The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) recent decision not to list the range-wide population of greater sage-grouse for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the culmination of one of the most challenging and politically contentious issues in the history of wildlife management. In my opinion, having served as director of the FWS under President George W. Bush and having worked as wildlife biologist for more than 30 years, the work set in motion to benefit sage grouse represents the greatest landscape-scale conservation effort undertaken in modern times.

This is also one of our greatest opportunities to invest in the future of natural resources. The collaboration we've seen among 11 states, multiple federal agencies, private landowners, and a multitude of vested stakeholders was unprecedented and extraordinary, setting forth a model for what I believe to be the future of conservation in America.

We knew this outcome was difficult but achievable. Changes to land management practices had to be made to avoid a listing of the species, and change can be difficult. And it is important to keep in mind that the FWS evaluated planned conservation measures and regulatory assurances?from federal agencies and the states?with an eye towards being able to defend its "not warranted" decision in court. 

Based on my career experience, these conservation plans had to be sound in character and include assurances that they will actually be implemented. The FWS cannot, by law, give serious consideration to plans that are based on a wing and a prayer, and state plans alone could not consistently address threats to sage grouse. To avoid a listing, the federal plans for this species had to be stronger than state plans and meet the needs of a multiple-use mandate. Whereas states are only constitutionally mandated to generate revenue from their state trust lands, the federal mandate ensures that lands stay open to hunting, fishing, sustainable ranching, and responsible energy development as conservation plans are implemented. These uses of the land are essential for our nation's economy and our Western way of life.

I believe the "not warranted" decision can withstand court scrutiny if the current state and federal plans are implemented fully, especially with the help of voluntary conservation measures on private lands. However, if these plans are weakened in any way, or funding for implementation is inadequate, I seriously question if that decision can hold.

Collaboratively planning for sage grouse conservation may have felt like a marathon, but so far we have only been training and visualizing the finish line. Today the race begins. From this point forward, we need congressional support and funding, so that full implementation of the plans can be achieved and carried out well into the future. Just five years ago, a listing was determined to be "warranted" for these birds, and we could easily be back there again without leadership from Congress. Management of sagebrush habitat is not a short-term endeavor. We have the blueprint in place and now it's time to build our future?one where responsible development continues and species survival is assured.