Bull-trout habitat area is expanded
Critical habitat for bull trout has been expanded across the Northwest - this time with Montana waters included - in a designation announced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Friday.
The expanded designation came in response to a lawsuit challenging a designation last October that covered 1,748 stream miles and 61,235 lake acres in the Columbia and Klamath River Basins of Oregon, Washington and Idaho.
Montana waters were entirely excluded from that designation.
The decision published Friday in the Federal Register designates 3,780 stream miles and 110,364 lakes across the same region.
The service also announced critical habitat designations for separate bull trout populations in Montana's St. Mary and Belly rivers, located east of the Continental Divide, and Washington's Coastal-Puget Sound population.
The big change was the inclusion of Montana waters west of the Continental Divide.
Wade Fredenberg, the service's native fish coordinator, said Montana waters were excluded from the October 2004, designation mainly because the state had a bull trout conservation plan and because the state's largest private landowner, Plum Creek Timber Co., has a habitat conservation plan for native fish.
The lawsuit challenging the last designation prompted the service to voluntarily remand its decision for further evaluation.
"Following the lawsuit, we did considerably more analysis of the Montana plan," Fredenberg said, adding that the service considered "whether it had regulatory or statutory backing."
There are a "lot of good things going on for bull trout in the state of Montana," he said, "but the reality is that the [state] plan itself does not have any statutory or regulatory components. It's mainly a guideline for voluntary compliance."
The Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation has been developing a habitat conservation plan for state lands similar to the one that was developed by Plum Creek. But Fredenberg said the state's plan is not likely to be approved anytime soon.
Marc Wilson, supervisor of the service's Montana Field Office, said critical habitat designations in general do not afford extra protections to threatened and endangered species. But they do require an additional layer of consultation reviews from the service - for habitat in addition to the species - whenever there is a proposed project or management activity, even on private lands, that involves federal funding, permits or licensing.
When there is a "federal nexus," the service would be involved with determining whether there are impacts to a threatened or endangered species, with or without the designation, Wilson said.
Fredenberg said there is concern within the service that areas outside "critical habitat" designations might be perceived as being less important for bull trout, when that is often not the case.
The service perceives critical habitat "as important habitat for the species that might need special management considerations" rather than the entire expanse of habitat that is used, or might be used, by bull trout, explained Diane Katzenberger, public affairs officer at the services Rocky Mountain regional office in Denver.
Fredenberg said the service "tries to make clear that we're not big fans of critical habitat because it doesn't add much in additional protections."
"Our perception is that since we got involved with critical habitat, we've made no progress over the last two years with our recovery plans, which we view as being more effective for doing good things for bull trout," he added.
The service's recovery plans for bull trout are likely to be further delayed because of a pending five-year status review to determine whether a change in the bull trout's listing is warranted. That status review, required by the Endangered Species Act, is expected to be complete before the end of the year.
The exclusion of Montana waters from the October 2004 designation was one of the main targets in the lawsuit filed soon after by Alliance for the Wild Rockies and Friends of the Wild Swan.
The two Montana-based environmental groups also said the government's designation was inadequate because it accounted for just 10 percent of waters that were originally considered for designation across the entire Northwest, and because the government completely ignored economic benefits that might result from critical habitat designations.
Arlene Montgomery, spokeswoman for Friends of the Wild Swan, said future litigation over bull trout critical habitat will be decided after a thorough review of the latest designation. But after a broad look, Montgomery expressed some dissatisfaction.
"At least there's more that's designated," she said, specifically referring to Montana waters. "But it's not connected, and connectivity is a really important component of bull trout recovery."
A map of the Montana designation indeed shows segments of rivers and streams that are connected. But Fredenberg and other service official contend there are other protections in place for waters that are not designated.
Montgomery said the federal government has designated only about 18 percent of the waters that were originally considered for critical habitat.
"It doesn't look like they've done much to help bull trout," she said.
The bull-trout designation applies to:
. Idaho, 293 stream miles and 27,296 lake acres;
. Montana, 1,058 stream miles and 31,916 lake acres;
. Oregon, 911 stream miles and 24,610 lake acres;
. Washington, 1,519 stream miles and 26,542 lake acres, along with 966 miles of marine shoreline.
Descriptions of the designations with maps, photographs and other materials are available on the Internet at:
http://species.fws.gov/bulltrout
Reporter Jim Mann may be reached at 758-4407 or by e-mail at jmann@dailyinterlake.com