New Study Rekindles Gnatcatcher Battle

Armed with a new study, developers are demanding federal officials postpone a decision due later this week on providing nearly 800,000 acres of critical habitat for the tiny gnatcatcher in Southern California--including more than 97,000 acres in Orange County.

The study, co-written by the biologist whose earlier research concluded that the birds were nearing extinction, is being seized upon by developers as proof that the threatened bird is genetically so close to a Mexican songbird that it is not in danger. But environmentalists and other scientists disagree, saying the California birds even look different.

There are only a few thousand pairs of the bird in Southern California, whereas there are millions of Mexican gnatcatchers.

The research, funded by the Building Industry Assn. of Southern California, the Orange County Transportation Corridor Agencies, the U.S. Navy and others, will be published in Conservation Biology’s October issue.

The study, written by Robert M. Zink, George F. Barrowclough, Jonathan L. Atwood and Rachelle C. Blackwell-Rago, compared DNA from gnatcatchers in Mexico with DNA from the plucked feathers of nestlings in the United States.

“Put simply, based on [DNA] data, northern populations do not appear to constitute a unique component of gnatcatcher biodiversity,” the study concludes.

The scientists caution that they were only able to test a small number of birds and that they might be seeing evidence of crossbreeding between the Mexican and American birds or genetic mutations. In-depth molecular study could reveal more differences, they said.

But in a letter sent Monday, Irvine attorney Rob Thornton urged Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt to postpone a decision on critical habitat for the bird. “It is hard to conceive of any new information that could be more significant and important than the new genetic data,” he wrote.

A judge has ordered U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to designate critical habitat for the bird by Saturday. The agency would have to seek an emergency extension from the court to bypass that order. A Fish & Wildlife Service spokeswoman said the agency had just received the information and would be consulting with attorneys.

Atwood’s involvement in the study is significant. His 1990 report that the California gnatcatchers were indeed distinct from their Mexican cousins was the primary scientific evidence that the government relied upon in deciding to list the gnatcatcher as threatened. Attempts to reach Atwood were unsuccessful.

Thornton, who represents the Transportation Corridor Agencies, Pulte Homes Corp. and Forest Lawn Memorial Park Assn., said, “It’s impossible to determine that [the gnatcatcher] needs 800,000 acres as essential, given the fact that it doesn’t appear to be threatened.”

But environmental groups say that even if there are genetic similarities, there are also obvious differences, such as the birds’ coloring. They say the final critical habitat decision is vital because the gnatcatcher and the coastal sage scrub it nests in are under siege from development.

The study “is just not that relevant,” said Andrew Wetzler, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which has been involved in gnatcatcher litigation for a decade. “The Endangered Species Act doesn’t have a narrow, inflexible genetic definition of what is and what isn’t a species.”

Environmentalists also note that healthy populations in a neighboring country do not mean a species is safe in the U.S. For instance, the gray wolf and the bald eagle were listed as endangered in the U.S. while not being at risk in Canada.

Kimball Garrett, ornithology collections manager of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and a noted author of bird books, said, “One would expect them to be similar--after all, they’re each other’s closest relatives.”

However, he cited the birds’ appearances as proof of differences. The California birds are darker and more infused with gray, while the Baja birds are paler and have more white on their breasts and their tails.

Garrett said that designating critical habitat is crucial because “the Mexican government can decide to pave the entire peninsula and there’s nothing we can do about it. Therefore, it behooves us to protect what we have in our borders.”

Critical habitat is land considered crucial to the survival of creatures on the brink of extinction. The designation allows the Fish & Wildlife Service to modify or prohibit activities that would severely harm the habitat on federally regulated land.

Thornton said that if the service finalizes the broad critical habitat proposal for the gnatcatcher, lawsuits are a “virtual certainty” for several reasons, including the new study.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Threatened Territory

Developers are challenging a proposal by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to set aside nearly 800,000 acres as critical habitat for the threatened California gnatcatcher, citing a study that says species closely related to the songbird are abundant in Mexico.

Source: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Pacific Region;

Graphics reporting by SEEMA MEHTA / Los Angeles Times