Enacted in 1973, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was intended to prevent the extinction of certain species by identifying the species at risk, creating and implementing a recovery plan, recovering the species, and removing them from the threatened and endangered species list. Since the ESA was last reauthorized more than two decades ago, fewer than 2% of species have met those criteria. Recovered species that should be celebrated as success stories languish on the list, while other species are listed but never are evaluated as part of a recovery plan. 

Livestock grazing is one of the best tools to protect habitats for species – whether the populations are endangered, threatened, or robust, but ranchers and rural communities bear the burden of severe land and resource restrictions and countless lawsuits, which are brought by environmentalists funded by taxpayer dollars. While the intent of the ESA was noble, implementation has deteriorated such that many ESA decisions are made by the judicial branch. These groups abuse the law by constantly petitioning to add new species to the ESA list. Their barrage of petitions causes missed deadlines, which enables them to sue the government and reap taxpayer dollars as compensation, costing the federal government and ranchers millions of dollars and draining resources away from real recovery efforts.


PLC Recommendations

Follow the science. PLC supports addition of safeguards to exclude or weigh information submitted by organizations that have a financial interest in supporting the determination of listing threatened or endangered species.

Support permittees’ voluntary conservation work. Permittees provide water, habitat, and protection for many species through the normal course of their work. This work should be considered during the species’ evaluation process, and when looking at the long-term viability of species post-delisting. Agriculture is one of the most stable management conditions on the landscape, so keeping these lands open, available, and healthy for species should be rewarded.

Protect existing land use from arbitrary reintroduction efforts. Livestock producers have long lived in the same habitats as all kinds of wildlife and should not face removal from the landscape for new efforts to reintroduce species. Designation of new ecosystems with lines on a map that are not representative of current populations only creates additional conflict that harms ranchers and native wildlife.

Restore the ability to delist species. Species should be able to be delisted when they meet recovery goals. Delistings should be able to proceed when the best available science indicates that recovery goals have been met.

Clarify requirements for habitat designations and critical habitat designations. In Weyerhauser Company vs. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Supreme Court was clear that an ecosystem must first be habitat before it can be critical habitat – meaning that a species must be able to live in an area before USFWS makes a restrictive critical habitat listing. USFWS must comply with this ruling to reduce regulatory burdens.

Create robust tools for compensation when ESA-listed species damage ranchers’ operations. Many ESA-listed species cause damage to permittees’ property and operations. While ranchers continue to provide high-quality habitat as part of their normal work, they should not be expected to bear an undue burden when these species affect their business. Robust livestock depredation tools and fair, workable standards to provide compensation must accompany any ESA listing process.

Top PLC Issues Covered by the ESA

Greater Sage-GRouse

(not listed under the ESA)

Activists have long tried to add the Greater Sage-Grouse to the endangered species list as a means to lock up as much land as possible in the West and prevent multiple use. To prevent this abuse, PLC has secured legislation to prevent the listing of the species since 2014, which has allowed voluntary conservation efforts and partnerships to flourish. Grouse populations continue to benefit from grazing; among other things, grazing supports the kinds of grasses and plants that support small bugs that are part of the important, early diet for sage grouse chicks.

BLack-Footed ferret

(Endangered, with Experimental, Non-Essential Populations)

Black-footed ferrets once numbered in the tens of thousands but were thought to be extinct. After finding a small population on a ranch in Wyoming, scientists and ranchers have implemented a successful breeding and reintroduction program.

Black-footed ferrets feed primarily on black tailed prairie dogs, which are not listed under the ESA, but face significant restrictions on management because they are a primary food source for an endangered species. 

Factoring in management of ferrets and prairie dogs has also held up important land use plans across the West. PLC opposes the kind of judicial micromanaging that has stymied management of grasslands and rangelands, despite the Forest Service and stakeholders engaging in robust collaborative development of forest plans.

Large Carnivores

Large carnivores are often the most controversial endangered and threatened species. Activists have long targeted perpetual ESA protections for species like wolves and bears as a means to cause the most damage to ranchers and rural communities. Conflicting court decisions have been leveraged to keep ranchers guessing about whether they will be able to defend their livestock and their families from these predators.

Gray Wolves: As of 2024, USFWS has failed to issue a new delisting rule for populations in the lower 48 contiguous United States, despite commitments to do so as part of an agreement to stall litigation on the issue. As a result of the delay, litigation has resumed on the rule and PLC is committed to securing the science-based return of wolves to state management. Wolf recovery nationwide should be celebrated as a success story, not wielded as a threat of government intervention. PLC is defending the nationwide delisting in court. The last three administrations have all agreed wolves are recovered and no longer need protection, so the law should reflect reality.

Mexican Gray Wolves: Federal protection of Mexican Gray Wolf populations has threatened livestock producers’ livelihoods across the southwest. After failure to establish meaningful measures of success for populations in the existing habitat, USFWS moved in 2024 to expand critical habitat for the wolves, expanding the area of regulatory burdens on livestock producers in a way not backed by science or common sense. As a result, livestock producers across Arizona and New Mexico are facing additional loss of cattle and sheep, have decreased production and growth rates, and face difficulty in accessing depredation assistance. PLC is pursuing additional compensation and assistance tools for ranchers affected by this ill-advised expanded habitat and continues to pursue more tools for producers to protect livestock.