Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service received after publication, along with the agency’s mission.
The Trump administration is reviewing hundreds of national wildlife refuges and dozens of fish hatcheries.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said it’s looking for sites “established for a purpose that no longer aligns with the mission” of the bureau, according to a Dec. 16 order from Director Brian Nesvik, who used to lead Wyoming’s state wildlife agency.
The Fish and Wildlife Service website states that the agency's mission is "working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.”
Nesvik said the review should consider “opportunities to achieve efficiencies in the areas of governance, oversight, and span of control,” along with ways to remove organizational barriers and staff capacity to work with local communities, and state and tribal wildlife management agencies.
Senior Advisor Joshua Coursey, a Wyoming mule deer advocate, will lead the review of wildlife refuges, while Acting Deputy Director for Operations David Miko will lead the review for fish hatcheries.
Some conservationists and former Fish and Wildlife Service employees worry the effort is being rushed, as the team leads were given three weeks over the Christmas and New Year holidays to conduct their initial review.
“Such a large and important analysis should certainly be given more time and resources to develop a thoughtful and useful product,” a group of retired Fish and Wildlife employees, including several high-ranking directors, wrote in an email to Nesvik, obtained by digital news outlet WyoFile.
“We would welcome more clarity from the FWS [Fish and Wildlife Service] about how it would proceed with any recommendations regarding refuges that, in the opinion of this Administration, no longer align with the Service’s mission,” the email continued.
Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the nonprofit Center for Western Priorities, added that the review could be detrimental to visitors and habitats. He said wildlife refuges tend to be a “great equalizer” when it comes to people accessing public land.
“National parks can be more of an investment to get to both in terms of transportation, in terms of cost,” Weiss told Wyoming Public Media. “Wildlife refuges tend to be free or inexpensive.”
Refuges are also often smaller than national parks and more urban. One example is the Rocky Mountain Arsenal outside Denver, which used to make chemical weapons, and is now habitat for bison and black-footed ferrets.
Weiss is concerned the “comprehensive review” of sites like this could mean selling them off.
“So anything that comes out of this, the first question is, who's making money off this and who are greasing the wheels inside the Interior Department?” Weiss said.
An initial summary of “organizational change recommendations ” was due Jan. 5. The more detailed review is due Feb. 15.
According to a Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson, the agency began seeking input from staff and external stakeholders during the week of Jan. 5.
“As the review progresses and recommendations are developed, the Service will provide additional updates to the public,” they said via email.
The spokesperson emphasized that, according to the order from Nesvik, the review must encompass all sites in the wildlife refuge and fish hatchery systems.
“The Order does not identify or single out individual refuges or states,” the spokesperson said.
This story was produced by the Mountain West News Bureau, a collaboration between Wyoming Public Media, Nevada Public Radio, Boise State Public Radio in Idaho, KUNR in Nevada, KUNC in Northern Colorado, KANW in New Mexico, Colorado Public Radio, KJZZ in Arizona and NPR, with additional support from affiliate newsrooms across the region. Funding for the Mountain West News Bureau is provided in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Eric and Wendy Schmidt.
