Speeding toward NEPA reform

January 6, 2026 by Kaylyn Zipp

The SPEED Act, which passed a vote in the house, would make it easier and faster to approve large infrastructure and energy projects by scaling back parts of the federal environmental review process. The bill must now move to the U.S. Senate for a vote.

The Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act is a permitting reform bill introduced by U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) aimed at overhauling the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA currently requires government agencies to assess and publicly disclose the environmental impacts of significant federal actions before they proceed. Proposed changes could affect protections for wildlife by altering the scope of impact analyses, restricting consideration of new science, reducing agency flexibility to update assessments, and altering judicial and interagency reviews.

Why now?

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to evaluate and disclose the environmental impacts of major projects before they move forward. In recent years, those review requirements have increasingly been criticized as slowing down infrastructure, energy, and development projects, with pressure to accelerate construction and reduce costs intensifying calls for NEPA reform. Members of both major political parties believe that NEPA should be reformed, however they disagree in the manner of the reformation.

“In the name of speed or maybe greed, this legislation takes a sledge hammer to NEPAs core functions” said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA).

The SPEED Act aligns with the administration’s Executive Order ‘Unleashing America’s Energy’, which directs the Council on Environmental Quality “to expedite and simplify the [NEPA] permitting process.”

What the SPEED Act proposes

The SPEED Act has many provisions that widely alter the NEPA review process:

Impacts on research integration: Specifies that studies published after a permit application or notice of intent do not need to be considered, limiting the incorporation of emerging science.

Limiting scope of environmental impacts: The act would restrict agencies to evaluating impacts that share a reasonably close causal relationship with the project and bars consideration of effects “separate in time or place from the proposed agency action,” seemingly barring consideration of climate change effects, which often occur in locations distant from fossil-fuel-emitting projects. Depending on interpretation, the wording could also bar consideration of downwind or downstream pollution.

Limiting agency revisions and reviews: The proposed changes would prohibit agencies from rescinding or altering completed environmental documents except under narrow circumstances.

Cooperating agency involvement: Limits cooperating agencies to reviewing only matters within their jurisdiction and prevents them from preparing environmental documents unless required by the lead agency.

Stricter timelines

Reliance on prior environmental reviews:  The SPEED Act would allow agencies to reuse or modify previously completed Environmental Assessments, Environmental Impact Statements, or categorical exclusions for similar actions.

What requires review: The SPEED Act proposes raising thresholds for federal actions subject to NEPA, adds exclusions for grants, farm loans, and guarantees, and excludes projects unless the agency has complete control and responsibility over effects.

Defining the foreseeable future: The proposed changes narrow the definition of “reasonably foreseeable” effects to only those caused by the immediate project in the area impacted, excluding speculative, future or distant impacts in space or time.

Judicial review: Shortens the window for legal challenges to 150 days, limits who can sue and allows litigants to bring claims only related to the particular comments they submitted. The statute also appears to bar challenges to agency decisions to categorically exclude activities from NEPA. The statute also imposes timelines on judges reviewing cases, and restricts courts to remanding decisions for correction without stopping or revoking permits. Consequently, even successful NEPA challenges cannot stop or delay inadequately considered projects.

Potential Implications

By preventing agencies from revisiting or reversing prior NEPA analyses, the changes proposed by the SPEED Act would lock in past decisions, and reliance on older assessments could underestimate current threats to wildlife and reduce adaptive management. In addition, limiting cooperating-agency roles may reduce the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s influence on permitting decisions. Meanwhile shortened, more restrictive judicial-review timelines could make legal challenges to projects harming wildlife harder and faster to resolve, leaving less opportunity for mitigation. The changes to the SPEED Act could limit the incorporation of emerging science, climate change, and other biological and habitat information into project reviews, thereby constraining agencies’ ability to analyze impacts on species and ecosystems. Moreover, the SPEED Act would decrease agencies’ incentives to comply with NEPA, because even if courts determined agencies’ analyses to be inadequate, courts would be powerless to pause projects.

Amazonian municipalities grant the right to bee

January 6, 2026 by The Wildlife Society

In parts of the Peruvian Amazon, municipalities have passed ordinances to recognize native stingless bees as rights-bearing entities. The rights have been bestowed on stingless bees such as Melipona eburnea, Tetragonisca angustula, Melipona illota and Melipona grandis, keystone species responsible for pollinating approximately 80% of Amazonian flora. Stingless bees are threatened by deforestation, invasive species, pesticides and climate change. The Peruvian municipalities of Satipo and Nauta approved the ordinances, which will give the bees and their ecosystem inherent rights to exist and thrive; to help maintain healthy populations; to live in a healthy habitat free from pollution; to have ecologically stable climatic conditions; and to regenerate their natural cycles. Significantly, the bees were also given the right to be legally represented in cases of threat or harm, allowing for immediate action on issues threatening their existence. “The Neronto (Melipona eburnea) has much work to do. For us, it is vital for society and for Indigenous Peoples,” said César Ramos Pérez, president of EcoAshaninka, an Indigenous association representing native communities in the region that was part of the initiative.

The ordinances are creating a buzz globally. Petitions are calling on the Peruvian government to make the law nationwide, and the move has drawn a swarm of interest from groups in Bolivia, the Netherlands and the U.S. who want to advocate for the rights of their own wild bees.

Read more at the Earth Law Center.

TWS seeking potential candidates for TWS Vice President

January 5, 2026 by The Wildlife Society

The Wildlife Society (TWS) welcomes candidate recommendations for the position of vice president. The person elected to this position will serve a four-year term (Year one: vice president; Year two: president-elect; Year three: president; Year four: immediate past president).

Specific qualifications and a description for each of the four positions can be found here.

Minimum candidate requirements include:

  1. Is an active member in good standing of TWS and has been so for at least the preceding ten (10) years.
  2. Demonstrated commitment to TWS’ Purposes and Principles as stated in Bylaws and to TWS’ Code of Ethics.
  3. Demonstrated understanding of the role of a “Board,” including the Board’s judiciary responsibilities, in a nonprofit corporation.
  4. Demonstrated record of leadership and service to TWS and to at least one organization unit level of TWS (Section or Chapter) as described below.
  5. Demonstrated understanding of the wildlife profession and wildlife professionals gained via at least ten (10) years of applicable wildlife-related, employment (post B.S. or M.S.-graduation) at an institute of higher learning, a government agency, an NGO or a private company. Leadership, organization, and communication skills are apparent.
  6. Has employer support, if applicable, and is committed, willing, and able to serve the full four (4) year term. FYI, service on Council at any level is a year-round commitment. Travel required and periodic work during evenings and weekends will be necessary. 
  7. Is a member in good standing of their Section and Chapter of residence.

Candidate recommendations must be made using this form by Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2026. TWS’ Nominating Committee will review all potential candidates submitted by the deadline. A candidate recommendation, however, does not guarantee that the candidate will be invited to submit a formal nomination packet. Learn more about the selection process below.

Selection Process

The selection process for vice president begins each year in October or November, immediately following the Annual TWS Conference, when the new TWS President identifies and appoints all eight members of the Nominating Committee. Committee composition is determined by TWS Bylaws and consists of one active TWS member per voting district, with each member serving a one-year term (three terms max). The Committee recommends two nominees for vice president and assists, if needed, in identifying two nominees for voting-district representatives for voting districts with upcoming vacancies.

Nominating Committee members are a distinguished and diverse group (diversity in ethnicity, gender, geography, employer, age, etc.) representing the Society’s membership. They possess a myriad of expertise, professional interests and accomplishments, as well as dedication to TWS and a commitment to actively serve the Society in the search of the best available candidates.  This committee is held to the highest standards in selecting diverse and qualified candidates that will strongly and ethically uphold the vision and mission of TWS. 

The candidate search is a rigorous and thoughtful process that occurs over the winter and spring months and culminates when the committee submits their selected candidates to TWS staff by March 1. The election begins in the spring when the ballot is presented to membership and continues for at least 30 days, ending June 30.

LISTEN: Out in the Field speaks up

January 2, 2026 by Katie Perkins

What started as an op-ed in The Wildlife Professional has turned into a society-wide, member-led initiative to illuminating and elevating (LGBTQIA+) wildlifers.

In this episode of “Our Wild Lives,” co-organizers of Out in The Field (OiTF) Silas Fischer and Adam Janke join hosts Katie Perkins and Ed Arnett to discuss how OiTF is helping to make the wildlife profession more open, visible and inclusive.

Fischer and Janke recount their personal experiences as wildlife professionals, unpack the mission behind this TWS member-led effort, and explore how allies can meaningfully support the work of OiTF.

“Our Wild Lives” is The Wildlife Society’s weekly podcast, sharing compelling stories from wildlife professionals doing critical work around the world. Your hosts, Katie Perkins and Ed Arnett, of The Wildlife Society, bring you thought-provoking conversations with leading experts and emerging voices.

New episodes are released weekly wherever you get your podcasts. Please email comms@wildlife.org with feedback or future episode suggestions.

Massive wildlife overpass opens in Colorado

January 2, 2026 by The Wildlife Society

Elk, pronghorn, and other wildlife now have a safer path across one of Colorado’s busiest highways with the opening of one of the largest wildlife overpasses in North America. The wildlife crossing extends over Interstate 25 in Douglas County near Larkspur, Colorado. Interstate 25 has been hazardous for people and wildlife. More than 10,000 vehicles travel the stretch of highway, with one reported wildlife-vehicle crash per day in the fall and spring. The Greenland Wildlife Crossing is one of 19 that were funded through the Wildlife Crossing Pilot Program and is part of the I-25 South Gap project, which improved 18 miles of I-25 between Castle Rock and Monument. The project took less than a year to complete and was 50% less than the projected cost. Recently introduced bipartisan legislation looks to build upon the Wildlife Crossings Pilot Program by increasing the funding and establishing the program longer-term.

Read more in the Denver7 news coverage here.

Our favorite wildlife stories of 2025

December 31, 2025 by The Wildlife Society

From Hickory Nut Gorge to the Big Cypress region of Florida’s Everglades, this year in wildlife has brought both heartbreaking and heartwarming stories of wildlife news.

Here is our team’s favorite news stories published on wildlife.org in 2025.

Wild Cam: Watch coyotes hunt with badgers

Graduate student and TWS member Emma Balunek saw something unexpected on her trail cameras—badgers and coyotes seemingly hunting together in the prairies of northeastern Colorado. Instead of writing it off as a coincidence like many scientists before her, Balunek set up more camera traps from New Mexico to South Dakota to answer basic questions about how, when and why the animals are cooperating. While badgers (Taxidea taxus) are strong diggers, coyotes (Canis latrans) are more lethal above-ground predators. Through her research and the observations of citizen scientists, Balunek has documented the pairs collaborating across the American west—and even in Mexico and Canada.

Wild Cam: Drought brings drinking problems for tequila bats

The lesser (Leptonycteris yerbabuenae) and greater (L. nivalis) long-nosed bats are good at what they do—pollinating the agave plants that mezcal is made from. But TWS member Mallory Davies noticed they were eating a decent number of insects and sugar water in their northern range. By analyzing fecal samples from the bats, Davies and her colleagues found that the bats were ingesting aquatic insects during times of drought. These dietary changes are possibly caused by a mismatch between agave bloom timing and travel patterns for the migratory species.

One female bobcat kept her kittens in a landowner’s backyard in Tucson for about a week. Credit: Chris Wesselman

Bobcats and people coexist in Tucson

Researchers have found a surprising number of bobcats living in Tucson. TWS member Cheryl Mollohan helps tracks these felines through her Bobcats in Tucson Research Project, which has an online portal where residents submit sightings. During the study, her team caught 56 different bobcats and radio-collared 38 of them. Tucson residents recorded 1,400 bobcat sightings. One of their findings was that females went to the same backyards year after year to whelp their pups—and homeowners often welcomed the experience.

‘Alligator Alcatraz’ could threaten fragile ecosystem

In July, the Trump administration opened a new migrant detention facility in the Florida Everglades dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.” The center sits within the ecologically sensitive Big Cypress region and has continued to operate without required environmental reviews or public input. Environmental groups and Miccosukee Tribal leaders have all raised concerns about the impacts of the facility on the ecology of the area, which is home to many endangered species, including the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi) and Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus).

Tentacle bunny virus rebrands jackalopes in viral trend

With the body of a jackrabbit and the horns of an antelope, the jackelope is straight out of American folklore. But a strange virus called the Shope papilloma virus is causing Colorado’s cottontail rabbits to grow horn-like tumors out of their heads.

Why are there no rats in Alberta?

For most of North America, big cities are synonymous with rats. But not Edmonton—or all of Alberta, for that matter. Alberta’s success in rats has been thanks to a prevention campaign that declares the animals an agricultural pest. This means anyone with rats on their property has to control them. To keep rats from coming across the eastern provincial border with Saskatchewan, the government of Alberta created a buffer zone of intense rat management. Alberta’s rat management is a testament that the best offense is a good defense.

Hickory Nut Gorge green salamanders were described scientifically in 2019. Credit: Kevin Hutcheson

Wild Cam: Rescuing salamanders from hurricane destruction

Hurricane Helene wasn’t catastrophic only for human communities. A rare population of newly described salamanders in North Carolina suffered a huge setback after the storm and flooding washed through the Asheville area in September, 2024. The Hickory Nut Gorge green salamander (Aneides caryaensis) was first described in 2019. A team from the Amphibian and Reptile Conservancy went up the devastated mountain to collect individuals to build a breeding colony at the North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro.

Fireflies are blinking out in Mexican cities

In Morelia, Mexico, people are losing their memories of fireflies, according to a new study by Cisteil Pérez-Hernández. By surveying more than 100 people, Pérez-Hernàndez found that while most Morelians knew what fireflies were, they weren’t seeing as many fireflies, and didn’t see them in the same areas they used to. The decline is likely caused by rapid urbanization and is linked to the species’ societal extinction—where cultural knowledge and collective memory of a species gradually fade over time.

Are expanding armadillos a problem?

Over the last 10 years, armadillos have rolled into new areas and caused new problems. The nine-banded armadillo, considered an ecosystem engineer, is now established in 17 states. They dig large burrows that can disrupt agriculture, infrastructure and gardens. They are also vectors for diseases, including leprosy—but the fear and animosity towards the animal may be overblown.

Polar bears tussle near a carcass while ivory gulls (Pagophila eburnea) wait their turn. Credit: Wayne Lynch

TWS2025: Polar bears’ leftovers feed the Arctic

Polar bears are lethal predators and big eaters. But new research from TWS member Holly Gamblin shows they leave a lot of leftovers out on the ice. Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) hunt along the Arctic sea ice for fatty mammals like ringed seals (Pusa hispida) but typically only eat their high-energy blubber. By putting out seal carcasses at experimental sites and recording them with camera traps, Gamblin has observed a wide variety of Arctic scavengers like Arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus) taking advantage of the leftovers.

Is hunting success making turkeys harder to hunt?

December 30, 2025 by Kaylyn Zipp

Some male wild turkeys venture boldly into open spaces while others keep to cover, but how predictably they do so may determine whether they survive or how they die.

Using GPS-tracked male turkeys, researchers found that those that consistently take risks are disproportionately harvested or killed by predators, suggesting that hunting pressure may silently steer the species toward more cautious behavior.

“We may end up with populations that avoid the parts of the landscape that hunters typically use,” said Nick Gulotta, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Georgia who cautions that if these characteristics are genetically inherited, male turkeys may become harder to hunt.

The study, published in the Journal of Animal Ecology, captured 108 adult male wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) over nine years in Georgia and South Carolina and outfitted them with GPS backpack transmitters to send hourly locations throughout the breeding and spring hunting seasons, when most deaths occur.

The team estimated each turkey’s average behavior and how much they varied from that average, from GPS tracking data. Using federal land cover maps and state road data, they mapped where forests, fields and roads met to identify areas where turkeys might be more exposed.

The researchers then calculated how far a turkey was from these risky features at each GPS point. If a bird stayed close to risky places such as open areas, habitat edges associated with trail systems and hunting access points, it was defined as more of a risk taker.

The researchers also kept track of daily activity by calculating average hourly speed. They then modeled and linked this behavior to the bird’s survival to estimate how both risk-taking and predictability influenced a turkey’s chances of making it through the season.

Predators preferentially targeted turkeys exhibiting less active, more predictable behaviors. Credit: Credit: Nicholas_T

The study found a nuanced picture of mortality risk in wild turkeys. Birds with bold, predictable patterns faced the highest mortality risk from both hunters and predators.

Although managers cannot realistically predict which wild turkeys are most vulnerable to harvest, Gulotta said, “it’s important for managers to recognize that the way we harvest in relation to individual behavior matters, because the choices we make now will shape how harvestable the population is in the future.”

One way to protect risky male turkeys is to limit hunter access to the areas they use most. Hunters in the study usually stayed within 20 to 100 meters of habitat edges associated with trail systems and open spaces where males display and feed. Both hunters and predators were more likely to harvest or predate birds that regularly used these exposed areas. Creating buffer zones around trails and open fields could give turkeys more space during the breeding season, lowering their risk while still allowing hunting opportunities outside of buffer zones.

In the future, hunters may be able to blame their lack of hunting success not on their inability to hunt but on their previous success.

Stakeholders push back on proposed USDA reorganization

December 30, 2025 by The Wildlife Society

Commenters are overwhelmingly negative about a proposed reorganization by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Between August 1 and September 30, 2025, the U.S. Department of Agriculture received nearly 47,000 emails responding to its proposed reorganization. Based on its analysis of comments, the agency reports 82% of the comments received during this time expressed negative sentiments relating to the reorganization. Comments expressed concern about reduced transparency, stakeholder engagement, diminished regional leadership, and potential impacts on research, environmental stewardship and frontline services.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed a reorganization to “refocus its core operations on supporting U.S. agriculture, producers ranching and forestry, structured around four pillars: workforce alignment, proximity to customers, bureaucracy reduction and consolidation of redundant functions.”

Many of the comments mirror the concerns that The Wildlife Society voiced to the USDA, including lack of prioritization of science in agency decision-making, loss of service delivery and the loss of ability to conduct place-based research. TWS is concerned that these changes may hinder the ability to provide essential knowledge to management recommendations tailored to local ecosystems and conditions.

A portion of the public comments revealed deep skepticism that the changes are driven by evidence rather than politics, with comments noting a lack of publicly available cost-benefit or operational impact analysis and a lack of rationale for choosing the five hubs. Comments emphasized that there has been insufficient transparency in the reorganization process and demanded more stakeholder input. Although the comments were overwhelmingly negative, retirees did note that “opportunities exist to enhance customer service.”

Read the comments made by TWS here and USDA summary and analysis of stakeholder feedback comments here.

A turning point for wildlife policy

December 29, 2025 by Kaylyn Zipp

This year has, in many ways, been a turning point for wildlife policy. In 2025, we witnessed a shifting regulatory landscape, reductions in our federal workforce and new investments reshaping conservation in the United States. As wildlife professionals respond to mounting environmental, economic and social pressures, the decisions made this year and next could define habitat viability, wildlife populations and ecosystem health for decades to come. 

Your clicks have spoken. These were the top policy topics that TWS members were interested in this year: 

Changes in the federal workforce

Shifting administrative priorities have caused significant disruption to conservation professionals in the federal workforce in 2025 and readers have followed this story closely. Federal funding freezes, layoffs, retirements and staff reductions caused concern among wildlife professionals about the future of research and conservation programs. TWS has monitored this issue as it develops and remains committed to voicing the needs of our members through this turbulent time.

Top articles:

Deregulatory actions

We’ve seen several regulatory proposals this year that aim to reshape environmental review processes. Permitting efficiency and energy and economic priorities have been pitted against ecological safeguards in the regulations that implement foundational U.S. legislation like the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act. TWS policy staff have kept their finger on the pulse of the challenges conservationists face in maintaining environmental integrity amid a rapidly changing regulatory landscape.

Top articles:

Wildlife crossings and corridors

This year has also shown some examples of bipartisan, science-driven conservation policy. Significant investments in wildlife crossings and corridors have been positive for humans and wildlife. Programs designed to reduce vehicle collisions with animals demonstrated measurable success, improving public safety and promoting habitat connectivity. TWS is excited to continue to see the development of these projects and the legislation supporting them. 

Top Articles: 

Moving into 2026, TWS policy staff are committed to elevating the voices of TWS members in the conservation policy arena as new and continuing policy shifts shape the future of wildlife management.

The ‘Big Wild’ in Michigan just got bigger

December 29, 2025 by The Wildlife Society

In a landmark purchase, a massive tract of intact forested land home to Michigan’s only elk herd and the Lower Peninsula last native trout streams is now permanently protected and open to the public.

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources has acquired roughly 8,850 acres known as the Black River Ranch, a property surrounded on three sides by the Pigeon River Country State Forest. The land purchase secures for the public one of the largest remaining unfragmented forest blocks in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula, protecting wildlife habitat for elk (Cervus canadensis), black bears (Ursus americanus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), bobcats (Lynx rufus), pine martens (Martes americana), loons (Gavia immer), and bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). A combination of state and federal grant funding, private donations, and nonprofit partnerships secured between 2020 and 2023 made the purchase possible. Among those contributors was the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, whose financial support—the largest investment the organization has made toward land protection in Michigan—helps protect land that lies in the core range of Michigan’s only elk herd. The property also includes 14 miles of native brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) streams, three lakes, and extensive wetlands and upland forests, offering recreation opportunities in the region.

Read more at the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.