Responding to the Unimaginable – California Native Plant Society

An update to help you sort through the overwhelm of federal actions–and act.

This post is the latest in our series on California federal public lands defense, brought to you by the CNPS Conservation and Public Affairs teams. Correction 7/27: A former version stated that 90% of California documented native plant occurrences are on public lands and 40% of rare plants on BLM lands. The correct statistics are: over 90% of California native plant species exist on public lands and 45% of rare plant species exist on BLM lands. 

Summer is peak vacation season, and people from around the world are visiting California’s iconic public lands. The beauty of those trips and the memories being made stand in stark contrast to the severity and volume of the threats now facing these remarkable places and the native plants that depend on their protection. Please read on for an update on the recent and ongoing issues we’re tracking and how you can help. 

National Monuments 

Last week, the President signed two proclamations that eviscerated the boundaries of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments by almost 3 million acres combined, leaving just over 300,000 acres protected under monument designations. The actions blatantly disregard Tribal sovereignty and the leadership of Tribal nations in caring for their ancestral lands. The habitat and the plant communities, wildlife, geology, paleontology, and ancestral sites they contain. Legal actions are already in the works to challenge the actions.

What do Utah national monuments have to do with California and native plants? 

CNPS is concerned about the developments in Utah for four main reasons: 

1. CNPS prioritizes large-scale public lands protection as one of the most effective ways to protect native plants and habitats. Over 90% of California native plant species live on public lands, and approximately 45% of rare plant species exist on Bureau of Land Management Lands alone. Actions that negatively impact public lands in one area can set precedent or cascading effects for public lands in other places.
2. An attack on any national monuments is an attack on national monuments everywhere. The President’s actions are unprecedented and likely illegal. The Antiquities Act, through which the Utah monuments and others around the nation were designated, gives presidents the authority to protect public lands and historic sites, and only Congress can revoke them.
3. The President and his congressional allies are acting against the wishes of the public. Polling consistently shows strong, bipartisan support for existing national monuments and public lands. California’s congressional representatives are needed to push back on current harmful actions and protect public lands. California’s Republican House members play an especially important role in defending public lands protections, and they need to hear from each of us.  
   • You can take action now through the Monuments for All Petition, which is an easy way to message your congressional members and the administration at once.
4. The President’s executive order defies Tribal sovereignty and stewardship without government-to-government consultation with Tribal nations. Bears Ears was the first national monument designated at the request of a historic coalition of Tribal Nations—The Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Zuni Tribe, and Ute Indian Tribe of Uintah and Ouray Reservation. Protecting public lands and honoring Tribal sovereignty can and should go hand in hand. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

On July 10, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce announced that a rule to amend the definition of “harm” in the ESA had been finalized. Under the new rule “harm” would be limited to actions that directly injure or kill listed wildlife, removing long standing protections for the habitat of protected species. This definition of harm has been challenged before. In 1995, the Supreme Court upheld that “harm” includes any significant “modification or degradation” of habitat that kills or injures animals by impairing their ability to eat, shelter or breed. The first purpose stated in the language of the ESA, which remains unchanged, is “to provide a means whereby the eco­systems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be con­served.” 

So where does this leave California native plants? While the Endangered Species Act prohibits the removal or damage to protected plant species on federal lands, the definition of “take,” which includes “harm,” never applied to plants, only to animal species. So, the July 10 ruling to remove harm from the definition of “take” does not specifically affect plant species—at least on the surface. However, plants are habitat. So, practically speaking, the law’s former inclusion of habitat did in fact help protect plants. The change to the definition of harm removes a valuable but indirect protection of endangered plant species, which have benefitted from secondary process of environmental review. Before July 10, projects that take a listed animal via harm would spur consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). As part of that consultation, the FWS was required to evaluate impacts to listed plant species in addition to animals. This is a primary process by which many federally listed plant species achieved protections on private land. Now plants will no longer obtain “shirttail” protections on projects that “only” would take a listed animal species via “harm.” 

What we’re seeing now with the ESA reiterates the need for policy at both federal and state level that directly includes plants. Despite plants being the foundation of all terrestrial habitats, plants continue to receive less protection than animals. The lack of equality in the treatment of plants by the ESA has long been seen as an area where this landmark law could improve. Today, we unfortunately are witnessing a regression in the protection for all listed species – a change that contributes to a disturbing trend at both the federal and state levels: Despite the twin crises of biodiversity loss and climate change, decision-makers are weakening environmental laws right as they need to be strengthened. 

You can help by calling your Congressional representatives (find your rep here). Urge your member to support the historical intent of the ESA, to push back against the incompatibility of the rule change with the language of the ESA, and to express their support for the conservation significance of habitat protection. 

The Roadless Rule 

As we shared before, CNPS, alongside partners and community advocates nationwide, has been working to demonstrate strong opposition to the federal administration’s attempt to rescind the “Roadless Rule.” Adopted in 2001, the Roadless Rule protects important habitat, safeguards clean water, and preserves Tribal resources by limiting most road construction, timber harvesting, and development in “Inventoried Roadless Areas” (IRAs) in our national forests, protecting 4 million acres here in California.  

When the Roadless Rule was enacted, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), held more than 600 public meetings to garner community input. At the time, 95% of the 1.6 million comments received were in favor of the rule. However, during this repeal process, the agency is yet to host a single public meeting. 

In response, communities across the country have hosted their own town halls to discuss the regional impacts of rescission and demonstrate community interest in keeping the rule intact. From Rocklin to Orange County and all along the Central Coast, CNPS members have been in the room, voicing concerns about potential impacts on native plants and their habitats. Thank you! 

As we shared before, CNPS, alongside partners and community advocates nationwide, has been working to demonstrate strong opposition to the federal administration’s attempt to rescind the “Roadless Rule.” Adopted in 2001, the Roadless Rule protects important habitat, safeguards clean water, and preserves Tribal resources by limiting most road construction, timber harvesting, and development in “Inventoried Roadless Areas” (IRAs) in our national forests, protecting 4 million acres here in California.  

When the Roadless Rule was enacted, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), held more than 600 public meetings to garner community input. At the time, 95% of the 1.6 million comments received were in favor of the rule. However, during this repeal process, the agency is yet to host a single public meeting. 

In response, communities across the country have hosted their own town halls to discuss the regional impacts of rescission and demonstrate community interest in keeping the rule intact. From Rocklin to Orange County and all along the Central Coast, CNPS members have been in the room, voicing concerns about potential impacts on native plants and their habitats. Thank you! 

What’s next 

We’re currently waiting for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to release a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) as part of the repeal process, which will open a public comment period. CNPS will alert our members and followers when this comment period opens. In the meantime, you don’t have to wait until the comment period opens to start taking action. 

• Learn: Familiarize yourself with Roadless Areas near you to better understand what’s at stake. (Check out this map from Outdoor Alliance to find places you recognize.)
• Educate: Spread the word to friends and family about the importance of Roadless Rule protections. 
• Speak out: Contact your congressional representative and urge them to support the Roadless Area Conservation Act (RACA), which would codify the Roadless Rule. 
• Look up your congressional representative here. 
• Check this list to see if they have already co-sponsored RACA. 
• Stay tuned: Look out for updates on when the comment period opens and be ready to share your concerns!  

Why comment? 

We don’t know how the agency will respond to comments, but we do know that using our voices in this moment still matters. Formally submitting comments puts on record the number of people opposed to this action, and if rescission is finalized, it makes clear that the administration continues to act against public consensus. Speaking out in large numbers also helps break through the noise, bringing attention and awareness to a wider audience than the traditional conservation community and allies.  

Shout out to all of you! 

Amid the multitude of attacks, CNPS members continue to show up and speak out, championing a vibrant future for native plant diversity and California communities. Your action is not in isolation, and we so deeply appreciate your attention, commitment, and unrelenting advocacy to protect California native plants and their habitats.  

__________________________________ 

See 24 ways to help public lands in our new Flora magazine Guide to Defending Public Lands.