Reports of National Bison Range agreement demise prove to be greatly exaggerated

Reports of National Bison Range agreement demise prove to be greatly exaggerated

Just 18 days after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) terminated its controversial agreement with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) to conduct management actions on Montana's National Bison Range Complex, Department of the Interior officials announced their intention to "reestablish a working relationship" between the two parties, reports the Wildlife Management Institute.

Following the requirements of the Tribal Self-Governance Act, the Service had entered into an Annual Funding Agreement (AFA) with the CSKT in 2005-2006 that turned over roughly half of the budget and staff positions at the Bison Range complex of national wildlife refuge lands for the CSKT to carry out biological (including habitat management), fire, maintenance and visitor-service programs.

The Service terminated the 18-month-old Bison Range AFA for reasons that included: (1) failure to comply with Service bison management standards; (2) failure to meet Service monitoring and reporting standards and protocols; (3) failure to complete biological study plans; (4) submission of biological reports with subjective conclusions not supported by data or literature review; (5) creation of a work environment characterized by harassing, offensive, intimidating and oppressive behavior on the part of CSKT employees; and (6) creation of unsafe conditions for Service and CSKT employees. The Service's action was strongly supported by many of the nation's leading conservation organizations.

Deputy Secretary of the Interior Lynn Scarlett, Service Director Dale Hall, and Associate Deputy Interior Secretary Jim Cason announced that they envision establishing a new AFA with the CSKT for Fiscal Year 2007 that contains substantially the same terms as the 2005-2006 agreement. At the same time, they agreed that any plans to attempt to phase in full tribal management of the refuge lands should be suspended.

Scarlett, Hall and Cason also said that they had agreed to: (1) draft a National Bison Range operations plan that will clearly spell out the mission, goals, objectives and tasks envisioned for the Bison Range for the next five years; (2) continue acting on Equal Employment Opportunity complaints that have been filed by Service employees and seek appropriate personal relief for legitimate grievances; (3) retain an ombudsman to work at the Bison Range to assist senior Interior officials with identification and resolution of any problems or conflicts related to management and operation of the range; and (4) undertake the drafting of a decision document that would critically examine all long-term options for the most effective management of the range.

Conservation groups maintain that flaws in the 2005-2006 AFA threaten to continue to cripple administration of the National Bison Range lands and provide a template for future agreements that would be damaging to the National Wildlife Refuge System as a whole. They have urged the release for public review and comment of a draft Service policy on AFAs to ensure that any future agreements with tribal governments successfully complement the mission and purposes of individual refuges and the entire National Wildlife Refuge System.(rpd)

January 07, 2007