John,

Elon Musk wants 775 acres of the Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge for SpaceX. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is considering giving it to him.

USFWS Director Brian Nesvik is reportedly considering a “trade” of SpaceX land for Refuge land -- a move that calls into question the whole idea of protecting land in the first place.

The Rio Grande Valley is among the most biologically rich regions in the United States. It supports documented biodiversity that includes more than 1,200 plant species, over 300 butterfly species, and approximately 700 vertebrates -- at least 520 of them birds -- many of which rely on this habitat as part of a critical migratory flyway.

This is not just about the damage to this one habitat and all its species. Such a “trade” would open the door to private industrial expansion on other lands that have been permanently set aside for wildlife, ecological integrity, and the public interest -- not corporate profit. Trading away this land normalizes the idea that conservation is negotiable.

Send a direct message to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today, to demand that they abandon any transfer or “trade” of Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge land to SpaceX.

National Wildlife Refuge lands are not interchangeable. This protected acreage is unique, defined by its location, connectivity, and the specific web of life it sustains. The whole idea of “like value for like value” of these lands is self-contradictory: No other lands can replace the ecological functions of this refuge, or resurrect species like the ocelot or migratory birds if they become extinct.

When corporate interests are allowed to chip away at refuge lands piece by piece, permanent protections become temporary, conditional, and vulnerable. Repeated over time, the result is the erosion of entire ecosystems -- and ultimately, the extinction of the species those protections were created to save.

Allowing a billionaire’s company to acquire protected refuge land so it can generate billions more in private revenue sets a perilous precedent: that no conservation promise is final in the face of predatory monetary or political interests. When habitat like this is lost, it is not “relocated.” It is gone.

“Refuge” must mean, protected habitat stays protected -- especially when the stakes include irreversible biodiversity loss and the forever extinction of species found nowhere else.

Tell USFWS today: Protect wildlife and habitat! Don’t “trade” away Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge land to SpaceX.

– DFA AF Team