Slip-Sliming Away

Have our threatened species found a friend in the federal courts?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A pinkie-length salamander recently slithered onto the endangered species list, starting a political brawl as ugly as the Texas critter itself.

Earlier this year, Mother Jones reported how the federal government consistently caves in to state lobbyists and politicians who oppose adding creatures to the Endangered Species Act’s list (“Basic Extinct,” January/February). Remember the Barton Springs salamander, which Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt refused to add to the list two years ago? Even when it appeared that only seven of the salamanders remained, he opted for a vague “conservation agreement” between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the state of Texas that denied the tiny amphibian the strict protections provided by the act. The deal benefited housing developers, who wanted to build near the salamander’s sole habitat.

But in April, Babbitt announced he’d add the rare amphibian to the list after all. His change of heart was prompted by federal Judge Lucius Bunton: “Strong political pressure was applied to the secretary to withdraw the proposed listing of the salamander,” the judge wrote — reminding Babbitt that, by law, listing decisions should be based on scientific concerns only.

Conservationists are elated. “This is a rare victory for science over politics,” says David Hillis, a zoology professor at the University of Texas.

And such victories may soon be more common. This spring, federal judges made similar decisions in cases involving the jaguar in the Southwest and the Canadian lynx in the Northwest. The jaguar case had special significance, according to environmentalists, because it was the first time a judge demanded that a species be added to the list (usually judges merely require the interior secretary to reconsider his decision).

State politicians grouse about these aggressive moves by the courts. Texas Gov. George Bush, who received more than $100,000 from land development interests during the last election cycle, is “sorely disappointed” by Babbitt’s salamander ruling. “We had entered into a workable conservation agreement with the federal government and they essentially cut and ran,” says Bush’s press aide.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate