 26 seconds.  

Wildlife Bridges

Not as easy as getting a Lyft, but innovative solutions for restoring wildlife movement have emerged over the last three decades. Wildlife biologists teamed up with highway engineers to design/build/create wildlife crossings to allow animals to cross over or under roadways, never having to enter the right-of-way. Wildlife crossings include bridges, enlarged culverts, and tunnels combined with fencing along roads to funnel animals to the crossings. These structures have proven to be the most effective measure to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions. Some examples of successful wildlife crossing projects in the United States include:

WYOMING: The Trapper’s Point project near Pinedale, Wyoming, which includes six underpasses and two overpasses, has become world-renowned for reducing pronghorn and mule deer collisions and for protecting the “path of the pronghorn” migration corridor.

FLORIDA: Florida has taken a proactive approach to protecting the endangered Florida panther, constructing over 60 wildlife crossings and installing accompanying fencing targeted at making it safer for panthers to cross the road. According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, “Panther deaths caused by vehicle collisions have been sharply reduced in areas where crossings and fencing are in place.”

COLORADO: The Colorado Highway 9 Crossing Project with two overpasses and five underpasses has reduced wildlife-vehicle collisions by 87 percent in the first year. Success rate for mule deer has ranged from 82 percent in an underpass to 98 percent on an overpass.

Great strides have been made but much more needs to be done. National Wildlife Federation is currently working with members of Congress to include funding for wildlife crossings in the upcoming surface transportation bill. With adequate funding, state transportation agencies can make wildlife crossings standard practice.

You can learn more about keeping wildlife on the move and next time you pick up your phone to order a curry in a hurry, be thankful that you don’t have to dodge highway traffic to get to your next meal!

---

This originally appeared on the National Wildlife Federation  website.

The post For Wildlife, There’s No App for That appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

This is a guest post by Dr. Kristen Gunther. It was originally published on ensia.com.

Wyoming is sprawling and sparsely populated, home to some of the most awe-inspiring, intact lands and ecosystems in North America. Tourists from all over the world flock to Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks to spot iconic wildlife such as elk, bison, deer and pronghorn. Hunters travel here for once-in-a-lifetime experiences chasing big game through Wyoming’s rugged mountains and desert basins.

For decades, Wyomingites have strived to strike a balance between an energy economy and an outdoor culture that values both natural resources and energy extraction. Our state leaders were at the forefront of Greater sage-grouse conservation and championed a collaborative, science-based plan that was adopted throughout the West and was credited for the 2015 decision that no listing was required for the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act.

Yet in the current political climate and administration, where an “energy dominance” mandate for management has been passed to federal public lands managers, we are facing a future where one of the West’s most iconic species  — the mule deer — could be irreparably devastated. The stakes are obvious for Wyoming, but even for those who aren’t concerned about Wyoming ecosystems or the native big game species of the West, this is a conflict with sobering nationwide ramifications. What we’re faced with today is a federal government determined to continue free-for-all industrial development against the will of its citizens, even when we offer pragmatic, evidence-based conservative solutions that require absolutely no sacrifice.

Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) are indigenous to the West, and the youngest branch of the deer family in North America. “Muleys” get their name from their large ears. They are elusive, highly specialized, beloved animals, and hunting them can take you deep into some rough and beautiful country. In a state that brings in about US$300 million annually in total big game hunting revenue, deer represent a major contribution to local economies and conservation funding.

Protecting the Red Desert to Hoback and other well-documented big game migration corridors in Wyoming is not a threat to Wyoming’s energy industry, where millions of acres are already open for drilling. But this conflict is much greater than the question of whether energy should outweigh wildlife when it comes to management of multiple-use public lands — it shouldn’t, and legally it does not. It’s also a question of whether or not science matters in decision-making. The best peer-reviewed research in the world regarding these migrations is taking place in Wyoming, and it shows that oil and gas development within migration corridors and winter range is a direct threat to mule deer in particular. Muleys don’t ever get used to the presence of oil and gas activities, even over the course of generations. And unlike other big game, they can’t adapt their migratory strategy or route as the landscape changes around them. They learn their migration route — scientists hypothesize that they are taught by their mothers — and keep to it for the rest of their lives. These unique traits are compelling, but maladaptive in the context of an increasingly disturbed landscape.

If we lose our deer herds for the sake of quick oil and gas profits, the loss won’t just be felt in our deer, but in ourselves as well. We know the science, and we know what it says we must do. And we are not willing to forever give up a special and wild part of who we are.

Wyoming is an energy state, but we’re also a wildlife state, home to landscapes and species that have sparked human imaginations and passions for countless generations. If we lose our deer herds for the sake of quick oil and gas profits, the loss won’t just be felt in our deer, but in ourselves as well. We know the science, and we know what it says we must do. And we are not willing to forever give up a special and wild part of who we are. 

The post Energy development threatens big game herds in Wyoming (and why it matters outside the state, too) appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

In 2014, a U.S. district court ruled that wolves in the Great Lakes region must be protected due, in part, to the “virtually unregulated” killing of wolves in the area. Prior to regaining these protections, wolves in Wisconsin were subject to brutal and indiscriminate trapping and the use of packs of dogs to pursue wolves to their death. Aggressive hunting and trapping led the wolf population in Wisconsin to plummet, and scientists found the state likely to be drastically underestimating the number of wolves killed. In issuing her ruling, the judge wrote, “at times, a court ‘must lean forward from the bench to let an agency know, in no uncertain terms, that enough is enough.'” This case, she wrote, “is one of those times.”

Another court found that Wyoming’s kill-on-sight approach to wolf management violated federal law and ordered wolves in the state again protected under the Endangered Species Act.

This abysmal state management of wolves–and recent congressional efforts to return management responsibility to these states–led a group of 70 scientists to publish an open letter calling for the continued protection of wolves around the country.

All of this was known to members of the House when they passed the Ribble Amendment seeking to delist wolves in these four states. We know this because tens of thousands of you spoke out in person and online to deliver this message. The representatives that supported this reckless legislative rider put both the Endangered Species Act and the future of gray wolves at risk. The Act calls for species to be listed or delisted based on science, not on the feckless whims of politicians seeking reelection. 

If there is a silver lining, it is that this bill is so laden with assaults against wildlife and wilderness that it is unlikely to become law. In addition to the legislative delisting of gray wolves, the bill seeks to:

• Prevent the regulation of lead ammunition and fishing equipment under the Toxics Substances Control Act. Despite millions of birds suffering slow, painful deaths annually due to lead, the SHARE Act blocks the federal government from regulating this deadly material (s. 203).
• Create a loophole in federal law to allow trophy hunters to import polar bear “trophies” into the United States. In a giveaway to big money lobbying groups like the Safari Club, the House created an exception to federal law for the purpose of allowing hunters to bring polar bear parts into the country. This action encourages the killing and stockpiling of soon-to-be-listed species with the knowledge that anti-wildlife members of Congress will create new law for the benefit of wealthy big game hunters (s. 302).
• Block the enactment of restrictions on the bloody ivory trade. Elephants are being pushed closer to the brink of extinction every hour by poachers profiting from the sale of elephant ivory. Recent restrictions put into place by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be halted should the SHARE Act become law (ss. 1003, 1006).
• Redefine hunting to include trapping. This redefinition would potentially open millions of acres to indiscriminate and outdated leghold traps and snares. These devices are banned in many countries, put wildlife in peril, and jeopardize public safety. Rewriting the definition of hunting to include this barbaric practice will put endangered and threatened species at new risk for the benefit of an extreme minority that continue to pursue this dying activity (s. 603).

We expect more reluctance to passing the SHARE Act’s companion law in the Senate and will advocate forcefully for a veto should legislation of this sort clear that chamber.

The post Anti-Science Wolf Delisting Bill Passes House of Representatives appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

Wolves in these states have been subject to some of the most aggressive hunting and trapping programs: Wyoming wolves were ordered protected last year due to the state’s “shoot on sight” policy in 85 percent of the state, and Wisconsin had the troubling distinction of being the only state to allow the use of packs of hounds to chase wolves to their death. Significant questions were also raised about Wisconsin’s method of counting its population as required by the Endangered Species Act, and a federal judge found Minnesota’s plan created a “virtual carte blanche for the killing of wolves” in ordering wolves in the Great Lakes again protected last December.

Recently, a group of 70 scientists and legal scholars published an open letter detailing the scientific and legal need for the ongoing protection of wolves in the Great Lakes and beyond. This came after Senators Booker and Boxer and Representative Grijalva led 25 Senators and 92 Representatives in sending a letter to President Obama asking that he veto any bill with riders such as that which would have delisted gray wolves. Representatives Pelosi and McCollum and Senators Reid and Peters were instrumental in negotiating the removal of this rider during the budget process.

The upcoming passage of this omnibus spending bill without the wolf rider represents a big win for wolves and the people that care about their continued recovery. We should celebrate this win and thank those that made it possible.

The post Great Lakes and Wyoming Wolves Win appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

The letter is in response to an earlier letter from a smaller group of scientists suggesting wolves should lose protections. It calls into question several of the claims made in that letter, specifically noting the authors’ misunderstandings of both the legal requirements of the Endangered Species Act and interpretation of scientific data. 

You can read the letter in its entirety here.

Federal courts have repeatedly rebuked the USFWS for failing to follow the law in attempting to delist wolves in the Great Lakes, and a proposal to delist virtually all of the nation’s gray wolves remains pending. Congress is also considering legislation that would circumvent legal requirements of the Endangered Species Act by selectively delisting wolves in as many as four states.

Take action by calling your senators and asking them to reject anti-wolf policy riders on upcoming spending bills.

The post 70 Scientists Recommend Continued Protection for Wolves appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.

Cecil’s death was strikingly similar to the killing of another beloved animal closer to home. In December 2012, a hunter shot and killed what was then Yellowstone’s most popular wolf. Scientists studying her knew her as 832F, while others called her the ‘06 Female or ’06. She was a six-year-old, radio-collared alpha female from the Lamar Canyon Pack that roamed Yellowstone National Park.

The Wyoming trophy hunter that killed 832F was, by many accounts, acting legally, as Wyoming then allowed the hunting of wolves. In 2014, Wyoming was ordered by a federal judge to again protect them under the Endangered Species Act. Wolves in that state, unlike those in neighboring Montana and Idaho, are currently fully protected under the Act.

While the killer of ’06 may have been acting within the law (though there is some question as to whether he artificially and illegally lured the wolf out of the safe confines of Yellowstone National Park), he was certainly acting against the public interest. Like Cecil, ’06 was the subject of ongoing scientific study and was treasured by wildlife enthusiasts. For as little as $18 (the cost of a “wolf license” for Wyoming residents), this trophy hunter was able to deprive the rest of the public from continuing to enjoy the benefits of ’06.

Beyond the loss of scientific benefit in continued study, there is a clear economic cost to allowing trophy hunters to satisfy their own wants by taking animals like ‘06. Wolf-related tourism brings in $35.5 million annually to Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. High profile wolves like ’06 are key drivers of that spending. Like Cecil, she was a park favorite that drew photographers and wildlife enthusiasts who wanted only to see her.

Also like Cecil, she served a very valuable role in her ecosystem. Apex predators like lions and wolves facilitate balance by preventing other animals from overgrazing and by keeping these same populations healthy. When wolves were brought back to Yellowstone in 1995, they changed the behavior patterns of herbivores, allowing plant life to regenerate and bringing benefits across the environmental spectrum. Lions serve a similar function, keeping their ecosystems healthy by preying on ungulates, and keeping those herds and their shared habitat healthy.

Tragically, these two killings bear another similarity in their immediate impact on existing social structures. Cecil’s killing will bring the ascension of another lion who will likely kill Cecil’s twelve cubs. Scientists call this the perturbation effect. When a dominant male lion is killed, other adult male members of his coalition and their offspring are often killed by the successor to his crown.

The death of ’06 was equally devastating to her pack. The social structure of the Lamar Pack was torn apart following the killing of ’06 and another wolf, 754M, a beta male in the pack, who was also ‘06’s mate’s brother. The mate of ‘06, 755M (754M’s brother), abandoned the pack following the killings and left the area to set out on his own. A previously healthy, thriving pack was upended and has never fully recovered.

The killing of ’06, like the killing of Cecil, was not just the killing of a lone animal. Their social structures were ripped apart. Economic, environmental, and scientific benefits were sacrificed. Hearts were broken.

These killings are preventable. In Cecil’s case, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service can quickly act to close the U.S. market for “trophies” like Cecil’s by finalizing proposed protections under the Endangered Species Act. African lions have declined by as much as 60 percent in just three decades. If we don’t act, they could be extinct by 2050. In addition to issuing its final rule protecting lions, the Service should reconsider its planned exemption for the import of lion trophies from countries it deems to be engaging in “scientifically sound management.” Trophy hunters kill as many as 600 African lions annually. That is roughly a 2 percent loss every year, spread disproportionately onto healthy, adult male lions favored by trophy hunters. USFWS should immediately remove that exemption from their proposed listing to help lions recover and to prevent future lions like Cecil from being killed.

The Service should also act to prevent the killing of the next ’06. Her death illustrates the economic, environmental, and social costs of trophy hunting of still-recovering gray wolves. The pending USFWS proposal to remove Endangered Species Act protections from most of the gray wolves in the lower 48 states has been deemed unscientific and is widely opposed. Federal courts have found their efforts to delist Great Lakes wolves lacking and have ordered them protected.

Congress can help in two ways. First, members of Congress should oppose all attempts to legislatively delist wolves. Scientists, not politicians, should make decisions about endangered species protections. Congress should also quickly move to pass the Conserving Ecosystems by Ceasing the Importation of Large Animal Trophies (CECIL) Act, introduced last week by Senator Robert Menendez, D-NJ. This bill would ban the imports of trophies form lions and other at-risk species into the United States.

The Cecils and ‘06s of the world need these protections from trophy hunters. Congress and the USFWS should listen to the worldwide uproar around their deaths and work to protect remaining wolves and lions.

The post The Heavy Price of Trophy Hunting appeared first on Endangered Species Coalition.