Search

Pacific salmon, the signature species of the Pacific Northwest, have declined across their range for well over a century, due to a myriad of human-caused effects on their habitat and the fish themselves. Restoration efforts--some successful, some halting--began in earnest in the late 20th century, with considerable attention focused on the Columbia Basin, where historically salmon runs were crippled by a large interconnected hydroelectric system of federal and non-federal dams. In the 1980 Northwest Power Act, Congress created an interstate agency, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, with access to a substantial amount of ratepayer dollars; the agency has chosen to expend those dollars principally for habitat rehabilitation and hatchery production. Generic federal laws like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act have provided some levers to modify dam operations to benefit fish and driven better protections for salmon throughout the Northwest. The relicensing requirements of the Federal Power Act, coupled with that law's fish protection provisions, have led to several notable dam removals. Significant restoration in Puget Sound watershed is underway due to a judicial decision finding that barrier road culverts violate treaty fishing rights, an interpretation that holds potential to foster salmon habitat improvement measures throughout the Northwest. Surveying events from Alaska's Bristol Bay in the north to the Klamath River along the Oregon-California border in the south, we explain how the law has--and must--play a key role in efforts to save salmon. Although the importance of particular laws varies from basin to basin--as does their effectiveness--some significant restoration is underway despite major unanswered questions such as the fate of the lower Snake River dams. The institution of tribal co-management programs, especially along the Oregon coast, provide an especially significant restoration tool if this development can be replicated across salmon country. The addition of tribal sovereigns into decision-making is likely to improve salmon protection and restoration wherever comanagement programs exist. Improved management will be a prerequisite if Pacific salmon are to recover in a climate-challenged world that threatens the existence of many runs. But to a large extent, restoring historic fish runs will require federal policies and leadership that have not always been present. As the first quarter of the 21st century draws to a close, salmon saving efforts are proceeding on a variety of fronts with some promising results, but the future of many salmon runs is clouded by the threat of climate change and a national ambivalence to confronting its challenges with a muscular response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Murray Rothbard's "For a New Liberty," highlighting its early and influential contribution to libertarian philosophy. Rothbard systematically applies anarcho-capitalist principles to contemporary societal issues, notably addressing concerns regarding conservation, ecology, and population growth in contrast to mainstream political ideologies.

This document is an introduction to a special issue of the journal Plants on "Advances in Plant Reproductive Ecology and Conservation Biology." The special issue focuses on three main areas of research: population genetics, breeding systems, and ecology of common and rare plants. The papers in the special issue provide new insights into these themes using a variety of methods. The studies highlight the importance of understanding plant reproduction and ecology for successful conservation biology projects. The special issue includes research from various locations around the world, demonstrating the global significance of plant conservation. [Extracted from the article]

"The Corps of Discovery and America's Wild New World" is an article discussing the book "Wild New World: The Epic Story of Animals and People in America" by Dan Flores. The book explores the history of biodiversity and the impact of human activity on the environment, addressing the concept of human exceptionalism and cultural differences in human-animal interactions. It emphasizes the loss of species and genetic diversity caused by human actions, particularly the ongoing sixth extinction. The article also highlights the encounters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition with various animals, providing insights into America's history and ecology. It emphasizes the importance of understanding and appreciating America's diverse wildlife and ecosystems, as well as the need for continued conservation efforts to protect species from extinction. [Extracted from the article]

December 2023 will mark the 50th anniversary of the passage of the 1973 Endangered Species Act of the United States. This landmark Act by the US Congress was made possible through strong bipartisan political cooperation on environment protection, capping off a string of progressive legislative victories that would set the tone for US environmental policy at local, state, and federal government levels for decades. Beyond its domestic significance, the 1973 Endangered Species Act had a clear and recognizable impact on global environmentalism by influencing and inspiring endangered species legislation in other nations as well as the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity. At the time of its passage, the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) was far and away the most comprehensive piece of legislation ever enacted to halt and reverse rising rates of species extinction and biodiversity loss. Other nations emulated the ESA in past and present endangered species laws and regulations, even as late as 2019, leading to the eventual emergence of a set of global standard practices for species and habitat protections that endure to this day, practices with clear American roots. This study explores the degree to which the past and present endangered species laws of other English-speaking jurisdictions borrowed from or mimicked the US Endangered Species Act in purpose, style, form, and function. Further analysis is undertaken to reveal the extent to which Japan's own endangered species protection statute is likely influenced by the US ESA. The ESA's influence on global environmental norms and wildlife protection practices is first explored through the lens of international relations theory, in particular the 'constructivist' school of thought that helps explain recognized patterns in global environmental cooperation. The study demonstrates how the 1973 Endangered Species Act essentially became a template for other national and provincial governments to model and even mimic when these governments were designing and enacting their own endangered species management protection programs. Historically, the ESA's passage and its emulation by other polities are indicative of the degree to which the United States has impacted and continues to greatly impact and influence global wildlife law and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"A Woman Among Wolves: My Journey Through Forty Years of Wolf Recovery" is a book by Diane Boyd that chronicles her experiences studying and documenting the recovery of wolves in northwestern Montana. The book provides a comprehensive account of Boyd's adventures, from her early days working with wolves in Minnesota to her time in Glacier National Park. It explores the challenges and controversies surrounding wolf recovery and offers insights into the behavior and ecology of these animals. The book is a valuable resource for those interested in wolves, wildlife biology, and women's studies. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the rise of ecological restoration in the United States, exploring its history, challenges, and potential. It highlights the complex relationship between ecological restoration and social values, politics, and historical injustices, particularly in relation to Indigenous people. The article also examines debates surrounding federal intervention in ecological restoration and draws connections between restoration efforts and atomic energy. While critical of certain aspects of ecological restoration, the article acknowledges its goals of habitat restoration and damage mitigation and suggests a path forward focused on justice and remediation. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the need for an additional listing-determination category under the United States' Endangered Species Act (ESA) in response to ongoing climate change. The ESA aims to protect and recover imperiled animal and plant species and their ecosystems. Currently, the ESA does not explicitly consider climate change in listing determinations. The article highlights the decline of the native Yellowstone cutthroat trout population as an example of the challenges faced by species under climate change. The author suggests the inclusion of a new category that acknowledges the inefficacy of adaptation strategies for species in the face of climate change. [Extracted from the article]

The article examines the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) efforts to reconcile its obligations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). It discusses the conflicting roles of the EPA under FIFRA and the ESA, as well as the registration and cancellation process of pesticides under FIFRA. It analyzes the workplan released by the EPA in April 2022 aimed at improving the consultation process for pesticide registration.

Private lands are often critical for successful species conservation, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service has increasingly utilized voluntary Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances (CCAAs) as a strategy for promoting private land conservation. CCAAs, however, present a challenge where the FWS, with its history as a regulatory entity, must now engage landowners as conservation partners. There is a deep culture of distrust among landowners, who are often suspicious of engaging with the agency, making it necessary for the FWS to build trusting relationships. Furthermore, FWS decisions often face litigation in the courts, where they may be overturned. This creates a challenge for CCAAs, as the agency is pulled between landowner demands for greater flexibility and a court system that emphasizes rigid compliance to established rules and procedures. This study seeks to understand what factors influenced the flexibility of agency staff and officials as they navigate the process of negotiating CCAAs amidst these competing demands for accountability. Three cases of CCAA development are presented, each aiming to protect the habitat for the greater sage-grouse and ease the regulatory burden on ranching communities, should the grouse become a federally protected species. In addition to the well-documented need for trust-building and maintenance, the findings of the study highlight the importance of shared goals, the participation of trusted intermediary organizations, and as well as the meaningful support and investment of senior FWS leadership in exploring creative, innovative solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various populations of wolves have been listed as threatened or endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act since the 1970s. But no listed species has aroused, and continues to arouse, so much controversy as the Northern Gray wolf. "Wolf law" is unique, odd, and often counterproductive-at least if the goal is to ensure the species' survival and revitalize damaged ecosystems upon which healthy human communities depend. This Article identifies some of the unique characteristics of wolf law, analyzes how and why it has developed in this strange way, and proposes some more sensible ways for healthy human communities to coexist with healthy wolf communities. We analyze how politics and human needs-rather than the needs of the wolves-have driven the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's approach to wolf management, often to the detriment of the species it is legally obliged to protect. After reviewing the fundaments of the Endangered Species Act, we trace the history of Northern Rocky Mountain gray wolves and highlight the unique, controversial, and often unhelpful (at least if we wish to ensure the species' survival) ways the USFWS has managed the species. We illustrate the tensions between the clear statutory mandates of the ESA and the political pressures shaping wolf conservation around human wants. We outline some of the themes that set "wolf law" apart from the pack. Finally, we suggest a path forward to manage wolves in a sensible manner that better fulfills the needs of the species--and thus, inevitably, the needs of our own species-as the ESA requires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the backdrop of the rising temperatures and the existing ‘emission gap’, climate change lawsuits have recently emerged as a new lever in order to step up compliance with international reduction targets. As of today, the majority of these strategic lawsuits are based upon tort law and human rights duties, which is evident given the major impact unhalted climate change on the immediate survival chances of future generations of humans. However, many terrestrial as well as marine ecosystems are already suffering from the global rise of temperatures, also in Europe. This article addresses the principal question as to whether within the specific context of the European Union, climate change litigation could not also use the 1992 Habitats Directive as an complementary instrument to mitigate future greenhouse gas emissions or at least prepare and adapt ecosystems for the inevitable impact of climate change. Using the recent courtroom experiences with the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 in the context of climate change-related lawsuits as a benchmark, this article argues that global warming will be an increasingly important factor when applying the conservation duties of the Habitats Directive in the coming decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecologists' destructive "World War III simulations" facilitated now-familiar models and theories that also "explicitly drew on and influenced metaphors of human society" (p. 132) while giving the impression of objective scientific knowledge. Martin explores how biologists used radioisotopes to breed wild species and study landscapes so as to plan for the post-disaster recovery of irradiated environments, which became widely known as "ecosystems" due to the strategies of influential ecologists such as the Odums. What does it mean to restore an endangered species or a degraded ecosystem back to the state of wildness, or at least to a less imperiled state?. [Extracted from the article]

Proactive Conservation is a paradigm of natural resource management in the United States that encourages voluntary, collaborative efforts to restore species before they need to be protected through government regulations. This paradigm is widely used to conserve at-risk species today, and when used in conjunction with the Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts (PECE), it allows for successful conservation actions to preclude listing of species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Despite the popularity of this paradigm, and recent flagship examples of its use (e.g., greater sage grouse, Centrocercus urophasianus), critical assessments of the outcomes of Proactive Conservation are lacking from the standpoint of species status and recovery metrics. Here, we provide such an evaluation, using the New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis), heralded as a success of Proactive Conservation efforts in the northeastern United States, as a case study. We review the history and current status of the species, based on the state of the science, in the context of the Conservation Initiative, and the 2015 PECE decision not to the list the species under the ESA. In addition to the impacts of the PECE decision on the New England cottontail conservation specifically, our review also evaluates the benefits and limits of the Proactive Conservation paradigm more broadly, and we make recommendations for its role in relation to ESA implementation for the future of at-risk species management. We find that the status and assurances for recovery under the PECE policy, presented at the time of the New England cottontail listing decision, were overly optimistic, and the status of the species has worsened in subsequent years. We suggest that use of PECE to avoid listing may occur because of the perception of the ESA as a punitive law and a misconception that it is a failure, although very few listed species have gone extinct. Redefining recovery to decouple it from delisting and instead link it to probability of persistence under recommended conservation measures would remove some of the stigma of listing, and it would strengthen the role of Species Status Assessments in endangered species conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, the northern spotted owl has declined throughout the Pacific Northwest even though its habitat has been protected under the Endangered Species Act. The main culprit for this decline is the likely human-facilitated invasion of the barred owl. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service conducted an experiment in which they lethally removed the barred owls from selected areas in Washington, Oregon, and California. In those locations, the northern spotted owl populations have stabilized and increased. Some have argued that we should kill the barred owl to protect the northern spotted owl. In this essay, I argue that the competitive displacement of northern spotted owls by the barred owl should not be addressed by killing the later to save the former. The most powerful objection to this conclusion is that we will lose old-growth temperate rainforest without an indicator species like the spotted owl protected under the Endangered Species Act. In response, I argue that we should directly conserve old-growth temperate rainforest independent of the northern spotted owl. In effect, we need legislation and policies that protects endangered ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As one of the strongest federal environmental statutes, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a powerful tool for environmental litigators to uphold the important conservation objectives articulated by Congress in 1973. In recent years, the role of “critical habitat” within the ESA has come into question. The Supreme Court decided in Weyerhaeuser that “critical habitat” must also qualify as “habitat,” but it failed to articulate any guidelines for determining what “habitat” actually is. This decision incited a regulatory tug-of-war over the proper definition of “habitat” within the ESA. This Comment explores the approaches to defining “habitat” employed by the Trump and Biden administrations. This Comment further argues that while Biden’s approach better effectuates the goals of the ESA, it is still a flawed interpretation of the Act because it allows the Secretary of the Interior to administer the ESA in such a way that is inconsistent with the Act’s separate goals of species survival and species recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biodiversity conservation policy in the United States, particularly as developed through the Endangered Species Act, has come to focus primarily on merely avoiding calamity. Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA prohibits federal agencies from carrying out, funding, or permitting actions that jeopardize threatened and endangered (listed) species, or destroy or adversely modify, their critical habitat. These prohibitions are among the ESA's most important protections, which Congress envisioned as creating an "emergency room" for vanishing species. However, improperly narrow agency interpretations undercut these protections' effectiveness, allowing continued adverse effects to both listed species and critical habitat so long as each incremental impact does not imperil the entire species or render ineffective an entire critical habitat reserve--a threshold almost never crossed. There is a better way. Federal agencies charged with administering section 7(a)(2) should instead focus on maintaining minimum survival thresholds and species' timely progress toward recovery in interpreting what it means to "jeopardize" listed species. These agencies should also embrace a "no net loss" approach to conservation of the physical and biological features of critical habitat that are essential to species' recovery. While far-reaching, these reforms require no amendments to the ESA itself, and only minor changes to regulations interpreting the law. Additionally, this approach to biodiversity conservation is consistent with both the vision of the Congress that passed the ESA and the language of the ESA itself and would significantly advance U.S. protections for its most imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. At the same time, these reforms would improve standards for management of protected areas in the U.S. and thus help fulfill President Biden's commitment to advancing biodiversity conservation and slowing climate change through protecting at least 30% of land and marine areas under U.S. jurisdiction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the decline of the Texas shrimping industry and the impact of policy and regulation on the livelihoods of shrimpers. The researchers conducted interviews with shrimping communities and used mixed methods research to gain a deeper understanding of the issue. The interviews revealed that trust and communication are crucial in building relationships with natural resource users. The article emphasizes the importance of collaboration between shrimpers, Sea Grant agents, and researchers in adapting to regulations and finding solutions to challenges. The findings highlight the need for clear communication and participatory science and management programs to address the concerns of shrimpers and foster a sense of ownership and understanding. [Extracted from the article]

The article focuses on how the gray wolf was prematurely delisted, using a definition of "significant portion of the range" that violates the Endangered Species Act. It mentions de-listing was the culmination of nearly twenty years of advocacy on the part of conservative voters. It also mentions U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) did not use the best available science, and so exposed the wolf to hunters, trappers, and livestock owners.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the strongest source of federal protection for species that are at risk of extinction, and the ESA is becoming increasingly important as climate change threatens species and their habitats more than ever. In 2019, the Trump Administration amended the ESA to provide clarity and predictability when making decisions to list a species as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The Administration defined "foreseeable future" in a way that starkly limits how far into the future the listing agencies may look when assessing risks to species. Prior to the 2019 definition of "foreseeable future," the federal agencies in charge of deciding to list species under the ESA faced risk uncertainty when assessing the likelihood and magnitude of threats to species and their habitats from climate change predominantly because of scientific uncertainty and difficulty predicting mitigation efforts. This Note argues that instead of the 2019 amendments providing the intended clarity and consistency, the "foreseeable future" definition instead weakens the substantive standards used in the ESA listing process, limits federal agencies' ability to consider climate change when making decisions on whether to provide species with ESA protections, and ultimately will push climate-imperiled species further toward the risk of extinction. To provide more effective guidance to the agencies making listing decisions under the ESA, revised rulemaking should require the agencies to explain how they deal with uncertainties and species' risk of endangerment and to apply standards consistently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the need to repeal the critical habitat designation section of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and limit the application of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the ESA section to help avoid the extinction of the Florida Key deer amidst threats due to climate change. Also cited are how the sea level rise due to climate change is destroying the deer's habitats in Florida, and the need to save the Western Snowy Plover from sea level rise.

For decades, the public forests of the Pacific Northwest were subject to widespread clearcutting of their old-growth trees as part of a federal policy promoting industrial logging. That era came to an end in the early 1990s, due to court injunctions enforcing environmental laws like the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Forest Management Act, as a response to diminishing old-growth dependent species like the northern spotted owl. Fulfilling a campaign promise to resolue the contentious issue by protecting both wildlife habitat and a logging industry important to local communities, President Clinton and his administration conducted a remarkable 1993 symposium on the economics and science of preserving rapidly disappearing habitat for Endangered Species Act-listed species like the northern spotted owl and several salmonids. The result was the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan (the NFP or the Plan), widely recognized as the largest commitment to ecosystem management worldwide. Somewhat surprisingly, the NFP is still in effect ouer a quarter-century later, despite determined efforts to euiscerate it. This Article examines the NFP, its antecedents, provisions, court interpretations, and future. In many respects, despite persistent controversy ouer the legal underpinnings of the NFP, the Plan has provided substantial protection for the Northwest's federal forests, and-although it did not end allpublic timber haruests-largely ended harvesting of public old-growth forests. Moreover, the Plan's aquatic protection strategy has proved quite effective and worthy of emulation elsewhere. A postscript to this Article considers the effect of the recent Biden Administration executive order concerning old-growth forests on the NFP. Although the Bush administration's repeated efforts to terminate the Plan failed, the Obama administration removed about ten percent of the federal forests subject to the Plan from its reach, substantially undermining its ecological premises. The courts have so far sustained these removals, casting a pall of uncertainty over efforts to update the NFP to reflect current challenges posed by witdfires and climate change. This Article suggests that the goals ofa revised NFP should be linked to the role that federal public Pacific Northwest forests can play in the U.S.' international obligations to combat climate change. We recommend a number of changes to the NFP, including ending both post-fire saluage sales and the logging of mature and old-growth forests. To accommodate these changes, we suggest providing a "just transition" for affected rural communities and increased flexibility concerning the boundaries of protective terrestrial reserues in the southern reaches of the Plan. We maintain that despite lingering uncertainty about its scope of coverage, the NFP can and should continue to provide the signature example of landscape planning worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article fills a void in the legal scholarly literature by evaluating and proposing attainable legal strategies to address the current substantial declines in beneficial insect populations. Despite perceptions of insects as odious pests, the reality is that insects, the most abundant and diverse animals on earth, provide ecosystems services that are crucial to human welfare and the existence of life. Insects, including thousands of species of bees, wasps, butterflies, moths, beetles, and flies, are indispensable pollinators of agricultural crops. Beyond pollination, insects carry out natural pest control, decomposition, and nutrient cycling vital to both agricultural and natural ecosystems. In recent years, a number of scientific studies have raised the alarm over serious declines in populations of insects that provide these essential services. Drivers of insect population declines include loss of habitat, pesticide use, and climate change. Complex synergies among these drivers exacerbate the problem. In this Article, we analyze three federal statutes to determine what, if any, utility they may have in addressing the problem of declines of beneficial insect populations: the federal Endangered Species Act, the Farm Bill, and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An in-depth evaluation of these statutes reveals that the Endangered Species Act and Farm Bill have a limited role to play in protecting beneficial insect populations. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, on the other hand, has the potential to dramatically reduce insect population declines resulting from habitat loss and pesticide use. After taking a deep dive into this federal law, we propose solutions that can be implemented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency without the need for additional congressional action. Specifically, we offer five distinct recommendations that the Environmental Protection Agency could implement with its existing regulatory authority that would substantially reduce the decline in beneficial insect populations and the ecosystem services they provide, which are essential to protect life on earth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explains the need for the government of Colorado to evaluate Clean Water Act Section 404 program. It discusses barriers to State Section 404 program assumption including assumable waters, the Endangered Species Act, program administration funding and political will. Initiatives for the management of critical natural resources are highlighted such as integration of water quality and quantity, increased regulatory program stability and influence of cooperative federalism.

The article focuses on importance of land conservation overall, outlining the reasons for focusing conservation efforts on rural lands and what environmental (and other) benefits can be gained in these areas. It mentions federal government mandates conservation through laws like the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. It also mentions ideas of how federal conservation programs could work in conjunction with subnational and private programs to further land conservation goals.

The article focuses on the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Sixth Circuit in the case National Wildlife Federation v. Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation which held that agencies are not bound by either the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when evaluating and approving these response plans. It also mentions need to prepare an environmental impact statement as per NEPA.

The article focuses on administration of U.S. President Joe Biden should prioritize renewable energy development on public lands contend with the regulatory burdens of longstanding environmental laws such as National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). It also mentions framework amply supports renewable energy development on federal public lands. It also mentions successful adaptation to climate change will require public land.

Over the coming decades, experts estimate that twenty-five percent of all plant and animal species may go extinct. Climate change directly contributes to species extinction through ecosystem shift, and accelerates other drivers of extinction such as destruction of habitat and pollution. The Endangered Species Act is the only legal tool in the United States to directly protect against the threat of species extinction, and critical habitat designations under the Endangered Species Act provide a way for the government to protect a species' habitat and preserve biodiversity. Unfortunately, the Trump Administration's recently promulgated regulations hinder, rather than bolster, federal agencies' efforts to save endangered species. By severely restricting the designation of critical habitat, the government has suppressed its own ability to respond to the effects of climate change on endangered and threatened species. This Note proposes a definition of the term "habitat" in the Endangered Species Act that comports with current scientific understandings of the term and would allow federal agencies to account for climate change when designating critical habitat. The definition reflects the dynamic and temporally variable nature of species' habitats, allowing for the designation of currently unoccupied areas that will support species' existence in the future. This definition would clarify the government's role in protecting species' habitats while also complying with the text and purpose of the Endangered Species Act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Endangered Species Act ("ESA") has been a powerful tool for conserving both national and global biodiversity. As human society continues to evolve, however, so too does its impact on endangered species. Most troublesome is mankind's contribution to climate change since the Industrial Revolution. As extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increased spread of disease indiscriminately harm living creatures, the fight against species extinction has become an uphill battle. Thankfully, there is still hope. Past legal scholarship has proposed using the ESA to protect species from the effects of climate change, for example, by preserving habitats that they will likely need in the future. Using the ESA in this fashion, however, only addresses climate change retrospectively. This Note proposes using section 7(a)(1) of the ESA to address climate change prospectively. Section 7(a)(1) commands federal agencies to pursue the conservation of endangered species--a mandate that can be used to mitigate climate change. Because section 7(a)(1) has only been interpreted by courts and not by the agencies that administer the ESA, this Note fills in the logical gaps and extrapolates a rule that can properly carry out the policy asserted in Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill--that endangered and threatened species be afforded the "highest priority." Specifically, this Note proposes that federal agencies must consult with the Fish & Wildlife Service ("FWS") or National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS") under section 7(a)(1) if there is a conservation-friendly alternative to either (1) a proposed agency action or (2) the administration of a statute within the agency's authority. The agency must implement a conservation-friendly alternative if one exists. If more than one exists, the agency retains discretion to choose among the alternatives. Finally, this Note applies the affirmative conservation framework to the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), concluding that section 7(a)(1) requires the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act's ("CAA") national air quality standards to mitigate climate change and thus protect endangered species. This Note demonstrates that regulating methane emissions by focusing on Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations would allow the EPA to satisfy its affirmative conservation duty while avoiding costly economic and political alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the Endangered Species Act (ESA) passed by Congress in 1973 to preserve ecosystems and protect endangered species from extinction. Topics covered include the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the application of ESA in this case, and the Court's failure to define what constitutes habitat.

The article discusses the court ruling in Friends of Animals v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, upholding the Service's proposed action to remove Barred Owls, an invasive species protected under the Migratory Birds Treaty Act (MBTA), for the benefit of Spotted Owl, a threatened species protected under MBTA and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Topics covered include the history of Northern Spotted Owl and Barred Owl studies, and the implications of this ruling for scientists and policy makers.

In 2019, the Supreme Court decided Kisor v. Wilkie, a case that asked the Court to revisit Auer deference, the doctrine which instructs courts to defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation. Auer deference, along with other judicial deference doctrines, has received vehement criticism jfom legal scholars and political scientists. Among these criticisms is the assertion that Auer deference allows too much opportunityforjudges' own '" views of reasonableness" to infiltrate their legal analysis. increasing the likelihood that judicial deference to agency interpretations will be significantly influenced by ideology. The majority decision in ¥Asor purported to articulate clearer standards tor the application of Auer deference and require judges to more clearly articulate their analysis in cases where Auer deference may be appropriate. This Note considers whether the Kisor framework could mitigate the impact of.judicial ideology on deference decisions. Jtfocuses in particular on the use of Auer deference in cases involving the Endangered Species Act, a statute which has been highly polarizing along party lines. The Note examines several cases, decided before and alter Kisor, in which Jideral courts were asked to rule on the meaning of Endangered Species Act regulations. This analysis suggests that while Kisor is unlikely to completely remove the influence of.judicial ideology on deference decisions, its requirement that judges "show their work" has the potential to significantly reduce the role that judicial ideology plays in determining what constitutes a "reasonable" interpretation of an ambiguous regulation. While it is too soon to defulitively evaluate Kisor's impact on deference decisions, this Note suggests that the Kisorframework encourages a more principled and ideologically neutral approach to difficult agency deference decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Beginning in the 19803, conservation groups began campaigning for the federal government to list the fluvial Arctic grayling-a relative Of the salmon that lives only in the cold waters of North America-as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. In 2014, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service declined to list the grayling under the Act, citing, among other things, the uncertainty associated with how the grayling would respond to climate change. The Endangered Species Act has long been heralded as one of the United States' most protective environmental statutes. dice in part to its precautionary mandate that the government take action to help species before they face extinction. But agency implementation and judicial interpretation of the Endangered Species Act has only recently begun to grapple with the crisis of climate change, which threatens global biodiversity and promises to test the strength of the Endangered Species Act. One factor complicating traditional enforcement of the Endangered Species Act in the face of climate change is the uncertainty that can cloud species-specific climate science. This uncertainty makes it difficult jbr agencies to know how climate change will impact a particular species. In the face of this uncertainty, this Note argues that agencies should embrace the precautionary principle to help guide listing decisions and critical habitat designations under the Endangered Species Act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The status of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is in peril. Under the July 2018 proposed rules to the ESA, federal agencies will have the power to consider economic rather than biological factors and to put extractive industries before imperiled wildlife. In essence, the July 2018 proposed rules allow federal agencies to undermine the original intent of the ESA - to halt and reverse species extinction, whatever the cost may be. Under the proposed rules, the future of species that rely on the ESA as the last line of defense is unknown. To have an ESA that is both effective and true to Congress's original intent in passing the ESA in 1973, industry interests such as oil, gas, and logging must remain separate from the ESA. This paper will examine the ESA's history and the July 2018 proposed rules in detail before comparing those rules to the ESA's original intent. After concluding that the proposed rules allow federal agencies to act contrary to the original intent, this paper will discuss how citizen involvement and sufficient funding is critical to help species that depend on the ESA. The July 2018 proposed rules diminish the effectiveness of the ESA, contributing to the ESA's own extinction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the delisting process of species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which protects biodiversity in the U.S. Also cited are the implementation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of ESA, the potential violations of private property rights in implementing ESA, and how contingent delisting can allow the FWS to accommodate both economic development and wildlife conservation.

Citizen suits are frequently cited as an essential legal innovation by virtue of their capacity to provide a backstop to lax or ideologically antagonistic administrations. Drawing on data from fifteen years of litigation under two prominent environmental statutes, we find little evidence that citizen suits effectively serve this role in practice. Instead, we find that limited resources and institutional barriers strictly limit the number of citizen suits filed annually against the federal government under two of the most litigated environmental statutes, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While our findings do not negate the importance of citizen suits, they expose their limitations and the close alignment that exists between where suits are filed and local politics. Citizen suits mirror local values as they are overwhelmingly filed in jurisdictions in which concerns about the environment are the highest, and they are rare where public concern is lowest. Our empirical findings lead us to reject the conventional model for citizen suits in favor of three alternative models that range from discrete, localized action to continuous lines of litigation over high-profile natural resources that can span decades. We find that the citizen suits under NEPA and the ESA that are covered by our study rarely target state or federal programs that are lax by national standards; instead, they serve a range of goals, large and small, that differ depending on the form of the suit (private enforcement actions, suits to perform nondiscretionary duties, or challenges to legally deficient agency action) and the programs and resources affected. Specifically, we find that citizen suits provide important constraints on agency discretion when environmental statutory mandates and the ideological outlook of presidential administrations diverge. Our findings also negate prominent critiques of citizen suits, most notably claims that citizen suits usurp government authority without the safeguard of political accountability and therefore are in need of vigorous gatekeeping by either executive branch officials or federal judges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses issues on the implementation of policies to conserve bee species and pollinators in the U.S. under its Endangered Species Act (ESA). Also cited are the listing by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of the rusty patched bumble bee as endangered specie under ESA, and the key areas of consideration in protecting the critical habitats of the bumble bees.

Ecological scientists and legal scholars think and talk in different ways. The "gulf of mutual incomprehension" that results can impede efforts to address shared problems. Dale Goble bridged this gulf by teaming with ecologists to interpret the Endangered Species Act and develop the concept of conservation-reliant species--species that require ongoing, long-term management to address the factors that threaten them. Most imperiled species are conservation reliant and conservation resources are limited. Meeting the long-term needs of conservation-reliant species will require the blending of ecological science, societal context, and law that Dale Goble has long promoted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author continues the thread of her study with Professor Dale D. Goble of the "significant portion of its range" (SPR) phrase contained in the definitions of threatened species and endangered species in the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Topics discussed include the state of the SPR case law and policy in the U.S., the evolution of the SPR phrase, and the apparently settled, definitely settled and seemingly avoidable SPR issues.

The article addresses the controversy surrounding whether or not the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has proven to be an effective mechanism promoting recovery. It provides a brief review of the basic structure of the ESA, and surveys the evolution of Professor Dale D. Goble and his colleagues' scholarship on conservation resilience. Also mentioned are climate resilience, endangered species delisting, and the need for ongoing conservation management and regulation.

The article discusses the effects that some of these rule changes will have on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the face of uncertain climate change and the science behind it. It mentions climate change's impact on the environment, and judicial deference to agency interpretations. It also mentions alternatives for how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Endangered Species Act can accommodate climate change and such as a broader ecosystem-based approach.

The article discusses predator control in the U.S. It examines the alleged tension between wildlife management and ecological stability. The article explores predator control on the Channel Islands of Southern California in 1994. It also discusses the perception of how humans viewed wild animals during the 20th century and various predator control programs in the U.S. The article examines legislation such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973.

The article analyzes whether the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) helps or harms critical habitats designations protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and assesses critical habitat federal rules. Topics discussed are requirements of ESA to designate critical habitat for threatened and endangered species, critical habitat rulemaking completion times by species classes and for Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian species, and rules designating habitat for multiple species.