An opinion: successes and setbacks in black-footed ferret recovery: do we really have the capabilities, resources, and socio/ political will to recover critically endangered species?

Dramatic habitat losses and human persecution over decades preceding passage of Endangered Species Act legislation caused the near extirpation and/or dramatic decline of many North American wildlife species. The black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes; ferret) was widely regarded as extinct until a small population was found in 1981 near the town of Meeteetse, in western Wyoming. Since that time, ferret recovery has followed something of a roller coaster track, bringing the species dangerously close to extinction again by 1987 (when only 18 surviving animals remained and were all brought into captivity), and then to greater stability by 1999, when captive population objectives were first met and substantial progress was being made to reestablish wild populations.

The early history and direction of the ferret recovery program was accentuated by controversy and sharp disputes between involved agencies and other parties (Miller, Reading and Forest, 1996). Interpretation of the actual nature, severity, and consequences of early program disputes vary, but despite disagreements and real threats to species survival, significant recovery progress has been made (Lockhart, Thorne and Gober, 2006). Indeed, the black-footed ferret program is now often viewed as something of a model of partnerships and cooperation in endangered species recovery and involves numerous state and federal agencies, Tribes, conservation organizations, and private interests across the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. And certainly, since ferrets were relegated to captivity in 1987, the ferret program has weathered difficult times to achieve some remarkable successes (see previous Endangered Species Bulletin articles; Vol. XXI, No.6; Vol. XXV, No. 3; Vol. XXVII, No.2; Vol. XXVIII, No. 3).

But, where does the black-footed ferret recovery program really stand today? What are the prospects for downlisting and full recovery? After years of resigned loss, rediscovery, intensive management, and numerous advances and setbacks, what lessons have been learned about restoring such a critically endangered species in the face of ever-pressing demands on those natural resources needed to sustain it? These are difficult questions, but necessary to address head-on if recovery challenges are to be overcome.

The black-footed ferret is an obligate carnivore of three North American prairie dog species (Cynomys spp.) with an original range that largely overlaid prairie dog distribution from southern Canada, through the grasslands and steppes of twelve western states, to northern Chihuahua, Mexico (Figure 1). Although nocturnal, secretive, and not well known to science until recent years, the ferret was undoubtedly a numerous and highly successful species with seemingly inexhaustible habitat and prairie dog prey. That was, of course, before European settlement of North America and eventual conversion of much of the nation's native prairies (and prairie dog colonies) to cultivated lands, and decades of intensive, large scale prairie dog poisoning campaigns waged by western grazing interests over much of the 1900s. While diminished in scope, both factors continue to affect prairie dog populations and limit ferret recovery today! Prairie dogs are still widely regarded as agricultural vermin--competitors with cattle for grazing, and the cause of rangeland ruin (which is contrary to the evolutionary history of grassland ecosystems and the greater impacts of domestic herbivores, managed pasture systems, and drought on range degradation).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The black-tailed prairie dog (C. ludovicianus), the most numerous and widespread of all prairie dog species, suffered the greatest population impacts over the 20th century. The historical range of the black-tailed prairie dog was subjected to extensive habitat conversion and poisoning, resulting in an estimated species population reduction of between 90 and 95 percent (Forrest 2005). Impacts to black-tailed prairie dogs were so great that in the year 2000, the species was designated a candidate for listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act; a classification withdrawn in 2004 (USFWS, 2004). Although, new data suggest that the black-tailed prairie dog is not threatened over its historical range, it nevertheless experienced enormous population declines and, with few exceptions, exists today in comparatively small and highly fragmented colonies--colonies largely unsuitable for ferrets.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In addition to threats imposed directly by humans, sylvatic plague (the rodent borne form of bubonic plague), was introduced to the West coast in the early 20th century (via shipboard rats) and has since spread through most western states. Plague has had locally devastating effects on prairie dogs and reintroduced ferrets and is perhaps the single greatest obstacle to ferret recovery today. Only portions of the eastern third of the black-tailed prairie dog range remain free from the effects of sylvatic plague and the entire ranges of the more westerly white-tailed prairie dog (C. leucurus) and Gunnison's prairie dog (C. gunnisoni) have been impacted.

Thanks to collaborative efforts of numerous state and federal agencies, Tribes, conservation organization, and private partners (many represented on the Black-footed Ferret Recovery Implementation Team, established in 1996), ferret recovery has indeed experienced enormous success and progress. Since ferrets were first successfully produced in captivity in 1987, some 6000 ferrets have been born in Black-footed Ferret Species Survival Plan facilities (six zoos and a Wyoming Game and Fish Department/Fish and Wildlife Service breeding center) and a few field breeding projects. And since 1991, about 2400 ferrets have been released in Wyoming, South Dakota (5 sites), Montana (3 sites), Arizona (2 sites), a joint release area overlaying a portion of northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado, Kansas, and northern Chihuahua, Mexico (Figure 1).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Black-footed ferret reintroduction projects have achieved varying levels of success. The most successful, a reintroduction project covering portions of the Conata Basin district, Buffalo Gap National Grasslands (U.S. Forest Service), and adjoining habitats within Badlands National Park, South Dakota, support a moderately sized and productive wild ferret population. The Forest Service's Conata Basin portion of the recovery area has proven so successful that it is used as a donor site where excess wildborn kits are captured and translocated to start or augment other reintroduction projects. Conversely, several other reintroduction projects have struggled and have, thus far, failed to establish viable populations due to the effects of plague, drought and other habitat constraints.

Despite some relatively onerous obstacles to black-footed ferret reintroduction success from disease and drought, steady progress is being made to address biological limitations at the field level. Over the years, a wealth of expertise and effective capabilities have been developed by recovery program partners, including some recent and promising results in development of a plague vaccine and other plague management applications. In essence, program cooperators know how to produce substantial numbers of ferrets in captivity and what is needed to successfully establish wild populations. And it is well demonstrated that, given proper habitat conditions, reintroduced ferrets are capable of rapidly establishing viable, wild populations.

However, that's where the rub in recovery lies today. Presently, there are too few prairie dog complexes (aggregations of colonies distributed about one mile or less from each other) across North America that are large enough, and with suitable densities, to readily support ferret populations. And worse, although there are millions of "unbroken" (uncultivated) acres of prairie lands with potential to restore suitable prairie dog complexes and ferret populations, and although there are substantial federal public lands in the west that could be managed proactively to more effectively advance recovery, there is a continuing intolerance of prairie dogs by the agricultural community; growing apprehension over sharing lands, especially private lands, with endangered species; an inability to allocate and/or dedicate sufficient financial incentives necessary to develop effective partnerships to offset concerns over managing lands for ferrets and other sensitive prairie wildlife; cumbersome, costly, and time consuming administrative processes to establish recovery sites and reintroduction projects; and finally, a growing trend in devaluing our natural resource legacy in favor of socio-economic factors.

Recovery events in 2004 exemplified the tenuous nature of ferret recovery; a year which saw high captive breeding output and encouraging progress at reintroduction sites in Arizona, Wyoming, and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal lands, South Dakota. However, much of the West was also under the grip of an extended drought, and both prairie dogs and ferrets were impacted at reintroduction sites in Mexico, Colorado/Utah and Conata Basin/Badlands, South Dakota. The drought elevated conflicts over forage between cattle and prairie dogs in Mexico and South Dakota. And in South Dakota, the drought caused dispersal of prairie dogs from the highly successful Conata Basin area onto adjoining private lands. That dispersal touched off a fiery debate and prompted a Forest Service review of management practices at Conata Basin in an attempt to provide better protections for neighboring ranchers who do not want prairie dogs on their lands.

The process of reducing prairie dog encroachment around Conata Basin included poisoning of prairie dogs both on adjoining ranches and within national grassland "buffer zones" adjacent to private lands; areas which also supported wild ferrets. Although no ferrets were believed killed from secondary poisoning (the Environmental Protection Agency approved rodenticide, two percent, zinc phosphate bait has limited secondary hazards to carnivores), the added loss of prey in an already drought stressed year undoubtedly increased impacts on ferrets. Moreover, the Forest Service subsequently amended its land use management plan to more assertively promote a "good neighbor" policy that included options for continued lethal control on Forest Service border lands; and more importantly, set the stage for a future amendment to control prairie dogs within the heart of the Conata Basin ferret recovery area itself.

The Conata Basin site supports the most successful reintroduced black-footed ferret population to date. Yet, this population is still somewhat small and vulnerable (only about 100 breeding adults). Without some ability to offset prairie dog habitat reductions on boundary areas of Conata Basin, and if further restrictions are imposed on natural habitat expansion and prairie dog population levels within the core of Conata Basin itself, the full potential of this recovery site will be limited and could substantially diminish overall ferret recovery prospects. And just recently, an active plaque episode was documented on the southern side of Conata Basin--the worst possible news and gravest management challenge to this increasingly threatened recovery area.

It remains to be seen what effects renewed prairie dog control and plague will ultimately have on the stability and long range potential of the Conata Basin ferret population. However, this issue goes directly to the heart of the most fundamental obstacle in ferret recovery--making room for ferrets, and prioritizing long range management of adequate lands and prairie dog complexes to support viable populations of ferrets, and other prairie dog-associate wildlife species. The current Black-footed Ferret Recovery Plan includes a "downlisting" objective of 1500 breeding adults occupying 10 or more populations scattered over the historical range of the species. Program partners have learned that to establish a moderately sized and stable ferret population requires relatively large (in excess of 10,000 acres) and high quality (high density) complexes of prairie dog colonies (even larger complexes in less densely occupied white-tailed and Gunnison's prairie dog habitats). Complexes such as that now found at Conata Basin.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

From a historical perspective, huge prairie dog complexes were likely common throughout the plains of North America and colonies were much more contiguous in distribution. Some complexes occupying thousands of square miles were widely documented at the turn of the 20th century. However, in our contemporary western landscape, few truly large complexes remain, especially within the range of the black-tailed prairie dog. And further west, where the largest remaining complexes of both white-tailed and Gunnison's prairie dogs are found, periodic epizootics of sylvatic plague hold back ferret recovery potential.

Moreover, what 2004 taught us is that our most basic measure of prairie dog/ferret habitat (occupied prairie dog acreage), is itself a highly dynamic and somewhat ineffective gauge of habitat quality and stability. In response to extreme drought conditions and limited forage at Conata Basin, prairie dogs were forced to disperse over a larger area, and the acreage of occupied prairie dog colonies swelled from about 17,000 to over 23,000 (Livieri and Perry, 2005). Yet, both prairie dog and ferret densities were stretched thin and reproduction of both suffered (Livieri and Perry, 2005). Consequently, prairie dogs, which unlike cattle are not constrained by fences and can more effectively spread foraging activity over drought-impacted lands, again became the focus of a long-standing debate, and a convenient scapegoat for poor range conditions. Impacts more reasonably attributed to the effects of cattle grazing and the drought itself. Habitat conditions substantially improved in 2005 with increased rainfall, yet the battle over prairie dogs and ferret recovery in Conata Basin goes on, and significant threats to the ferret recovery program's premier site persist.

Enormous resources have been vested in ferret recovery over the past two decades and with great success. And many program partners believe we possess the expertise and technical ability to actually recover this species. Moreover, compared to the vastness of lands potentially available for ferret recovery, the amount of habitat actually needed to meet recovery objectives represents a tiny, tiny fraction of the western landscape. In an upcoming revision of the Black-footed Ferret Recovery Plan, a downlisting target of 3000 breeding adults is being considered. On average, adult ferrets occupy some 200 acres of habitat. Consequently, about 600,000 acres of stable prairie dog habitat across the western states would be needed to meet such a recovery objective. Put in perspective, that is less than one percent of the estimated about 380 million acres of "potential" prairie dog habitat that remains (Ernst, Clark and Gober, 2006).

The Forest Service's National Grasslands units alone support almost 3.5 million acres aces of public lands from Montana and North Dakota to Texas and New Mexico. The Forest Service manages more plague-free, black-tailed prairie dog habitat than any other federal agency. And yet, less than one percent of the National Grassland land base is currently involved in an active ferret recovery effort--Conata Basin, which as noted above is under considerable threat. Perhaps no other agency has more ability (and hence responsibility) to foster ferret recovery in the wild today than the Forest Service. But instead of moving recovery efforts forward, as outlined in an original 2002 Forest Plan revision for the entire northern Great Plains, the Forest Service has apparently succumbed to local political will and is reversing its original management decisions. Indeed, in a pending Land Use Management Amendment for grassland units in Nebraska and South Dakota, covering over 700,000 acres of public land, the Forest Service may artificially cap the amount of occupied prairie dog acreage to only three percent. The multiple-use concept of federal management and associated commitment for the conservation of declining and endangered prairie species is grossly out of balance on Forest Service lands today.

It is also important to understand that ferret presence does not preclude other land uses. Ferrets are not sensitive to human activities and disturbance, and as long as base habitat conditions are maintained (i.e. sufficient prairie dog numbers), ferret populations can exist in harmony with livestock grazing, oil and gas development, hunting, other recreation, etc. Grazing is in fact of integral importance in managing prairie wildlife communities, including prairie dogs and ferrets.

Ferret recovery cannot be achieved by the continued force-fitting of this species into small parcels of habitat grudgingly conceded as "acceptable" to other land use interests. Nor can we realistically recover the ferret, if the islands of prescribed recovery habitat are themselves compromised whenever drought or other factors overwhelm our willingness to maintain priority management for prairie dogs over other forms of temporal competition (i.e., grazing). In north central Montana, the Bureau of Land Management overturned the management of some habitats set aside for prairie dogs and ferrets when chronic plague events compromised a ferret reintroduction effort. Recreational shooting of prairie dogs was again allowed in those areas even as prairie dog populations struggle to recover. Without a long range commitment to prairie dog management and efforts to block-up lands to develop even larger prairie dog complexes for ferrets, regardless of present status, the eventual recovery of the ferret becomes increasingly problematic

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

And so, given current world events and societal pressures, just how much of a national priority is the recovery of species like the black-footed ferret? To many partners directly involved in ferret recovery, we not only see the value of restoring and safeguarding this beautiful, interesting, and highly specialized carnivore itself, but the biological imperative of maintaining a good distribution of intact prairie/steppe ecosystems--lands to sustain populations of prairie dogs, ferrets, swift foxes, ferruginous hawks, burrowing owls, mountain plovers, and a wide array of other wildlife species dependant on such declining native habitats. This is, after all, one of the fundamental tenets of the Endangered Species Act itself.

And what lessons have we really learned over the past 27 years, since wild ferrets were rediscovered near Meeteetse, Wyoming? The black-footed ferret can indeed be recovered. But it will require a recommitment of principles and resources to secure habitats, and the cooperation and support of those who share lands with ferrets.

To build on the notable successes of the ferret program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and its many involved partners must reexamine and amend basic administrative and management approaches to recovery. They need to become more proactive, responsive, and flexible in development of reintroduction projects while eliminating the fear of impacts on adjoining, non participating land owners. Although substantial progress has been made in this area over the past two years, political challenges remain. They need to develop a series of preserves/National Wildlife Refuges for this highly diverse and threatened ecosystem in support of endangered and declining grassland species. Vast U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuge holdings (over 95 million acres) have been established for the protection of wetland habitats and associated wildlife values, game species, and the recovery of certain endangered species. However, no National Wildlife Refuge lands exist today that could potentially support large prairie dog complexes to help expedite ferret recovery and provide habitats for other declining prairie species. Finally, ferret recovery should be spread over all states within the historical range of the species, recovery efforts should be focused on federal public lands (wherever possible), smaller "nursery" recovery sites (habitats perhaps too small to support self-sustaining ferret populations, but may persist with periodic augmentation) should be developed in plague-free areas, and more effective assistance/incentive programs are needed to promote management of larger prairie dog complexes on both private and Tribal lands.

Do we have that kind of resolve, and can we overcome the prevailing sentiments of "not in my backyard"? Are we willing to actually dedicate the resources necessary to fulfill mandated ferret recovery responsibilities? Unfortunately, the answer to these questions at the present time, and especially under the guidance and management of the current Administration, appears to be "no".

So, the roller coaster ride continues and as a nation we are again up against the very socio-economic and political issues that caused the original decline of the black-footed ferret; factors which will ultimately determine the fate of this and other declining and endangered species, and will test our country's will to preserve our native wildlife heritage. To me, it would be an unforgivable indictment for such a progressive and value-based society as ours to squander the significant recovery gains made to date, and let the black-footed ferret slip back into oblivion or be denied a secure, wild future across the western plains of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.

Literature Cited

Ernst, A.E., A.L. Clark, and D.R. Gober. 2006. A habitat-based technique to allocate black-footed ferret recovery among jurisdictional entities. In: Recovery of the black-footed ferret--progress and continuing challenges. A symposium edited by: J.E. Rolle, B.J. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins. U.S Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5293. 288 pp.

Forrest, S.C. 2005. Getting the story right: a response to Vermeire and colleagues. BioScience 55:526-530.

Livieri, T.M. and W. Perry. 2005. Effects analysis of black-tailed prairie dog reduction on black-footed ferret populations in Conata Basin. Unpublished Report. USDA Forest Service, Wall, South Dakota.

Lockhart, J.M., E.T. Thorne, and D.R. Gober. 2006. A historical perspective on recovery of the black-footed ferret and the biological and political challenges affecting is future. In: Recovery of the black-footed ferret--progress and continuing challenges. A symposium edited by: J.E. Rolle, B.J. Godbey, and D.E. Biggins. U.S Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5293. 288 pp.

Miller, B., Reading, R.P., and Forrest, S. 1996. Prairie night--black-footed ferrets and the recovery of endangered species. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press. 254 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Finding for the resubmitted petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog as threatened; Federal Register. Vol. 69. No. 159, August 18, 2004.

Mike Lockhart

Former Black-Footed Ferret

Recovery Coordinator

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Retired

1112 E. Sheridan St.

Laramie, WY