90
8.1 EnErgy Production and Loss of BiodivErsity
The sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) is a ground-nesting bird
dependent on sagebrush steppe habitat in 11 western states in the United
States. The population is in marked decline, with the current range of the
species reduced to 56% its historic distribution (Schroeder et al. 2004).
Following formal petitions, US Fish and Wildlife Service concluded an
assessment in 2010 (USFWS 2010) to determine if the sage-grouse should
be protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In 2010, the federal government determined that protections were warranted based on
population estimates and ecological modelling, but that it was not practical to implement protections under the law due to competing demands on
the agency. The federal government invited the relevant states to develop
conservation plans that would protect the habitat (and ostensibly the population) of sage-grouse. Inducing the creation of these conservation plans
can be understood as a means of fulfilling obligations that flow from the
Endangered Species Act.
In Colorado, oil and gas development is the leading cause of sagegrouse habitat degradation (Copeland et al. 2009). A leading environmental non-governmental organisation (NGO), Environmental Defense
Fund (EDF), organised relevant stakeholders to develop the Colorado
Habitat Exchange, a compensatory mitigation programme through which
the oil and gas industry could purchase habitat credits to offset habitat
degradation associated with their operations. The credits would be supplied by farmers and ranchers who commit to conservation or restoration
of land, thereby producing positive gains in habitat. In this way, energy
development could be rendered compatible with a commitment to no-net
loss of sage-grouse habitat.
In terms of socioecological interplay and feedbacks, energy demand/
supply causes land use disturbance, resulting in sage-grouse population
declines and awareness of risks of ecological disturbance. This has the
potential to drive social regulation (i.e., the introduction of accountability
mechanisms that encourage firms to avoid destroying valuable habitat and
to offset habitat loss when avoidance is not practical), which can, in turn,
change land use patterns to stabilise populations of sage-grouse. As
depicted, this dynamic can be understood as a transition from a situation
in which the energy industry contributes in a significant way to risk of
sage-grouse extinction to a situation in which the energy industry responds
S. WOLF
8.1 EnErgy Production and Loss of BiodivErsity
The sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) is a ground-nesting bird
dependent on sagebrush steppe habitat in 11 western states in the United
States. The population is in marked decline, with the current range of the
species reduced to 56% its historic distribution (Schroeder et al. 2004).
Following formal petitions, US Fish and Wildlife Service concluded an
assessment in 2010 (USFWS 2010) to determine if the sage-grouse should
be protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In 2010, the federal government determined that protections were warranted based on
population estimates and ecological modelling, but that it was not practical to implement protections under the law due to competing demands on
the agency. The federal government invited the relevant states to develop
conservation plans that would protect the habitat (and ostensibly the population) of sage-grouse. Inducing the creation of these conservation plans
can be understood as a means of fulfilling obligations that flow from the
Endangered Species Act.
In Colorado, oil and gas development is the leading cause of sagegrouse habitat degradation (Copeland et al. 2009). A leading environmental non-governmental organisation (NGO), Environmental Defense
Fund (EDF), organised relevant stakeholders to develop the Colorado
Habitat Exchange, a compensatory mitigation programme through which
the oil and gas industry could purchase habitat credits to offset habitat
degradation associated with their operations. The credits would be supplied by farmers and ranchers who commit to conservation or restoration
of land, thereby producing positive gains in habitat. In this way, energy
development could be rendered compatible with a commitment to no-net
loss of sage-grouse habitat.
In terms of socioecological interplay and feedbacks, energy demand/
supply causes land use disturbance, resulting in sage-grouse population
declines and awareness of risks of ecological disturbance. This has the
potential to drive social regulation (i.e., the introduction of accountability
mechanisms that encourage firms to avoid destroying valuable habitat and
to offset habitat loss when avoidance is not practical), which can, in turn,
change land use patterns to stabilise populations of sage-grouse. As
depicted, this dynamic can be understood as a transition from a situation
in which the energy industry contributes in a significant way to risk of
sage-grouse extinction to a situation in which the energy industry responds
S. WOLF