Coalition sues feds over bull trout recovery plan

A coalition of local organizations filed a complaint on Tuesday challenging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s 2015 Bull Trout Recovery Plan, claiming the plan fails to incorporate certain requirements outlined in the federal Endangered Species Act.

The organizations – Save the Bull Trout, Friends of the Wild Swan and Alliance for the Wild Rockies – are challenging the plan released by Fish and Wildlife in September 2015.

“Plaintiffs request that the Court declare that the Recovery Plan violates the ESA [Endangered Species Act] and remand to FWS for preparation of a new recovery plan for bull trout that contains the criteria required by statute,” the complaint states.

The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. Its defendants are U.S. Fish and Wildlife Director Margaret Everson and U.S. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt.

When reached for comment, a representative for U.S. Fish and Wildlife said the agency “cannot comment on this lawsuit or any active lawsuit.”

The complaint points to Section 4(f)(B) of the Endangered Species Act, which states that recovery plans must incorporate “objective, measurable criteria which, when met would result in a determination, in accordance with the provisions of this section, that the species be removed from the list.”

“The recovery plan fails to incorporate recovery criteria that are objective and measurable,” the complaint states.

Bull trout are listed as “threatened” across their historical range in the United States, which includes Montana, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and Nevada. They have been completely eliminated from streams they once inhabited in California.

Under the Endangered Species Act, the recovery plan would not require bull trout to be recovered throughout the entire historical range, but recovered to the point where they are no longer listed as “threatened” or “endangered.”

Human activities such as logging, road construction, dams, mining and grazing have taken a toll on bull trout habitat and caused significant declines in bull trout populations, according to the complaint. Migratory bull trout have been “restricted or eliminated” from much of their habitat due to this activity.

“Persistence of these migratory life history forms and maintenance or reestablishment of stream migration corridors is essential to the ultimate viability of the bull trout,” the complaint reads.

According to the text of the 2015 recovery plan, the “primary strategy” for bull trout recovery is to “conserve bull trout so they are geographically widespread across representative habits and demographically stable in six recovery units” and “effectively manage and ameliorate the primary threats.”

It also discusses adding to ongoing conservation efforts and improving Fish and Wildlife’s understanding of the “threat factors” affecting the species. This includes working with Fish and Wildlife’s partners to “design, fund, prioritize, and implement effective conservation actions in those areas that offer the greatest long-term benefit to sustain bull trout and where recovery can be achieved.”

Arlene Montgomery of Friends of the Wild Swan said the plan “does not contain essential elements that are supposed to be in a recovery plan.”

“How do we determine if what we’re doing is benefiting the fish or not?” she said.

Montgomery is also concerned about the recovery plan’s claim that “threats will be effectively managed.” She said there is nothing in the plan about measuring water temperature, flows of water or cleanliness of streams favored by bull trout.

Bull trout require cold water temperatures, complex stream habitats and clean streams for spawning and rearing, according to the Fish and Wildlife website.

Montgomery added that the plan falls short in addressing the “looming, overarching threat” of climate change. She said that reduced snowpack and warmer temperatures would combine to lower stream flows and increase water temperatures in streams, factors detrimental to bull trout survival.

In a press release, Montgomery said, “Instead of ramping up protections for bull trout we are seeing standards being gutted from Forest Plans because of this weak recovery plan. The Fish and Wildlife Service is continuing on a path that will lead to less fish than when they were listed. That’s not recovery.”

Alliance for the Wild Rockies and Friends of the Wild Swan petitioned Fish and Wildlife to list bull trout as an endangered species in 1992, which it did in 1999. The organizations filed suit in 2001 for failing to designate critical habitat and threatened to file suit again in 2013, before Fish and Wildlife agreed to issue a recovery plan.

Fish and Wildlife released the recovery plan in 2015, and the plaintiffs filed their first lawsuit over the recovery plan in the District of Oregon. Litigation commenced in April 2016, but the District of Oregon “found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and entered judgment dismissing the case without prejudice,” according to the complaint.

The plaintiffs then chose to file its current complaint in the District of Montana.

Reporter Colin Gaiser may be reached at 758-4439 or cgaiser@dailyinterlake.com