Another attempt at wildlife conservation is in the works, fueled by the recent discoveries of a United Nations (UN) report.
The Wildlife Corridors Conservation Act of 2019 was introduced on May 16, shortly following the release of an extensive report conducted over global ecosystems and biodiversity by the United Nations Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services(IPBES) earlier this month.
Report finds species at risk
The IPBES report concluded that “Nature and its vital contributions to people … are deteriorating worldwide.” The report reads: “Human actions threaten more species with global extinction now than ever before,” with 25 percent of plant and animal species threatened. This finding suggests around 1 million species are already facing extinction.
The Wildlife Corridors Conservation Act of 2019—S. 1499 in the Senate and HR 2795 in the House—was introduced by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) alongside Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA-08) and echoes concerns laid out in the IPBES’s findings. The intended goal of this bill is to “provide for the protection and restoration of certain native fish, wildlife, and plant species, and for other purposes.”
The bill outlines and emphasizes the IPBES report’s main findings, which include several sections over the agricultural industries’ negative impact on the environment. In addition to discussing influences by the agriculture sector, the report points to human action as the primary driver of animal and environmental degradation and calls for timely change.
Bill proposes new wildlife corridors
The Wildlife Corridors Conservation Act of 2019 uses the IPBES report as a reference for the bill’s proposal, which includes the conservation of new and existing corridors across the U.S. for native species to transition to different habitats.
The act stresses the importance of corridors in order to “conserve native biodiversity” and “ensure resiliency against impacts from a range of biotic and abiotic stresses.”
In addition to building new corridors, the bill also proposes the establishment of a wildlife movement grant program on nonfederal land and water to help increase connectivity, as well as a national wildlife corridors database.
Additionally, the bill emphasizes the necessity for “mitigation or removal of human infrastructure that obstructs the natural movement of native species.”
Ethan Lane, executive director of the Public Lands Council, calls this proposal, “The worst of what happens when Washington tries to get involved in problems that affect rural western communities.”
Lane told WLJ that the UN report did not accurately represent the important contributions ranchers make in providing a habitat for wildlife. He said 640 million acres of U.S. land are used for pasture and grazing and represent a massive unbroken landscape on which wildlife can exist.
“If ranchers weren’t there, keeping those areas unbroken and available,” Lane said, “you would see a much different environment for wildlife to thrive.”
Agriculture’s role in the report
Both the IPBES report and the wildlife corridors bill discuss the agriculture sector’s impact on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, stating the impact is a staggering 25 percent, with animal-based food contributing more than 18 percent of the total number.
However, Lane argues these numbers are incorrect and in reality, are closer to 2 to 3 percent, “a rounding error.”
On May 21, Kansas beef producer Debbie Lyons-Blythe testified on behalf of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association in front of the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee. Lyons-Blythe delivered a testament over climate change, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency’s report that 2 percent of greenhouse gases in the country were from beef cattle.
She also testified that, according to the USDA, emissions from cattle “were not a significant contributor to long-term global warming.”
Lane stresses that the corridors bill “would be disastrous for landowners across the country, ranchers in particular.”
“This is a poorly-thought-out proposal,” Lane continued. “This is a big issue and it can’t be solved without talking to landowners, and landowners weren’t included in the first round.”
Lane said conversations with the Department of the Interior and stakeholders in the West are taking place now in an attempt to find a solution that benefits both sides. — Anna Miller, WLJ editor
