February 6, 2012
Mountain Yellow-legged Frog is Listed Under California ESA
To start discussion of the frog agenda item, the chief of the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Fisheries Branch, Stafford Lehr, gave a summary of the DFG mountain yellow-legged frog status review, and made the recommendation that both species be listed under the California ESA. After Mr. Lehr answered a few questions from the Commission, DFG Director Chuck Bonham made a brief statement in which he reaffirmed the DFG mission to protect California's biodiversity. Lisa Belenky from the Center for Biological Diversity (the group that originally petitioned the DFG to list both species) took the podium, commended the DFG status review for its thoroughness, and stated that although she thought both frog species should be listed as "endangered" she supported the DFG recommendations. With that, the Commission voted 5-0 to list both species. It was over in less than 30 minutes.
What made this listing decision different from most previous such decisions was the almost complete lack of controversy. Lehr, Bonham, and members of the Commission all mentioned that the unusually large amount of information associated with both species of the mountain yellow-legged frog provided a solid foundation for the DFGs threatened/endangered recommendation. I've long argued that science can (and should) play an important role in helping to resolve natural resource issues, and this listing decision strongly supported that role. Science clearly cannot provide all of the answers, but when conducted in a thorough manner it can at least provide sideboards to resource-related discussions.
In my next post, I'll discuss what this listing likely means for frogs and potentially-affected user groups (e.g., anglers).
Back to The Mountain Yellow-legged Frog Site.
January 24, 2012
State Listing Decision Nears for Mountain Yellow-legged Frog
At their February 2 meeting, the Commission will accept comments from the public regarding the listing petition or status review, and may vote on whether to list both species under the California ESA. Comments can also be sent to the Commission at the following address: Fish and Game Commission, 1416 Ninth Street, Box 944209, Sacramento, California 94244-2090 (or via e-mail to fgc@fgc.ca.gov). To be considered, comments must be received by the time of the February 2 meeting. The meeting starts at 8:30 AM in Sacramento, is open to the public, and will be broadcast live. The meeting agenda [PDF] states that the mountain yellow-legged frog item is the last item of the day, but there is no indication of at what time discussion of this item will begin.
The potential listing of both species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act also continues to move forward. As I've mentioned in previous posts, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is leading a multi-agency effort to develop a Conservation Strategy for the mountain yellow-legged frog. At the recent California-Nevada Amphibian Populations Task Force meeting (Placerville, January 12-13), Steven Detweiler (USFWS) gave an update on the progress made to date. The group is tackling a range of challenging issues, including how best to restore mountain yellow-legged frog populations in the presence of chytridiomycosis (the disease caused by the amphibian chytrid fungus) and how to prioritize sites for restoration actions. A draft document is scheduled for release by the end of 2012.
So, you can expect the mountain yellow-legged frog to be in the news a lot during the coming weeks and months. Stay tuned.
Back to The Mountain Yellow-legged Frog Site.
September 26, 2011
Another Field Season......
In my absence from the front country, lots has happened in the world of frog conservation. Most importantly, perhaps, was the die-off of more than 100 mountain yellow-legged frogs being housed at Fresno's Chaffee zoo. The cause of death remains a mystery. These frogs were collected in southern California as part of an effort to establish another captive breeding colony, the progeny of which could eventually be released back into the wild. This incident should serve as an important reminder of how difficult it is to maintain healthy frog populations in captivity. Whenever possible, I'd like to instead see concerted efforts to establish frog populations in suitable natural habitats across the range of the frog. Populations of the mountain yellow-legged frog have tremendous reproductive potential, and under the right conditions could produce lots of offspring for reintroduction to additional sites. And those offspring would come at a fraction of the cost of those from captive rearing facilities. The fact that fewer than 200 adult mountain yellow-legged frogs exist in southern California limits the options available, but I worry that the current focus on captive breeding has distracted us from a broader approach that includes trying to establish additional wild populations.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)-led effort to develop a Conservation Strategy for Sierra Nevada populations of the mountain yellow-legged frog continues apace. This effort is still in the information-gathering phase and I expect that a draft strategy won't be released until sometime in 2012, perhaps around the time that the USFWS begins the process of deciding whether these Sierra Nevada populations should be listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the California Fish and Game Commission will soon be meeting to decide whether to list mountain yellow-legged frogs across their range under the California Endangered Species Act. And then, both Yosemite and Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks continue to work on their respective park-wide aquatic restoration plans, plans that will likely propose multi-decade efforts to remove nonnative trout from key frog habitats within these jurisictions. I expect that both parks will release draft plans in 2012.
So, 2012 looks to be a busy year. Stay tuned for updates....
Back to The Mountain Yellow-legged Frog Site.
November 1, 2010
A.B. 2376: Opening the Door to Restructuring the Department of Fish and Game
In late September California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed A.B. 2376 into law. This bill was supported by numerous fishing groups, including California Trout, Trout Unlimited, and The Sportfishing Conservancy, and was motivated by the recently-released Treanor Report that suggested changes to how the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the California Fish and Game Commission (FGC) are structured (Treanor Report available here). A.B. 2376 requires that the Secretary of Natural Resources convene a committee to "develop and submit to the Governor and Legislature, a strategic vision for the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Fish and Game Commission". Specifically related to the management of fish and game, it requires the following:
"....that the strategic vision address specified matters relating to fish and game management, including but not limited to: biodiversity management and ecosystem functions; permitting and regulatory functions; recreational and commercial harvest; scientific capacity; relations with the public, landowners, nonprofits and other land management agencies; reforms necessary to address challenges of the 21st Century; use of technology and data systems; clarification of the roles of DFG and FGC; and strategies for identifying other stable funding options to reduce DFG's dependence on the General Fund."
That is a pretty broad statement so who knows what will come of it. But the DFG and the FGC both certainly need to be updated to better accomplish their respective missions. One change that would be high on my list of priorities is for the DFG to increase its scientific capacity and to use science (instead of political expediency) to resolve resource-related disputes. An increased capacity to conduct critical resource-related scientific studies would go a long way toward allowing the DFG to anticipate resource problems. This proactive position would provide for far better decision-making than the current DFG model which seems to be to ignore growing issues for as long as possible and then deal with them in crisis mode when forced to by outside pressure. As I've said many times before, science will not provide all of the answers to our resource issues but it can provide a solid foundation upon which rational solutions can be developed.
Back to The Mountain Yellow-legged Frog Site.



