Critical Lynx Habitat Draws Snowmobile Lawsuit

Created by Adam Rissien on May 7, 2009
The Caspar Star-Tribune ran an article painting a picture of how inequitable snowmobile groups were treated by the US Fish & Wildlife Service’s designation of lynx habitat. No mention was given about the previous lynx decision that had to be revised. On Feb. 24th, the NY Times reported,

“In 2007, FWS agreed to revisit the designation after it was determined that Julie MacDonald -- President George W. Bush's appointee as the Interior Department's deputy assistant secretary overseeing the Fish and Wildlife Service -- had pressured federal biologists to reach industry-friendly conclusions.”

Click here for the full article.

Those snowmobile friendly conclusions only designated 1,841 square miles of habitat for the lynx; the recent decision designated roughly 39,000 acres across six states.

Unfortunately, in Montana places such as the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest was determined to be “secondary, unoccupied habitat,” while adjacent areas were designated critical habitat. The division follows right along forest boundaries leading many to believe politics is still trumping science. In fact, many conservationists feel that, in addition to Montana, other places such as the southern Rockies and the Kettle Range in Washington should have been included as well.

Yet, when you read the Caspar article you would never know this background as the reporting appears to follow talking points taken directly from the Wyoming Snowmobile Association. They joined the Washington club in filing suit claiming that the USFWS did not do enough environmental analysis. Yep, I could hardly believe that the snowmobile groups want even more study, but when reading, it became clear they want an analysis that focuses on loss of their recreation opportunity; never mind the impact to a threatened species.

The Caspar article clearly favored snowmobile interests and the only mention of lynx proponents came near the end with a warning about another lawsuit by “environmentalists.”   

If you really want, you can read the article here.