By TIM ALEXANDER

Illinois Correspondent

BLOOMINGTON, Ill. — Through use of federally-backed conservation and ecosystem restoration programs, U.S. farmers have been working to increase pollinator habitat for the monarch butterfly for the past several years.

Now, some of the farm groups that support these programs are asking the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to deny a petition to list the insect as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

The objection, voiced by the Farm Bureau Monarch Project (FBMP), stems from a 2014 petition submitted to the USFWS that was opened to 90-day public comment. Following the comment period, USFWS embarked on a species status assessment, presented last year.

A Monarch Conservation Database launch has been scheduled for June 2018, with a final decision on the matter to be issued by the end of June 2019, according to the USFWS website. Members of the FBMP, which include the Illinois Farm Bureau (IFB), Oklahoma Farm Bureau and Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation, are concerned that agriculture has not been properly represented during the USFWS’ ESA investigation.

The members of the coalition are asking USFWS to deny the petition and are also questioning the process the USFWS uses to define a species’ habitat. The listing of the butterfly under the ESA would fundamentally change agriculture in the Midwest, according to one IFB official.

“We need to be the voice of agriculture,” said Lyndsey Ramsey, IFB associate director of natural and environmental resources. “We’re not represented in the conversation, and they’re making decisions regardless of whether they hear from us or not.”

Petitioners include The Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, The Xerces Society and Dr. Lincoln Brower, who has authored or co-authored more than 200 scientific publications on the monarch. In addition to listing the monarch, they are asking USFWS to designate critical habitat for the butterfly within the listing.

How Fish and Wildlife defines a species’ critical habitat is at the heart of the objection by the FBMP.

“In the case of the monarch, if critical habitat is defined very broadly to not only be where milkweed exists, but where milkweed could exist, then the impact could be widespread,” according to Ramsey. “Federal agencies may have to be consulted for simple things – from signing up for the Conservation Reserve Program, getting a Section 404 permit or applying pesticides.

“The monarch only highlights all the things we think are wrong with the (ESA). The implications are so severe and outlandish that you can’t possibly think that’s why the ESA was written. It will fundamentally change agriculture in the Midwest.”

The IFB supports a moratorium on additional threatened and endangered species under the ESA in its current form. Along with the other state Farm Bureaus, IFB is currently working to boost the monarch butterfly population and increase habitat. This has the support of the American Farm Bureau Federation, said Ryan Yates, AFBF Congressional relations director, during a recent podcast on the Oklahoma Farm Bureau website.

“Farmers and ranchers are in a unique position to be able to help provide for new habitat to increase the ability for the monarch population to grow and maintain sustainable numbers for the years ahead,” he said.

“We encourage them to reach out to their county Farm Bureau, their state Farm Bureau, to look and ask for resources about how they can participate in conservation efforts and identify state, local, nonprofit resources that can help give them the best practices that they need.”

Farmers can and should avail themselves of this opportunity to avoid “burdensome” government regulations that could be imposed due to an ESA listing for the monarch by implementing pollinator habitat restoration as soon as possible, Yates added.

IFB leaders heard an Illinois Department of Resources (DNR) official say the department is not interested in an ESA listing for the monarch at this point in time. The comment by Ann Holtrop, head of DNR natural heritage and the Illinois Wildlife Action plan, was made during the IFB Governmental Affairs Leadership Conference in March, IFB’s Farmweek publication reported on March 20.

“We, at the (DNR), share your concerns. We mow, build and burn things on our property. Our preference, like you, is not to have the monarch listed,” she said.

The IFB, along with the Illinois Corn Growers Assoc., Farm Service Agency and Illinois Department of Agriculture, have developed a Monarch Project Team; Lyndsey serves as one of two contact representatives for the agriculture sector. The team has embarked on two monarch strategies: a flyway plan which will be submitted to the USFWS in June, and an Illinois-specific plan to guide farmers’ conservation efforts.

The University of Illinois-Chicago is coordinating the Illinois-only strategy, which is known as the Illinois Monarch Project. The Monarch Project Team hopes to have its strategy drafted by March 2019, well before the USFWS’ ESA decision deadline of June 30, 2019, Farmweek reported.