By Caleigh Wells for KCRW.
Broadcast version by Suzanne Potter for California News Service reporting for the KCRW-Public News Service Collaboration

The California Fish and Game Commission delayed the decision again today over whether to grant state protection to the western Joshua tree.

The petition to protect the plant under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) was submitted in 2019. If it is listed, it would be the first species to earn protection in the state because of climate change.

But the process has been contentious. And even when the decision is made, the fate of the plant is far from sealed.

How to save a tree

A member of the public must make a case to the California Fish and Game Commission that a species needs protection. In this case, the case is over the western Joshua tree, which primarily grows in California.

Their champion is Brendan Cummings. As conservation director for the Center for Biological DiversityCenter for Biological Diversity, he's litigated plenty of endangered species cases. "Fifteen or so years ago, I did the ... litigation that forced the Bush administration to protect the polar bear under the Federal Endangered Species Act."

But this species is personal. He's got dozens of them in his backyard in the town of Joshua Tree. "If you look around us here, the adult Joshua trees we're seeing were recruited into the population under a climate that no longer exists," he says.

But the case he's making isn't easy. Millions of these trees are still spanning thousands of square miles. Listing a species means businesses and residents must either avoid killing it if possible, or move it, or pay a fee if it must be killed. With so many trees left, that could be burdensome.

Kelly Herbinson says it's worth the trouble. She's the co-executive director of the Mojave Desert Land Trust, whose whole mission is to set aside acres of desert habitat for preservation.

"What we're seeing right now is unprecedented. This is serious. And I don't know that that's always obvious if you're not doing this every day and working on the land every day," she says.

At lower elevations, the western Joshua tree is facing the effects of the worst drought in more than a thousand years. "If you were to go to, say, the West Mojave, or even areas nearby where the drought has been really bad, I mean, they're mostly brown," she says.

In its middle elevations, the Joshua tree has been separated into small island habitats by decades of development as the human population in the desert continues to grow. That cuts off genetic flow between populations and creates problems like what LA's mountain lions are facing.

And then of course, at its middle and higher elevations, the Joshua tree is facing a threat it rarely encountered before: increased wildfire.

On a protected parcel of land across the street from where Herbinson works, a stray cigarette in 2020 burned most of the Joshua trees on a quarter of the 600 acres that the Mojave Desert Land Trust saved from becoming a housing development.

"That is not something that happened historically," she says. "There's this massive overgrowth of invasive plant species that are blanketing the desert and creating this massive fuel load. And then it dries out because we're in a drought. And then you just have this carpet of dried up plants that are ripe to burn."

There's also the problem of the tree's lifelong partner: the yucca moth. They're completely reliant on each other to survive.

The moth lives underground at the base of its tree for years, waiting for it to flower, and in the spring when it finally does, it emerges and pollinates the tree in exchange for food and a safe place to produce larvae.

But as the climate changes, scientists have found that the moths aren't reproducing like they used to.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife spent months studying the trees. Their job is to provide all the data and expertise that the commission needs to make a decision. In June, the department determined that there isn't compelling evidence that the western Joshua tree is in danger of going extinct in the foreseeable future. It said the plant has time to adapt to climate change.

Almost all of the peer-reviewed scientists disagreed. At the meeting in June, hundreds of members of the public showed up to throw in their opinion too.

Local politicians, the local water board, building developers, and labor unions all argued that listing an abundant plant in the desert as endangered would hurt development and jobs.

National politicians, conservationists, scientists, local residents, and tribal groups all made the case that the western Joshua tree is disappearing, and needs to be protected.

The commission reached a stalemate in June, and then on Wednesday they decided unanimously to delay the decision again, to leave room for more tribal consultation.

Cummings says he is not surprised by the delay. But even if the commission lists the western Joshua tree next year, he doubts the fight will end there either.

"If they vote to protect Joshua trees, various business interests will undoubtedly sue, trying to overturn that protection. And conversely, if the commission votes against protecting Joshua trees, I will sue, attempting to overturn that unlawful, unscientific decision. So the future of the species is likely to be contested for the next few years," he says.

For now, the Joshua tree has temporary protection, since it is a candidate species for CESA. The commission will revisit the decision in February 2023.

Caleigh Wells wrote this article for KCRW.


get more stories like this via email

Wildlife experts are warning people not to get too close to the animals in national parks as the summer travel season heats up. Overeager tourists can not only put themselves in danger, but threaten the animals.

Three million people visit Montana's Yellowstone national Park each year, and many want photos with the iconic Bison that are threatened and being reintroduced to the wild.

Chamois Anderson, senior representative for the Rockies and Plains program with Defenders of Wildlife, said while interaction with animals is part of the national park experience, it's important to give the bison their space - so tourists need to keep their distance.

"You know, they pull off the roadway to view bison, or maybe bears if they see one," said Anderson, "and they just want to get that selfie or that photo with their cellphone, and they approach these animals as if they're at a zoo. These are not zoos. These animals are very wild, and we need to keep them wild."

Anderson said she tells park visitors to stay at least 25 yards away from bison, and 200 yards from bears and wolves.

Defenders of Wildlife has released a video on YouTube describing what to consider when interacting with animals in Montana's Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks.

In North Carolina, Defenders of Wildlife's Senior Southeast Field Representative Tracy Davids said the group is going beyond educating tourists, and is also asking professional photographers to back off the remaining 20 or so Red Wolves in the eastern wetlands of the state.

"Particularly now during puppy season, we've had reports of photographers getting a little too close," said Davids. "Not so much putting themselves in jeopardy, but in a way that's harassing the wolves."

An 83-year-old woman from South Carolina sustained serious injuries when she was gored by a bison at Yellowstone in June.

The National Park Service says the bison was defending its space, came within a few feet of the woman and lifted her about a foot off the ground with its horns.

The Park Service says bison injure more people in Yellowstone than any other animal, typically one or two a year.

Wisconsin's wolf management plan has been in place for months now but the legal fallout continues.

Wildlife organizations have filed a court appeal challenging the process. A coalition announced the appeal this week, which centers on how the management plan came together under the state Department of Natural Resources.

A judge dismissed the original lawsuit earlier this spring. It accused an agency panel of breaking the rules for how it interacted with special interest groups tied to hunting.

Melissa Smith, executive director of Friends of the Wisconsin Wolf and Wildlife, said by favoring certain voices, other wildlife groups are left behind.

"It's quite egregious that the citizens of Wisconsin do not have any legal standing to challenge rules in any decisions that's wildlife-related," Smith contended.

The coalition said the judge's decision conflicts with principals under the Public Trust Doctrine. The DNR said it cannot respond to pending litigation. The legal activity comes a few months after federal officials opted to keep the gray wolf on the endangered species list.

State law requires a wolf hunt if the animal is delisted from federal protections but the new management plan does not include a goal with specific numbers. Instead, the plan focuses on sustainability, which is a source of contention among pro-hunting groups.

Meanwhile, Smith stressed she wants state rules to be consistent.

"If you look at the deer plan, our Wisconsin deer plan, it states plain as day that deer are held in the public trust," Smith pointed out. "It seems that it's pretty inconsistent when they decide something is held in the public trust and when something is not."

Around the country, certain hunting and farming groups contend the gray wolf population has grown too large, putting livestock at risk. But conservationists countered the concerns are often overstated and management efforts need to be rooted in science.


get more stories like this via email

A federal judge in Montana is holding a hearing next Tuesday on a motion for an injunction against the Pintler Face logging and burning project on Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest.

A coalition of conservationists and activists has sued to stop work altogether.

The Pintler project is located about 10 miles northwest of Wise River, Montana, and calls for bulldozing in 11 miles of new logging roads to gain access to 3,400 acres of clear-cuts, prescribed burns and logging of more than 560 acres of aspen. It would also log another 5,800 acres in a commercial segment of the project.

Mike Garrity, executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, said all told, there could not be a more devastating spot for this type of project because it disrupts a continuous ecosystem he said lynx and grizzly bears need to thrive.

"If we want these species to eventually be recovered and removed from the Endangered Species List, we need to have one connected population to prevent inbreeding," Garrity explained.

Critics of the lawsuit and supporters of the Pintler project said it would make strides to preventing wildfires and also backtrack on years of economic development the state has made in the region.

Beyond the sheer size of the project and the devastation it would do to the Anaconda Pintler Wilderness ecosystem, Garrity argued critical wildlife habitat would be at risk and one of the world's most natural and efficient carbon sinks would be threatened.

"These are old-growth forests," Garrity pointed out. "One of the best things about old-growth forests in addition to providing great wildlife habitat is they absorb carbon and they do it for free. It's one of the most effective methods of pulling greenhouse gases from the atmosphere."

Garrity argued the U.S. Forest Service sidestepped a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement and a policy act by secretly removing lynx designations and pretended that 145 miles of roads in the project area were not there so the logging could go forward. It is important because most grizzlies are killed within a third of a mile of a road. The coalition wants the judge to stop all work on the area until the entire case is decided.