404 Southeastern Freshwater Fish, Mussels, Crayfish, Birds, and Others
Petitioned for Protection as Endangered Species

ATLANTA, Ga.— The Center for Biological Diversity and six southeastern conservation groups filed a formal petition today asking the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Endangered Species Act protection for 404 species dependent on the region’s troubled waterways. The 1,145-page petition asks for protection for 48 fish, 92 mussels and snails, 92 crustaceans, 82 plants, 13 reptiles, four mammals,15 amphibians, 55 insects, and three birds including the Florida sandhill crane, salamanders like the hellbender and black warrior waterdog, fish that once formed important fisheries like the Alabama shad, and nine freshwater turtle species. It sets in motion a federal review of the species.

“With unparalleled diversity and a variety of severe threats, the Southeast’s rivers are the extinction capital of North America,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species program director at the Center. “Dams, pollution, growing demand for water, and uncertainty about future water availability with global climate change mean these 404 species need Endangered Species Act protection to have any chance at survival.”

Based on a massive search of available literature and extensive consultation with a host of scientific experts, the petition includes extensive information on the status of, and threats to, the 404 species, and clearly demonstrates the species are in need of protection. The combined threat of dams, urban and agricultural sprawl, logging, mining, livestock grazing, pollution, invasive species, climate change, and other factors represent a massive assault on the health and integrity of Southeast rivers and clearly threaten the survival of these 404 species.

“These 404 species are an integral part of what makes the Southeast unique,” said Greenwald. “Saving them would improve the health of southeastern rivers and help ensure a high quality of life for people now and in the future.”

The Southeast’s rivers and streams are a hotspot of biological diversity, harboring, for example, 493 fishes (62 percent of U.S fish species) and at least 269 mussels (91 percent of all U.S. mussel species). The Coosa River is the site of the greatest modern extinction event in North America with extinction of 36 species following construction of a series of dams. Overall, the Mobile Basin is home to half of all North American species that have gone extinct since European settlement.

“An extinction crisis is unfolding in southeast rivers and streams,” said Greenwald. “If dramatic action is not taken to curb impacts to the region’s rivers, these 404 species and many others will be lost forever.”

The species included in the petition have a diversity of life-history strategies and range from the anadromous Alabama shad to the sandshell mussel, which lures fish into close proximity using an appendage that looks like a small fish in order to release their larvae into the fish’s gills. The species have colorful names like Chesapeake logperch, holiday darter, Alabama hickorynut, bearded red crayfish, frecklebelly madtom, and Pascagoula map turtle.

Groups joining the Center include Alabama Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition, Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration Network, Tennessee Forests Council, and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy.

I have a completely picayune editorial criticism; the petition should be talking about "fishes" rather than "fish" to be considered for listing, since it's multiple species.

The petition itself is either a genius-level idea to force the issue of hundreds of vulnerable species that need protection, or it's an over-the-top demand on the USFWS to spend money they don't have to consider the cases of all 404 species. Either way this is at heart a political decision, as a society we value this biodiversity or we find it more convenient to ignore it and pretend it doesn't matter.

Are they out of their minds?

Look, don't get me completely wrong here; some species need all the help they can get. But really, now... these Center for Biological Diversity people are starting to annoy me. They ostensibly mean well, but they're nuts. They won't be happy until absolutely everything is protected, even if it kills absolutely everything. For example, their plan to outlaw the keeping of most corals will only doom them all, since oceanic acidification will wipe out all the world's reefs within 50 years or so, and as such the only corals still alive will be those in aquaria... assuming there still ARE any in aquaria, which they apparently oppose.

How in the heck can you list 404 new species over a wide area and not expect it to wreak absolute havoc? Once a body of water becomes protected, everything involving it stops. Maybe that's a good thing, but people are still going to be people, and the outlaws among them are only going to start doing everything in secret where we can't measure or control their impact until it's too late. You just can't shut down every industry in the state which could impact these species, and if you don't, then what's the point in listing them?

I like diversity of species. I like having lots of critters and plants living in peace. I like the idea of protecting them so that they can keep on doing just that. However, I also like being able to do a great many things without having to spend years in court first, I like it when my neighbors have jobs, and I like not having to worry that a couple of morons will do something stupid and then either bring oppressive heat down around my ears or worse, not report something that they really should, allowing a bad situation to get much, much worse. I also like having access to things that I should be able to study and/or enjoy in a responsible manner, and I think that this petition goes way to far. Sure, protect the Hellbenders and other critical cases, but don't go adding a few hundred other things just because it's politically expedient. 55 insects??? How in the heck do they propose to protect insects without the outright banning of most mosquito control efforts? Yes, the effects of mosquito control have had a devastating effect on all other insects as well, but what's the alternative? Widespread mosquitoborne illnesses? Yeah.. that'll be much better, and hey, think of all the extra food for the fish! Bonus!

I guess I'm saying... "Oh, good grief!" The worst part is that they'll likely get their way. Many of you see that as a very good thing. Many of you don't have to live here, either. If there were some sort of way to compromise, that would be great. There isn't though; the ESA is very draconic, isn't it?

The ESA isn't as draconian as you think, or many commercial interests want everyone to think. There are federally listed mussel species in the Alabama River, but that doesn't shut down barge traffic on the river. It means that existing mussel beds have to be protected from any channel alterations or dredging. For fish, let's say that the blotchside logperch is listed. It's still found in a remaining range of clean, unaltered streams. As long as the streams are the unchanged the species will probably remain. How many people target this species, or would take it as incidental take, in places like the upper Paint Rock River system in Alabama? I'd say few. So what's the point of protection? Not clearcutting surrounding landscapes, which hasn't happened for over a hundred years anyway.

The bottom line, as always, is too many people trying to do too many things with dwindling freely available resources. The ESA doesn't address that unfortunately.

Is there a web site to go look at the petition or a list of the species that are on the list. I would be very interested in this. I would guess that some of the species are in SC and would like to get involved.

David

Is there a web site to go look at the petition or a list of the species that are on the list. I would be very interested in this. I would guess that some of the species are in SC and would like to get involved.

David

http://www.biologica...crisis/map.html

or it's an over-the-top demand on the USFWS to spend money they don't have to consider the cases of all 404 species.

Yes.

This was NOT well received at Southeastern Fishes Council and there's a group of extremely informed ichthyologists and fish ecologists working to call into the question the means by which this list was created and get it thrown out before F&W has to deal with it.

CBD basically went to Natureserve, wrote down every species that was a G2 or G1 and said "it needs listed on the ESA". Then they backed up these listing by the Jelks et al 2009 list (this was the "science" they did) and made Howard regret ever writing it down. Boy, was that a weird group conversation tripping back and forth from first to third person.

So, for example, this list is requiring that USFW list eastern sand darter. Do y'all think that's a species that should even be on the radar of the service? Now add 403 others to that, and that's what they're asking the service to do. Best of intentions that's turned into wanton waste, IMHO.

Todd