Adaptive Management in the Face of Climate Change and Endangered Species Protection

In recent decades, new theories in resource management have emerged that have been specifically designed to account for the uncertainties and complexities inherent in ecosystem processes and structures. Adaptive management is one such theory and has become the dominant approach used by resource managers where degrees of scientific uncertainty are high. Adaptive management has been particularly recognized for its usefulness in addressing the impacts of climate change on wildlife species due to the high degree of complexity and scientific uncertainty climate change entails. Although adaptive management enjoys widespread support among resource managers and academics, guidance has been lacking in how to implement adaptive management plans effectively. The absence of clear statutory authority and regulatory standards has made the development, implementation and review of adaptive management plans challenging. The lack of adequate funding and personnel resources has often also greatly restricted an agency's ability to implement adaptive management plans effectively. This Note explores challenges to the use of adaptive management as a resource management approach with emphasis on challenges that have arisen in the context of managing the impacts of climate change on protected species. The recent decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Servheen, 665 F.3d 1015 (2011) provides a backdrop for discussion. In Greater Yellowstone Coalition, the Ninth Circuit rejected an adaptive management plan for removal of a population of grizzly bears from the ESA's list of threatened species where ample scientific evidence indicated that the bear was adversely affected by climate change and the effects of climate change were not adequately addressed in the plan. The case is noteworthy not only because it established that climate change impacts must be addressed in adaptive management plans where adaptive management is the selected management approach, but also because it highlights difficulties agencies and courts have in developing, implementing and reviewing adaptive management plans where statutory authority, regulatory standards and funding for the plans are lacking. The Note then considers the possible role of the National Fish Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy (FWP Strategy) recently developed under the direction of the Council for Environmental Quality and authorized by Executive Order. The FWP Strategy strongly endorses the development and implementation of adaptive management plans for U.S. species affected by climate change. While the FWP Strategy is still in its early stages of development and adaptive management plans devised under its guidance have yet to be tested, the Strategy appears to address several of the problems that have plagued agencies in obtaining judicial approval of adaptive management plans. On its face, the FWP Strategy stands to benefit the many species of fish, wildlife and plants in the United States whose survival is threatened by climate change, and may ultimately provide a viable solution for resolving current management issues involving these species that were raised in Greater Yellowstone Coalition.