Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Coalition challenges science behind Interior grouse protections

Scott Streater, E&E reporter

A coalition of the oil and gas industry, mining groups and local governments in four states is formally challenging some of the core scientific documents the Interior Department is using to protect greater sage grouse habitat covering millions of acres of public lands across the West.

Specifically, the coalition is challenging three reports under the Data Quality Act that the Interior Department is using to justify amending as many as 98 Bureau of Land Management resource management plans (RMPs) and Forest Service land-use plans to add grouse conservation measures.

These scientific reports produced in the last five years by BLM, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Fish and Wildlife Service are likely to be core documents FWS uses in deciding by September whether to propose listing the greater sage grouse for protection under the Endangered Species Act.

But the influential 2011 grouse management report by BLM's National Technical Team (NTT) of sage grouse experts and an FWS-commissioned report in 2013 by a conservation objectives team (COT) that outlined rangewide sage grouse protection goals are riddled with factual errors, the coalition alleges. So, too, is a 2010 report from USGS that the service "relied extensively upon" in order to justify its determination in March of that year that the grouse warranted federal protection, the groups said.

Taken together, the three reports "advance a one-sided narrative that is simply not supported by the full body of scientific literature and data," according to an executive summary outlining the three challenges that was researched and written by a team led by Kent Holsinger, a Denver-based natural resources attorney.

The coalition -- which includes the Denver-based Western Energy Alliance, the American Exploration & Mining Association, and a total of 19 counties in Colorado, Montana, Nevada and Utah -- asks Interior to "retract" the three reports "and their use in land use plan amendments and the upcoming listing decision" by FWS, the summary says.

"Alternatively, the agencies could issue amended reports that use sound analytical methods and the best data available while ensuring transparency and objectivity, and adjust their policies accordingly," it concludes.


No comments: