Comment on FR Doc # 2011-32431

I am writing to discuss a more broad picture of ecosystem management when determining to add to the Endangered with Critical Habitat list. It is my understanding that each species is brought under detailed and fervent review to determine its status in the ecosystem in which it thrives. My goal is to incorporate the notion that the review and basis for deciding how a species stands in its natural habitat requires more consideration than just its localized environment and environmental factors. As time passes and science becomes more precise, it is important to keep the bigger picture in mind. For instance, in northwest Montana, many fluvial systems are affected by the actions being taken across the border in neighboring Canada, yet there seems to be little policy to address these man-made lines when it comes to deciding how to manage individual species. The actions taken by Canadians and those affecting the river systems may certainly trump the local, state, and federal actions being taken by the Fish and Wildlife Service. I think there needs to be a paradigm shift in regulation and management of natural resources and how we choose to classify said endangered species. If one studies Ecology closely, we soon realize that every species relies on its entire environment, not just portions of it. It is essential to have this understanding when we choose to regulate individual species because we may soon spot sources of contamination or other troubling environmental factors that could eliminate the destruction of multiple species whom all rely on the same ecosystem, and this method could save a large amount of time for all of those who are engaged in protecting the natural resources for whom they work to protect. It is my underlying goal to petition the Fish and Wildlife Service to reconsider its actions when considering how to manage a single species that may be considered endangered, and to instead focus on the greater ecosystem at large being affected.