The USFW goal of creating 858,000 acres of New Mexico and Arizona critical habitat for Jaguars is to be applauded..........The Service actually is doing something positive within their mandate of providing extirpated species like Jaguars with habitat connective to Mexico where known Jaguar populations exist...........Of course, there is Rancher and Development Interest push back along the usual lines of "tying up the land with more restrictions" being heard...................The USFW replies to this concern as follows:---- "It doesn’t mean that land is shut down with no access and nothing happens there"........, "it simply means that with a federal nexus to those areas, it adds another layer of evaluation"...... "Activities such as ranching and grazing and recreation and hunting, we do not anticipate would be problematic for the jaguar critical habitat, and, as a result, we do not envision that any kind of consultation with Fish and Wildlife Service would be necessary".......................“With respect to the border, we do not envision that [the critical habitat] is going to have an economic impact on the border because the areas that currently do not have border fence are very, very rugged areas where it’s not anticipated that there will be a fence of the sort that would keep a jaguar from roaming"............... "So we don’t envision there is going to be any conflict with the border there"..............Prior to the Goldrush in 1850, Jaguars ranged from San Francisco south into Mexico and across Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana straight onto Georgia, Florida and up into the Carolinas................Lets give the USA a chance to get em back in at least one tiny sector of their historical range.............August 9 deadline for commentary on the plan

Jaguar habitat designation sparks concern

 sierravistaherald.com

SIERRA VISTA — A proposal by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to designate several hundred thousand acres of Southeast Arizona as a critical habitat for the jaguar drew criticism from locals who saw the effort as ineffective and something that would result in unnecessary additional government oversight on public lands.

The comments came during an information meeting held at the Performing Arts Center at Buena High School on Tuesday. About 50 people attended the meeting, which was then followed by a public hearing.

At issue is the effort by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to designate a total of 858,137 acres of land as critical habitat for the jaguar. Such a designation would result in new requirements for actions taken on federal lands or on lands with a federal nexus encompassed in the habitat.

“It doesn’t apply, for example, to private actions on private lands, but if you have a federal nexus of some sort, it doesn’t mean that land is shut down with no access and nothing happens there, it simply means that with a federal nexus to those areas, it adds another layer of evaluation,” said Scott Richardson, a Tucson-based biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service. “Those federal agencies have to consult with the service, and that’s an added layer of evaluation to determine if an action may cause destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat.”

The proposed area for the designation includes portions of land in the Peloncillo Mountains along the border of Cochise County and New Mexico, portions of the Whetstone and Huachuca mountains down to the Mexican border, large swaths of the Coronado National Forest in Santa Cruz County, the Pajarito, Atascosa, and Tumacacori mountains in Pima and Santa Cruz counties and the Baboquivari Mountains in Pima County.

The criteria used for designating areas as part of the critical habitat are based on historical records of areas known to have been occupied by jaguars in the last 50 years, as well as areas not occupied by jaguars in that time, but which are thought to be essential to conservation efforts.

This second category is defined by several factors, such as water availability, elevation, and most importantly, connectivity to Mexico.

Jaguars mating

“We acknowledge, if you look at them range-wide, jaguars, a very small portion of the habitat of the individuals incur within the United States. Conservation and recovery of the jaguar will primarily depend on those areas to the south of the United States,” Richardson said. “Once we looked at what we had in terms of habitat quality and what was necessary for conservation, it became obvious that in order for an Arizona habitat to function and contribute to conservation, it had to be connected to Mexico.”

Given the acknowledgement from Fish and Wildlife officials that so much of the effort to protect the jaguar would have to occur outside of the country, many on hand at Tuesday’s meeting felt that the creation of a critical habitat would do little to protect the species which only rarely appears in the United States and whose breeding populations are located 130 miles south of the border, and instead simply result in more government restrictions for residents living in or near these designated areas.

“What we have put in the proposal for the jaguar critical habitat, is that activities such as ranching and grazing and recreation and hunting, we do not anticipate would be problematic for the jaguar critical habitat, and, as a result, we do not envision that any kind of consultation with Fish and Wildlife Service would be necessary,” said Jean Calhoun, assistant field supervisor for Fish and Wildlife in southern Arizona.

Others in attendance worried that future growth and development of the area could be negatively impacted by possible restrictions imposed by the critical habitat.

Developments and activities would have to be of a large scale in order to be considered impactful, officials said.

“Those are very major activities, such as a major highway going through the critical habitat, or, for example, a border fence that was completed throughout the entire boundary with Mexico,” Calhoun said.

That last comment resulted in some murmurs and vocal concerns about the possibility of a critical habitat halting any future efforts regarding a border fence. Specifically, some felt the economic impact study conducted by the federal agency did not take into account the economic impact of a unsecured international border.

“With respect to the border, we do not envision that [the critical habitat] is going to have an economic impact on the border because the areas that currently do not have border fence are very, very rugged areas where it’s not anticipated that there will be a fence of the sort that would keep a jaguar from roaming. So we don’t envision there is going to be any conflict with the border there,” Calhoun said.

The economic impact anticipated to result from the establishment of a critical habitat was estimated to be $360,000 over 20 years.

“These costs are strictly administrative costs. What we mean by that is, it’s an additional time and resource, as far as employee time, by Fish and Wildlife and other agencies to consult on activities that occur in critical habitat,” said Hayley Dikeman, biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service.

The public comment period for the proposal of a critical habitat in southeastern Arizona for the jaguar is scheduled to end Aug. 9.

For more information, including maps and documents, visithttp://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Jaguar.htm.