The petition that was launched in August of 2014 to list the monarch butterfly as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act is now more than a decade old, but the Trump Administration has put the insects’ status once again in limbo.

FOS Wild Monarch tagged

Will citizens scientists still be able to tag monarch butterflies if they are listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act? –Photo by Monika Maeckle

Just one year ago, following 10 years of debate, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed listing the monarch butterfly as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Department of the Interior was expected to finalize the listing by mid-December this year. Recent proposed ESA changes by the Trump administration, however, have jeopardized any near-term final decision.

The intent of the changes is to “advance President Donald J. Trump’s directives to strengthen American energy independence, improve regulatory predictability and ensure federal actions align with the best reading of the law,” according to a recent U.S. Department of the Interor press release,

Because of this turn of events, the final rulings for the monarch and other threatened creatures are now categorized as “long-term actions” — that is, proposed listings that the agency does not expect to act on within the next 12 months. Several species have spent decades on the “long term actions” list.

Karen Oberhauser, monarch butterfly expert –Courtesy photo

“I’m not surprised at this,” said Karen Oberhauser, professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin Madison and a longtime monarch butterfly scientist.

Oberhauser, founder of the Monarch Joint Venture and other pollinator advocacy organizations, expressed concerns about the current administration’s recent proposed roll-back of protections for all endangered species and their critical habitats–especially disregarding possible impacts of climate change and considering the cost of protecting a species when listing it.

Oberhauser pointed out that the original 1973 law protected species regardless of the cost.

“In fact, they could not consider economic impacts. The argument was that species extinction is a very consequential event, and the price tag for preventing it shouldn’t be an issue. But current proposals would require analysis of the economic impacts of species listing,” she said, adding “this comes on top of many other decisions that weaken environmental protections in this country.”

Just this week, the Trump administration moved to dismantle the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, one of the world’s leading Earth science research institutions.

“This was expected as soon as the election results were in last November,” said Chip Taylor, founder of the monarch butterfly citizen science tagging organization Monarch Watch, when asked about the proposed rule changes. “I suspect that many others were expecting this shoe to drop.”

Nor was migration studies expert Andy Davis surprised by the news. “This process has already been dragged out for more than a decade, and my guess is that it is a nightmare for the USFWS to make any decision that doesn’t anger someone. Whether they are listed or not, someone will be angry either way,” said the Odum School of Ecology professor and author of the MonarchScience blog.

Davis believes the listing is unwarranted based on scientific evidence and has vocally opposed it.

That said, any additional delays on the ruling contribute to “further entrenching the dangerous narrative that monarchs need to be saved by people by captive rearing,” Davis said.

The proposed listing has caused wide disagreement in the monarch butterfly community since it occurred more than a decade ago.

Proponents of the listing argue that protecting habit and reducing pesticide use and human intervention will benefit monarchs and other wildlife.

Those opposing it say that declaring a creature “endangered” when its summer breeding population is healthy, its current range spans North America and other countries and is continuing to expand because of climate change and other factors, is misguided and disingenuous. They argue that while the migration is in decline, monarchs are not. The creatures’ habits and range are simply adapting.

Need more context? Check out my recent book, The Monarch Butterfly Migration: Its Rise and Fall.

The postponement of the monarchs’ status didn’t get much attention when it was made public last month because it was buried in a list of more than 170 other species whose status is also being postponed.

The Center for Biological Diversity, which participated in the initial petition to list the monarch, labeled the proposed ESA rule changes “reckless — they’re a death sentence for wolverines, monarch butterflies, Florida manatees, and hundreds of other vulnerable species.”

In a fundraising plea that encouraged people to register a comment on the rule change under the headline “Stop Trump’s extinction plan,” the Center continued:  “These proposed changes to the Act will give industry a pass to bulldoze, drill, and destroy precious critical habitat.”

“This is a disappointing development,” wrote Emma Pelton, in a blog post on the Xerces Society website, the organization that led the filing of the original 2014 petition. “Delays in listing mean delays in recovery efforts, making the path more difficult and costly. Now, more than ever, monarch butterflies need our help.”

The comment period for the proposed rules closes at 11:59 PM on Monday, December 22. Register your comments at this link. 

TOP PHOTO: Tattered monarch butterfly. Photo by Carol Clark

Related articles