Would grouse protections hurt national defense?

The House Armed Services Committee will vote today on a defense authorization bill with contentious Republican language to postpone Endangered Species Act protections for the greater sage grouse, sparking debate over whether wildlife protections are a threat to military readiness. Language from Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) in the National Defense Authorization Act would block a Fish and Wildlife Service decision on whether the sage grouse needs federal protection in any states that have their own plans in place to protect the bird's sagebrush habitat. It would also stymie a broad effort by the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service to bolster sage grouse protections across tens of millions of acres of Western rangelands. The land-use plans aim to convince FWS that the ground-dwelling bird -- whose population of breeding males has dropped by more than half over the past several years -- needs no additional protections. Bishop said his grouse rider would block Obama administration restrictions that are undermining national security. "Almost unbelievably, sage grouse restrictions, based on dubious or outdated science, are currently costing the Department of Defense millions of dollars and impacting critical training and support activities at numerous installations across the country," Bishop said in a statement yesterday. "If the Obama administration lists the bird under ESA, the needs of our military will be subordinate to an extreme environmental agenda. Our military personnel, who we ask so much of, deserve better." That view was echoed Monday in an op-ed in Roll Call by three former servicemen who warned that a federal listing for sage grouse would "significantly impair the readiness and effectiveness of a number of military installations, and the military units assigned to these sorts of camps and bases."
Wildlife advocates are challenging those claims. Dozens of environmental groups yesterday sent a letter to House members warning that Bishop's grouse rider is "one of the most egregious political attacks on the ESA in this Congress" and would do nothing to enhance military readiness. They're backing an amendment by Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.) to strike Bishop's language from the bill...more