In a major win for wildlife conservation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in response to a lawsuit from RMEF and Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) announced recension of the “blanket rule” applied to species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Until 2019, the FWS used a blanket rule for species listed as both threatened and endangered that included various land use prohibitions and other restrictions. Because of the one-size-fits-all approach, the blanket rule often restricts not only potentially harmful activities, but also those beneficial to conservation, such as forest thinning, prescribed fire or planting native vegetation.
In 2019, at the encouragement of RMEF, the FWS rescinded the rule, recognizing that tailoring plans for threatened species would better incentivize states and landowners to manage threatened species by potentially lifting some restrictions. Flexible rules long used by the National Marine Fisheries Service, which has recovered species at nearly three times the rate of FWS, demonstrated their effectiveness.
But in 2024, the FWS again enacted the blanket rule, citing in part administrative convenience. The decision raised concerns for RMEF’s work that supports and funds habitat improvement and research projects across the nation. Much of that work encompasses lands that support ESA-listed species. Whether through weed treatments and wildlife-friendly fencing, partnering to restore streams and improve aquatic habitat, or helping acquire new public lands, RMEF projects help conserve habitat for Canada lynx, wolverines, grizzly bears, bull trout and myriad other species.
RMEF and PERC filed a lawsuit earlier this year challenging reinstatement of the blanket rule. While easier for bureaucrats to administer, the lawsuit argued that the approach ignores science and species-specific considerations necessary to seek recovery. The blanket rule restricts state management of wildlife habitat including valuable restoration without a costly permit, eliminates an incentive to push for species recovery from endangered to threatened, and then limits options to move toward delisting, the lawsuit stated.
In August, FWS sided with RMEF and PERC in announcing a pause of the blanket rule as it initiates steps to ultimately rescind the rule over the next 14 months. RMEF Chief Conservation Officer Blake Henning applauded the decision.
“We’ve worked with states and landowners to conserve or enhance more than 9.1 million acres of habitat for elk and other wildlife, and we’ve seen how flexible regulations that address specific challenges are more effective than a blanket approach,” Henning said. “We’re encouraged by this progress and will continue advocating for science-driven, species-specific conservation policies.”
RMEF Appeals Wolf Ruling, Calls for ESA Reform
Only days after a federal judge sided with environmental activists and ordered the FWS to reconsider ESA protections for gray wolves in the West, the RMEF filed an appeal.
In 2024, in response to petitions from environmental groups, the FWS issued a decision that wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains and western United States did not warrant a return to listing under the ESA. Notably the region’s wolf population of at least 3,200 animals is well above recovery goals — Idaho and Montana are 700 percent and 600 percent above federal minimums respectively — and Wyoming has met recovery criteria for more than two decades. Wolves are also expanding in California, Colorado, Oregon and Washington state.
The groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Alliance for the Wild Rockies and Western Watershed Projects, claimed that federal officials’ reliance on population estimates provided by Montana and Idaho, as well as liberalized regulations for hunting and trapping, threatened the long-term viability of wolves in the West. After looking at the science and population trends, FWS disagreed, noting that wolf numbers and range have generally continued to increase. The groups then filed a 2024 lawsuit in federal court; RMEF, Safari Club International and Sportsmen’s Alliance intervened on behalf of the FWS and continued state management.
In early August, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy ruled against the FWS in a lengthy opinion that ordered the agency to reconsider its decision. The judge found that the FWS had not considered wolves’ full historic range, the role Colorado plays in wolf range, and whether genetic connectivity will remain into the future. Molloy further ruled that the FWS must analyze non-peer-reviewed science that criticized Montana’s wolf population model and Idaho’s camera-trap program for tracking wolf populations. Finally, the judge wrote that the FWS “arbitrarily” relied on states’ commitments to halt wolf hunting and trapping should populations approach certain thresholds and failed to account for wolves killed unlawfully.
RMEF and its conservation partners convened following the ruling and immediately filed an appeal. As an organization, RMEF is committed to wildlife conservation that is supported by science, and maintains that resources should go toward proven, state-based wildlife management, not endless court battles, says RMEF President and CEO Kyle Weaver.
“This ruling is the latest in a string of nonstop litigation by environmental groups seeking to frustrate the original intent of the ESA, which is to recover endangered species and return them to state-based management, not keep them perpetually listed and under the authority of the federal government,” said Weaver. “Whether it’s the wolf or the grizzly bear, once an animal receives ESA protections, it becomes nearly impossible to remove them, even if populations meet recovery criteria over an extended period of time. The ESA needs an adjustment to renew its focus on real species recovery.”
The judge’s decision does not change the status of wolves in the Northern Rockies, which remain under state management, but calls on FWS to revisit its 2024 ruling that denied relisting wolves. That means state-managed hunting and trapping seasons will proceed as scheduled.
