For Immediate Release
November 22, 2004

Contact Information

Laramie, WY - Conservation groups have filed suit over the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's failure to protect the Dakota skipper butterfly and its declining grassland habitat under the Endangered Species Act.

Once widely distributed across the midwestern United States and south-central Canada, the Dakota skipper butterfly has experienced significant declines in the last 150 years. The butterfly has been wiped out of much of its range in Minnesota and North and South Dakota and has disappeared altogether from Iowa, Illinois, and eastern Montana. Scientific experts, as well as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have all concluded the species is teetering on the brink of extinction.

Conversion of prairie to cropland is the primary reason for the butterfly's decline. The Dakota skipper depends on high-quality prairie habitat for survival, and is also an important indicator of prairie health. Prairie habitat in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and the Canadian Province of Manitoba has declined by over 99%. Prairie habitat in North and South Dakota has declined by nearly 75% and the Province of Saskatchewan has lost over 80% of its native prairie (see attachment below). Gravel mining, road construction, domestic livestock grazing, herbicide and pesticide use, the spread of non-native plants, burning, and grassland mowing are also taking a toll.

"Healthy populations of Dakota skipper mean a healthy prairie," explained Jeremy Nichols, Endangered Species Program Director with the Laramie, Wyoming-based Biodiversity Conservation Alliance. "The decline and endangerment of the butterfly speaks directly to the loss and declining health of our prairies."

The Dakota skipper was originally proposed for protection under the Endangered Species Act in 1976, but action was never taken to protect the rare butterfly. Nearly 30 years later, the butterfly has continued its decline. In 2002, the Fish and Wildlife Service designated the Dakota skipper butterfly a "candidate species," a designation that means the Service believes Endangered Species Act protection is "warranted," but that confers no formal protection. Despite languishing for nearly 30 years, the Fish and Wildlife Service continues to delay protection.

The situation facing the Dakota skipper is unfortunately not unique. A report released by the Center for Biological Diversity found that 27 species have gone extinct while waiting for protection as "candidate species" (see, www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/Programs/policy/esa/eesa.html).

"Conservation delayed is conservation denied," said Nichols. "With the Dakota skipper sliding toward extinction, we can't afford to put up with anymore Fish and Wildlife Service footdragging."

The Service usually blames a lack of funding for its refusal to protect candidate and other imperiled species, but these funding constraints are a crisis of its own making. The Bush administration continues to fight against increasing the listing budget despite the growing number of species that need Endangered Species Act protection. Although the Fish and Wildlife Service's entire Endangered Species Act budget has increased over 500 percent since 1992, the listing budget is the only line item that decreased in real dollars over the same period.

Endangered Species Act protection for the Dakota skipper would mean that its prairie habitat would be protected and restored. It would also require the federal government to develop a recovery plan.

The groups filing suit include Biodiversity Conservation Alliance and the Center for Biological Diversity. A copy of the listing petition, the complaint more information, and a photo of the Dakota skipper can be found at www.voiceforthewild.org/general/photoalbum/species/ws_photo1.html.