Tucson Citizen.com
Views From Baja Arizona - brought to you by Hugh Holub

Posts Tagged ‘climate change’

Dispatches from the litigious environmental group war on America

Thursday, May 26th, 2011

Besides burying US Fish and Wildlife with petitions to list endangered species, and filing lots of lawsuits over the Endangered Species Act, litigious environmental groups make sure the media knows about their efforts.

At least in Tucson, the press release is the only story published (for example: KGUN Group says threatened frogs at AZ mine site

Here is a listing of recent press releases issued by Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth Guardians and Western Watersheds Project:

From Center for Biological Diversity’s web site:

May 25, 2011 New Orleans Court Hearing Will Include Arguments on $19 Billion Lawsuit Against BP Over Gulf Oil Spill

May 25, 2011 Endangered Species Act Protection Sought for Boreal Toads

May 24, 2011 Deadly Bat Disease Arrives in Maine

May 19, 2011 Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge Puts Fragile Pronghorn Population at Risk From Motorized Mayhem

May 18, 2011 Senate Rejects Massive Expansion of Dangerous Offshore Drilling

May 18, 2011 New Habitat Protections Finalized for California Desert Plant Threatened With Extinction

May 18, 2011 State Politician Holds Farce “Science” Panel on Endangered Species Act Protection for Dunes Sagebrush Lizard

May 17, 2011 Oregon Kills Imnaha Pack Wolf, Gunning for a Second

May 17, 2011 New Federal Plan to Tackle Bat-killing Disease Inadequate to Stop Epidemic

May 17, 2011 Judge Halts Settlement Over Hundreds of Endangered Species, Orders Parties Back to Negotiations

May 16, 2011 Years of Advocacy to Protect Kaua’i's Imperiled Seabirds Pay Off

May 16, 2011 Federal Pumps in Delta Are Killing Huge Numbers of Critically Imperiled Salmon and Other Native Fish

May 13, 2011 Center for Biological Diversity Statement on Shell’s Submission of Its Chukchi Sea Exploration Plan for 2012-2013

May 12, 2011 More Wolf-killing Legislation Proposed

May 12, 2011 Government Urged to Increase Habitat Protection for Chiricahua Leopard Frog

May 11, 2011 Groups Call on Government to Finally Kill Proposed Dam

May 6, 2011 United Nations Report Projects 10 Billion People by Century’s End

May 5, 2011 Pearce Asked to Immediately Release Data Said to Support Claims About Imperiled Lizard

May 5, 2011 U.S. House of Representatives Approves Dangerous Measure Expanding Offshore Drilling

May 5, 2011 Lawsuit Challenges Constitutionality of Anti-wolf Rider

May 4, 2011 Obama Administration Prematurely Lifting Wolf Protections in Great Lakes, Northern Rockies

May 4, 2011 Congressional Proposals Aim to Eviscerate Environmental Laws Along U.S. Borders, Coasts

May 4, 2011 Report Debunks New Mexico Congressman Pearce’s Claims About Protection for Rare Lizard

May 3, 2011 Lawsuit Filed to Stop Unlawful Killing of Endangered Wolves in Oregon

April 29, 2011 Activists Confront AES Over Damaging Dam Project, Broken Promises in Panama

April 28, 2011 Group Calls on New Mexico Congressman to Recant False Statements about Dunes Sagebrush Lizard

April 28, 2011 Lawsuit Launched to Protect Alabama Shad Under the Endangered Species Act

April 28, 2011 Lawsuit Launched to Speed Recovery of Imperiled California Amphibians

April 27, 2011 Endangered Species Act Protection Sought for Sierra Nevada Red Fox

April 21, 2011 Lawsuit Seeks to Rescue Pacific Walrus From Indefinite Wait for Endangered Species Protection

April 21, 2011 Lawsuit Launched to Protect 400-plus Freshwater Species in Southeast Under Endangered Species Act

April 20, 2011 Conservationists Intervene in Lawsuit That Aims to Take Away Polar Bear Habitat

April 20, 2011 Conservation Groups Appeal Ruling on Failure to Designate Critical Habitat for Endangered Florida Panther

April 20, 2011 One Year After Gulf Disaster: Reforms Left Unaddressed, New Offshore Drilling Must Be Halted

April 19, 2011 Lawsuit Seeks to Protect U.S. West Coast Waters for Endangered Leatherback Sea Turtles

April 19, 2011 Forest Service’s New Mexico Road Plan a Financial Boondoggle That Puts Wildlife, Watersheds at Risk

April 18, 2011 Lawsuit Launched to Force EPA to Study Oil-dispersant Impacts on Endangered Wildlife

April 15, 2011 Proposal Would Prematurely Strip Endangered Species Act Protections From Gray Wolves in Great Lakes Region

April 14, 2011 Congress Approves Wolf-killing Rider in Budget Act to Aid Montana Democrat’s Re-election

April 14, 2011 One Year After Gulf Oil Disaster, Significant Dangers Remain Unaddressed

April 14, 2011 Endangered Species Act Protection Sought for Iconic Plains Bison

April 13, 2011 Southern California Butterfly Denied Endangered Species Protection

April 13, 2011 Fast-spreading, Bat-killing Disease Arrives in Kentucky

April 13, 2011 Lawsuit Launched to Protect Disappearing Miami Blue Butterfly

April 13, 2011 Legal Action Filed to Defend Habitat Protections for Imperiled Green Sturgeon

April 12, 2011 Tester, Simpson Sneak Wolf-killing Rider Into Budget Bill

April 12, 2011 A Year After Gulf Oil Spill, New Report Tallies Full Cost of Wildlife Disaster

April 11, 2011 Two Arizona Springsnail Species Proposed for Federal Protection

April 11, 2011 Upper Klamath River Chinook Salmon One Step Closer to Endangered Species Act Protection

April 8, 2011 More than 22,000 Pledge Support for Saving Imperiled Bluefin Tuna

April 8, 2011 Endangered Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Gains Nearly 2 Million Acres of Protected Habitat

April 8, 2011 Three New Scientific Studies Confirm Lead Poisoning of Wildlife Due to Hunting Ammunition

April 7, 2011 House Passes Legislation to Gut America’s Most Important Pollution Law

April 6, 2011 Senate Rejects Back-door Moves to Roll Back America’s Most Important Air Pollution Law

April 6, 2011 Endangered Species Act Protection Sought for Nation’s Smallest Seahorse

April 5, 2011 Georgia Wildlife Officials Criticized for Rattlesnake Roundup Permit

April 4, 2011 Obama Administration Fails to Protect Rare Glacier National Park Insect Threatened With Climate-caused Extinction

March 31, 2011 National Campaign to Boycott Endangered Bluefin Tuna Coming to Las Vegas Sushi Restaurants

March 31, 2011 Rare Alabama Fish One Step Closer to Endangered Species Act Protection

March 30, 2011 Bat-killing White-nose Disease Spreads to Ohio, New Brunswick

March 28, 2011 Court Gives Endangered Status Back to West Virginia Northern Flying Squirrel, Rules That Recovery Plans Must Be Followed

March 24, 2011 Winter Sea Ice Hits Historic Low

March 24, 2011 New Protests Filed Against Water-rights Applications to Protect Rare Nevada Wildlife

March 22, 2011 Harmful New Mexico Forest Road Plan Blocked in Response to Conservation Groups’ Appeal

March 22, 2011 New House Bill Would Exempt National Forest Logging From Environmental Laws

March 22, 2011 Lawsuit Withdrawn After Minnesota Legislature Exempts Iron Range Resources From Environmental Review

March 21, 2011 Western Snowy Plover to Get Critical Habitat Protection Doubled

March 21, 2011 First Deepwater Drilling Plan Approved for Gulf of Mexico; Feds Claim No Significant Environmental Impacts

March 21, 2011 Obama Administration Denies Protection to Knoxville Area Salamander

March 20, 2011 Center for Biological Diversity Statement on Possible New Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

March 18, 2011 Settlement Reached on Wolf Recovery in Idaho and Montana

March 17, 2011 U.S. Government Fails to Protect Loggerhead Sea Turtles by Legal Deadline

March 11, 2011 More Than 11,000 Acres of Critical Habitat Proposed for Rare Chiricahua Leopard Frog in Arizona, New Mexico

March 11, 2011 As Congress Takes Aim, New Numbers Show Declining Wolf Population in Northern Rockies

March 10, 2011 Arizona Regulators Risk Damage to Water, Air Near Grand Canyon With Uranium Mine Permits

March 9, 2011 Senate Rejects House Attempt to Roll Back America’s Most Important Environmental and Public Health Laws

March 9, 2011 Forty-eight Conservation Groups Call on Sen. Barbara Boxer to Oppose Legislation Removing Protection for Wolves

March 7, 2011 Obama Administration Denies Protection to Nevada Butterfly

March 3, 2011 New Bill Would Cripple America’s Most Important Pollution Law

March 2, 2011 Eastern Cougar Declared Officially Extinct; Florida Panther Still Has a Chance If Reintroduced to Okefenokee

March 2, 2011 San Francisco Sued for Killing Endangered Species at Sharp Park Golf Course

March 1, 2011 New EPA Report Debunks Congressional Attacks on Clean Air Act, Demonstrates Law’s Public Health and Economic Benefits

February 28, 2011 North Carolina’s Golden Sedge Plant Receives Critical Habitat Protection

February 24, 2011 Statements by Conservation Groups on San Francisco’s Change of Position on Sharp Park Golf Course Management

February 24, 2011 Report: Nation’s Best Pollution Law Should Combat Global Warming

February 23, 2011 Obama Administration Denies Protection to Plains Bison

February 23, 2011 Lawsuit Filed to Increase Habitat Protection for Nebraska’s Vanishing Salt Creek Tiger Beetle

February 22, 2011 Campaign to Stop Consumption of Endangered Bluefin Tuna Is Heading to Streets, Sushi Restaurants of San Francisco

February 22, 2011 Obama Administration Denies Protection for Three More Endangered Species

February 22, 2011 Southern Rockhopper Penguins Listed as Threatened Species; Climate Change Protections Needed

February 18, 2011 U.S. House Votes to Repeal Clean Air Act Protections

February 18, 2011 Rare Texas Cave Species Get Big Increase in Protected Habitat

February 18, 2011 Obama Administration Delays Protection for Yet Another Endangered Species

February 17, 2011 Statement of Center for Biological Diversity on the Comment by Representative Denny Rehberg that Federal Judge Donald Malloy Should be “on the Endangered Species List”

February 17, 2011 Federal Plan Announced to Protect Grand Canyon From Uranium Mining

February 17, 2011 Government Urged to Finalize Habitat Protection for Sonoma County’s California Tiger Salamander

February 16, 2011 – Obama Administration Denies Endangered Species Act Protection for Dwindling Alabama Shad

February 16, 2011 – House Republicans’ Bill Would Gut Decades of Environmental Protections

February 15, 2011 – Settlement Sets Deadlines for Cleaning up Particulate Air Pollution

February 15, 2011 – New Bill Would Protect Bats, Other Species From Wildlife Diseases

February 15, 2011 – Center for Biological Diversity Statement on Proposed Confirmation of Dan Ashe as Director of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

February 14, 2011 – Lawsuit Filed to Save Lake Tahoe Wildlife Habitat From Logging

February 11, 2011 – Statement From Center for Biological Diversity Executive Director Kierán Suckling on House Republicans’ Continuing Resolution Bill

February 11, 2011 – As World’s Human Population Approaches 7 Billion, Global Species Extinction Crisis Accelerates

February 11, 2011 – Forest Service Plan Threatens More Than 900,000 Acres of Public Lands Near Grand Canyon

February 10, 2011 – President Obama’s Forest Service Tries to Weaken Wildlife Protections in National Forests

February 10, 2011 – Lawsuit Launched to Protect Endangered Whales From Gulf of Mexico Oil Exploration

February 10, 2011 – Florida Panther Reintroduction to Okefenokee Needed for Recovery

February 10, 2011 – First Peer-reviewed Study of Sharp Park: Removing Golf Course, Creating New Public Park Is Least Costly, Best Option

February 9, 2011 – Appeal Filed to Save Tejon Ranch, Condor Habitat

February 9, 2011 – Killer Bat Disease Reaches North Carolina as Swath of Epidemic Widens Rapidly

February 8, 2011 – Pacific Walrus Found Imperiled by Global Warming But Left Without Protections

February 8, 2011 – Arroyo Toad, Rare Southern California Lily Get Big Increases in Habitat Protection

February 7, 2011 – Lawsuit Asks Federal Court to Ensure Public Interest Is Represented in Rosemont Mine Process

February 7, 2011 – Endangered Sea Turtles Saved From Capture in Hawaii Swordfish Fishery

February 4, 2011 – Lawsuit Launched to Protect Pacific Waters for Endangered Leatherback Sea Turtles Threatened by Fishing Gear, Climate Change

February 3, 2011 – Shell Halts Plans to Drill in Heart of Polar Bear’s Alaska Habitat

February 3, 2011 – Arctic Sea Ice Hits Historic Low Just As Congress Moves Against Controls on Global Warming

February 3, 2011 – After Closed-door Meeting With Major Polluters, Upton Moves to Repeal Clean Air Act Protections

February 2, 2011 – Endangered Mexican Wolves Increase in Southwest

February 2, 2011 – Deadly Bat Disease Expands in Midwest

February 2, 2011 – Feds Will Reevaluate Endangered Status of Longfin Smelt

February 1, 2011 – Livestock Growers, Counties Withdraw Lawsuit to Eradicate Gray Wolves From New Mexico

February 1, 2011 – Agencies Refuse to Raise Paltry Fee for Destructive Cattle Grazing on 258 Million Acres of Public Land

January 31, 2011 – Court Orders Redo of Federal ORV Plan for Millions of Acres in California’s West Mojave Desert

January 31, 2011 – Lawsuit Filed Against Interior Department Over San Juan River Coal Pollution

January 31, 2011 – Wyoming Senator Moves to Gut Long List of Environmental Protections

January 27, 2011 – Endangered Species Act Protection Sought for Klamath River Chinook Salmon

January 26, 2011 – Plan for Delta Water Use Should End Big Agriculture Takeover of State Water Project, Groups Say

January 26, 2011 – Report: Federal Land Managers’ Failure to Close Caves Leaves Millions of Bats in West Vulnerable to Fast-moving, Deadly Disease

January 26, 2011 – Study: Peril From Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista Groundwater Pumping Nears San Pedro River

January 25, 2011 – Obama Plan to Eliminate Oil Subsidies a Good First Step, But “Clean Energy” Shouldn’t Include Coal, Nuclear, Biofuels or Natural Gas

January 25, 2011 – Suit Filed to Protect One of Nevada’s Largest Bat Roosts, National Park

January 25, 2011 – Two Georgia Counties Asked to Enforce State Wildlife Laws at Rattlesnake Roundups

January 25, 2011 – Lawsuit Seeks Protections for 82 Corals Facing Extinction

January 21, 2011 – Environmental Report Card: Obama Gets “C-” for First Half of Term

January 20, 2011 – Landmark Lawsuit Filed to Protect Hundreds of Rare Species From Pesticides

January 19, 2011 – Snowmobile Plan Challenged to Protect Wildlife, Quiet Recreation

January 19, 2011 – Coalition of Clean Air Groups Brings Actions Against Federal Government for Its Failure to Reduce Air Pollution in Iconic National Parks

January 19, 2011 – Two Colorful Mussel Species Proposed for Federal Protection

January 19, 2011 – Obama Administration Refuses to Reform Public-lands Grazing Fee

January 18, 2011 – Lawsuit Filed to Stop Release of Toxic Metals at Wisconsin’s Flambeau Mine

January 18, 2011 – Two Public-land Grazing Plans Dismissed to Protect Arizona Wildlife

January 18, 2011 – World-renowned Chefs Join Call to Boycott Bluefin Tuna

January 14, 2011 – Lawsuit Filed to Block Minnesota Agency’s $4 Million Loan to PolyMet Mining Company

January 13, 2011 – Lawsuit Seeks to Protect Polar Bear Critical Habitat From Oil Development

January 13, 2011 – Habitat Protection Sought for Endangered Delmarva Peninsula Fox Squirrel

January 13, 2011 – EPA Vetoes Permit for Largest Mountaintop-removal Mine Ever Proposed in Appalachia

January 12, 2011 – EPA Capitulates to Timber, Biomass Industries on Global Warming Pollution

January 11, 2011 – In Memory of Federal Judge John M. Roll (1948-2011)

January 11, 2011 – Oil Spill Commission Releases Safety Recommendations

January 11, 2011 – Court Blocks Federal Effort to Cut San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Habitat Protection

January 11, 2011 – Emergency Protection Sought for Disappearing Miami Blue Butterfly

January 7, 2011 – San Francisco River Would Be Protected From ORVs in Proposed Gila National Forest Plan

January 5, 2011 – New Report: Sierra Nevada Among Top 10 Places Whose Species Are Threatened by Climate Change

January 5, 2011 – New Report: Southwest Deserts Among Top 10 Places Whose Species Are Threatened by Climate Change

January 5, 2011 – New Report: Arctic Sea Ice Among Top 10 Places Whose Species Are Threatened by Climate Change

January 3, 2011 – Lawsuit Opposes Wildlife Agency’s Approval of Massive Newhall Ranch Project

Press Releases from WildEarth Guardians:
Rare Texas Lizard Could Gain Endangered Status
Monday, May 23, 2011
Government Issues Positive Finding on Guardians’ Petition

Groups Formally Call Upon New Mexican Officials to Ban Traps
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Cruel, Indiscriminate, and Harmful to Wildlife and Recreationists

Government Report: Less Than 1% of Cattle Killed by Native Carnivores and Domestic Dogs
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Taxpayers Fleeced by Federal, Predator-Control Program

Coalition Offers Reward in Case of Wolf Illegally Poisoned in Colorado
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Offering a reward of as much as $4,500 for information leading to the identification

Hope for Endangered Species Act Candidates
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
WildEarth Guardians and Interior Reach Settlement on Endangered Species Listings

Cattle Growers Fight Clean Water Rules in New Mexico
Monday, May 9, 2011
Hearing in Santa Fe to Consider a Stay of Outstanding Waters

Conservation Groups Challenge Wolf Delisting Rider
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Lawsuit Seeks to Restore Federal Protection to Gray Wolves in Northern Rockies

Group Charges Pearce with Perpetrating Hoax over Lizard Listing
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Drilling would be Unaffected by Species’ Conservation in More than 99 Percent of Permian Basin

Interior Withdraws Illegal Endangered Species Memo
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Group Urges Obama Administration to Leave Flawed Bush Policies Behind

Lawsuit Challenges Uranium Development in New Mexico
Friday, April 29, 2011
WildEarth Guardians demands transparency in Forest Service Permitting.

Arapahoe Snowfly on the Brink of Extinction
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
USFWS Initiates Endangered Species Act Status Review

Conservation groups oppose “Scorched Earth” Border Patrol plan for Rio Grande
Monday, April 25, 2011
Mowing Plan Would Eliminate Wildlife Habitat Along 91 Miles of the Rio

Easter Bunny: Hopping Toward Extinction?
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Group Presses Forward on Protection for Rare Southwestern Jackrabbit

A Step Up for Wolves in the Southwest, on the Heels of Setbacks Up North
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Legal Settlement Reached for Wolf on Gila National Forest

Conservation Groups Set for Showdown Over West Fork Wolves
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Small Group of Wolves Living in Remote Area Is in the Crosshairs

All Press Releases

Press Releases from Western Watersheds Project:

April 19, 2011
News Release BLM Temporarily Halts Fence Construction On The “Fast Tracked” Ivanpah Solar Power Plant

April 14, 2011
News Release WWP Wins Court Ordered Deadline For Removal of Livestock From 450,000 Acres of Sage-Grouse Habitat On Public Lands in Southwest Idaho

March 1, 2011
News Release WWP Wins A Federal Court Injunction Stopping Livestock Grazing on over 450,000 Acres of Public Land in Southern Idaho

January 25, 2011
News Release Suit Filed to Protect One of Nevada’s Largest Bat Roosts, National Park

January 18, 2011
News Release Obama Administration Refuses to Reform Public-lands Grazing Fee

January 17, 2011
News Release WWP Sues to Stop Fast Tracked Power Plant in CA

January 7, 2011
News Release Federal Court Tosses BLM Grazing Decisions

December 30, 2010
News Release Livestock Grazing Halted to Protect Steelhead On a Quarter-million Acres of the Malheur National Forest

December 13, 2010
News Release Tortoise Takes Place in Line For Federal Listing

Western Watersheds Project and WildEarth Guardians are suing the the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in federal court over two decisions the BLM’s Bishop Field Office made to reauthorize cattle grazing on four public land allotments in the Bodie Hills just north of Mono Lake despite their impacts to imperiled Bi-State sage-grouse.

News Release Conservationists Challenge Grazing in Bodie Hills to Protect Mono Basin Sage-Grouse

_________________________________

The Endangered Species Act series of articles:

Endangered Species Act…it ain’t what you think it is — Part 1

Endangered Species Act — Part 2– this land is not your land

Endangered Species Act – Part 3 – Never swat a fly

Background info on Endangered Species Act:

Endangered Species Act — an Introduction

Endangered Species Act — Which Animals and Plants are “Threatened” or “Endangered”?

Endangered Species Act — Section 7 Consultation

 
 
 
 

 

Endangered Species Act — USF&W Introduction and Key Sections

Endangered Species Act — Definition of ”Harm”and “Take”

Endangered Species Act–Listing and Critical Habitat

Endangered Species Act–Habitat Conservation Plans

_________________________________________________________

News about litigious environment group activities:

Center for Biological Diversity at war with US Military

Center for Biological Diversity demands Rosemont Mine site be included in protected habitat for frog

Judge puts WildEarth Guardian endangered species agreement on hold

Center for Biological Diversity fights imperiled species deal

Stop The Drilling! A Lizard Is Imperiled

Desert Pupfish Forces Border Agents to Patrol on Foot

New high recorded in frivolous environmental litigation

EPA Doles-Out Taxpayer Dollars to Environmentalist Activist Groups

Legislation to stop huge legal fee payments to environmental litigation factories poised to be introduced

Environmental groups bury feds with Endangered Species petitions

Endangered Species Act…it ain’t what you think it is — Part 1

Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

Most people probably see the Endangered Species Act as being all about saving polar bears, bald eagles, and so on.

Go to any one of the web sites of groups seeking to protect endangered species and you will see pictures of polar bears, wolves, pretty birds and so forth.

But underneath all those pretty pictures and the good idea of saving polar bears and pretty birds the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has a dark side.

The ESA has become a major weapon in a war between litigious environmental groups and virtually everyone attempting to continue existing uses of land for such things as ranching, or do anything new with land such as mining, power plant construction, building new electric or natural gas transmission lines, constructing solar arrays, land development and road construction.

Virtually all human activity is seen at odds with protecting endangered species by litigious environmental groups.

Given a choice between a new land development or a new power plant or potentially threatening a mouse, the mouse must always prevail.

The ESA in tandem with the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) has also become a major revenue source to litigious environmental groups that exploit structural flaws in the Endangered Species Act to generate millions of dollars in legal fees for their organizations.

ENDANGERED SPECIES, SUB-SPECIES AND “DISTINCT POPULATION SEGMENTS”:

The term “endangered species” means any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range other than a species of the Class Insecta determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of this Act would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man.

The term “species” includes any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.

The Endangered Species Act is not just about protecting “species”. The way the law is worded, protection can also be sought for “subspecies” and for “distinct” populations of species of plants or animals.

Contrary to the belief that a mass extinction of “species” is occurring, of course caused by human activity, new “subspecies” are being discovered almost daily.

It is a sure bet that wherever there is a new project that will disturb the environment being proposed, a species, sub-species or distinct population of a species will be “discovered” to only live at the site of that project.

Virtually every population of a plant or animal that lives in a particular habitat can be claimed as a “subspecies” because it lives where it lives.

The desert tortoises that live in the Mohave Desert are claimed to be a different subspecies than the ones that live in the Sonoran Desert.

The squirrels that live on top of Mount Graham are claimed to be a different subspecies than the squirrels living on adjacent mountains.

The pygmy owls that live in southern Arizona are clauimed to be a different subspecies than the ones that live across the border in Sonora.

The wolves that live in the northern Rocky Mountains are claimed to be a different subspecies than the ones that live in Arizona.

Arguably the tree lizards that live at your house could be claimed to be a new subspcies if they are a different color than the same species of tree lizard that lives across the street.

The “distinct population” argument expands the scope of the Endangered Species Act.

The squirrels that live on one mountain top are “distinct” from the squirrels on the nearby mountain..

The Chiricahua Leopard Frog that lives in a stock pond over by Arivaca is “distinct” from the frogs that live in a stock pond 30 miles away.

The pygmy owls living near Tucson are “distinct” from their kin in Mexico…and anyway…we all know Mexico could care less about protecting endangered species so even though there are lots of pygmy owls in Mexico, we must protect the Tucson owls just in case.

Thus all those “distinct” populations must also be protected.

MASS LISTING PETITIONS

A species is added to the list when it is determined to be endangered or threatened because of any of the following factors:

the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;

overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;

disease or predation;

the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms;

the natural or manmade factors affecting its survival

 
To the maximum extent practicable, within 90 days after receiving the petition of an interested person under section 553(e) of title 5, United States Code, to add a species to, or to remove a species from, either of the lists published under subsection (c), the Secretary shall make a finding as to whether the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. If such a petition is found to present such information, the Secretary shall promptly commence a review of the status of the species concerned. The Secretary shall promptly publish each finding made under this subparagraph in the Federal Register. (B) Within 12 months after receiving a petition that is found under subparagraph (A) to present substantial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted, the Secretary shall make one of the following findings: (i) The petitioned action is not warranted, in which case the Secretary shall promptly publish such finding in the Federal Register. (ii) The petitioned action is warranted, in which case the Secretary shall promptly publish in the Federal Register a general notice and the complete text of a proposed regulation to implement such action in accordance with paragraph (5). 6 (iii) The petitioned action is warranted, but that— (I) the immediate proposal and timely promulgation of a final regulation implementing the petitioned action in accordance with paragraphs (5) and (6) is precluded by pending proposals to determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened species….

 

Under the Endangered Species Act a petition to list a species or subspecies gets filed with US Fish and Wildlife.

US Fish and Wildlife has 90 days to respond and act on a listing petition.

So what happens when US Fish and Wildlife doesn’t have the budget to deal with petitions asking for 215 species or subspecies to be listed? They fail to act within the 90 day period.

And here is where the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) jumps in. The petitioning group sues US Fish and Wildlife when it fails to act within the 90 day window…and of course the petitioning outfit is right…and thus entitled to legal fees.

That’s not the first shot at legal fees under EAJA.

If, after the 90 day decision is made US Fish and Wildlife doesn’t meet its 12 month deadline…bingo another lawsuit.

And then if the species is listed and US Fish and Wildlife does not immediately declare a “critical habitat”…here comes the third lawsuit.

So how do you generate a lot of EAJA legal fees…file listing petitions for hundreds of plants and animals and force US Fish and Wildlife into default.

The litigious environmental groups claim mass petitioning for species is necessary because of global warming. Thousands of species will vanish tomorrow if the federal government doesn’t act right now!

Sounds great doesn’t it?

Open up your checkbook as well and save all those thousands of insects and whatever that are included in the mass listings petitions.

It used to be they passed the basket in church and you gave to save your soul.

Now you can give to save the Earth from those Satanic humans who want to build homes and other stuff.

Was that what the Endangered Species Act was all about?

_________________________________________________

The Endangered Species Act series of articles:

Endangered Species Act…it ain’t what you think it is — Part 1

Endangered Species Act — Part 2– this land is not your land

Endangered Species Act – Part 3 – Never swat a fly

Background info on Endangered Species Act:

Endangered Species Act — an Introduction

Endangered Species Act — Which Animals and Plants are “Threatened” or “Endangered”?

Endangered Species Act — Section 7 Consultation

 
 
 
 
 

 

Endangered Species Act — USF&W Introduction and Key Sections

Endangered Species Act — Definition of ”Harm”and “Take”

Endangered Species Act–Listing and Critical Habitat

Endangered Species Act–Habitat Conservation Plans

_________________________________________________________

News about litigious environment group activities:

Center for Biological Diversity at war with US Military

Center for Biological Diversity demands Rosemont Mine site be included in protected habitat for frog

Judge puts WildEarth Guardian endangered species agreement on hold

Center for Biological Diversity fights imperiled species deal

Stop The Drilling! A Lizard Is Imperiled

 

 

New high recorded in frivolous environmental litigation

EPA Doles-Out Taxpayer Dollars to Environmentalist Activist Groups

Legislation to stop huge legal fee payments to environmental litigation factories poised to be introduced

Environmental groups bury feds with Endangered Species petitions

Endangered Species Act — Part 2– this land is not your land

Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

Endangered Species Act —  Critical or Protected  Habitat Designation

The next step in using the Endangered Species Act as a weapon to throttle virtually all human activity in the country is the designation of critical or protected  habitat.

If the species or subspecies or “distinct” population is endangered oe threatened…obviously the plants or animals need a “place” to live without being harmed. That  is the “critical or protected habitat”.

But first one must understand the definition of “harm” that threatens or endangers the plant or animal.

After a convoluted process US Fish and Wildlife will issue a “biological opinion” defining what it believes is threatening or endangered the plant or animal.

This is mostly a non-scientific exercise in speculation….this “may” that “might’ harm the plant or animal.

When you look at petitions for listing in the first place, you will see the alleged “harm” type activities that must be stopped…cattle grazing, global warming, road construction, obstructing natural migratory paths,  wind turbine blades turning, whatever.  If you really want to read some good science fantasy, read this stuff.

Here is just one example from the Sonoran Desert Tortoise decision from US Fish and Wildlife to make the turtle a candidate for listing as an endangered species:

Development as a Barrier

Urban development, canals, and transportation infrastructure, such
as roads and railroads, disrupt ecological processes, increase
mortality in animals, promote the degradation, loss, and isolation of
wildlife habitat, and cause fragmentation of populations (Sonoran desert tortoise populations are island-like in their distribution, meaning they are generally concentrated on the bajadas and hillsides of mountains, and less-
distributed within the valleys between these areas. As a result, they
may be particularly vulnerable to large-scale disturbances that affect
the suitability of intervening habitat.Factors that affect inter-population dynamics in Sonoran desert tortoises include distance between populations, physical size of habitat areas, sizes of source populations, and the ease of which intervening areas can be crossed by dispersing individuals.

The effect of potential barriers to inter-population movements of
Sonoran desert tortoises (discussed above in the Species Information
section) is not equal across their range. The ability for the Sonoran
desert tortoise to move among populations is also important for
allowing shifts in their range in response to climate change, and to
promote recolonization after fire or other regional disturbances. Dispersal of Sonoran desert tortoises between populations through sparse desertscrub is less likely in very hot, dry valleys in the Lower Colorado subdivision of Sonoran desertscrub and populations in mountain ranges, such as the Eagletails, Maricopas, and Sand Tanks, have likely been existing in isolation for a long time.

Genetic analysis of blood samples collected from Sonoran desert
tortoises in Saguaro National Park in Pima County, Arizona, suggest
that intermediate gene flow still occurs, or occurred recently, among
isolated populations at the rate of at least 1 migrant per generation
(12-15 years). However, thousands of acres of tortoise habitat have been recently lost to large residential developments in the foothills of the Santa Catalina, Tortolita, Rincon, and Tucson Mountains in the greater Tucson metropolitan area.

The importance of allowing movement of individual tortoises between
populations is observable by evaluating historical gene flow. Edwards
et al. (2004, p. 485) used seven microsatellite DNA markers to examine
the genetic relationships of tortoises in eight populations in southern
and central Arizona, in the vicinity of Tucson and Phoenix. They also
calculated migration rates among these populations to estimate
historical rates of gene flow, and, therefore, the importance of
individuals moving between populations (Edwards et al. 2004, p. 485).
Edwards et al. (2004, p. 496) found no evidence of recent loss of
genetic diversity that would indicate genetic bottlenecking that could
occur from lack of mixing among Sonoran desert tortoise populations in
southern Arizona. However, the authors acknowledged that a small sample
size and small number of genetic markers (alleles) used in their
analyses would likely not detect this genetic effect. Despite reduced
mixing among populations, Sonoran desert tortoises may be capable of
maintaining small effective population sizes (still viable populations,
despite small size), even with a low degree of genetic diversity
(Edwards et al. 2004, p. 496). However, Edwards et al. (2004, p. 496)
also stated, “Because effective population sizes of Sonoran desert
tortoises are small, dispersal events probably play an important role
in the long-term maintenance of these populations.” This suggests that
while dispersal and movement of tortoises may be rare, they may be
important events. Therefore, barriers that prevent this movement could
result in significant genetic impacts, by preventing mixing of
populations over the long term.

The effect of urban barriers limits inter-population movements of
Sonoran desert tortoises resulting in “closed” populations. Experts
believe that an isolated population of Sonoran desert tortoises that
experiences significant declines in population size could not overcome
losses simply through an increase in reproduction, based on evidence of
past gene flow (Edwards et al. 2004, p. 496). Therefore, if a
population were to experience a catastrophic decline as a result of a
stochastic event such as drought, the immigration of new tortoises from
adjacent populations would be necessary for population recovery
(Edwards et al. 2004, p. 496). Urban barriers effectively prevent this
immigration of new tortoises, resulting in closed, or isolated, Sonoran
desert tortoise populations, which are now evident within the
metropolitan areas of Phoenix and Tucson. Mountains and associated
foothills with Sonoran desertscrub habitat occur in these urban areas,
and although development within this habitat has been restricted by
zoning laws, development is still allowed to virtually surround the
bases of the mountains, isolating tortoise populations. Examples of
this development include the Union Hills, White Tank Mountains,
McDowell Mountains, Black Mountains, and South Mountain Park in the
Phoenix metropolitan area and Tumamoc Hill, Tucson Mountains, and
Saguaro National Park West in the Tucson metropolitan area (Edwards et
al. 2004, p. 496). Zylstra and Swann (2009, pp. 10-11) remarked that
the increasing negative effect of human-made barriers on Sonoran desert
tortoise movements between populations may require translocation
(moving animals out of harm’s way into more secured areas of suitable
habitat), or occasional augmentation of populations with tortoises from
other populations, to remain viable.

Translocation has been considered an option, and implemented to
some degree for Mojave desert tortoise conservation and recovery. In
assessing the viability of translocation as a recovery and conservation
tool for the Mojave population, concern has been expressed for
potentially moving tortoises into areas where threats to desert
tortoise populations remain, which could negate any conservation value
associated with the action. Our (Mojave) Desert Tortoise Recovery
Office stresses that translocation of tortoises should not occur under
such circumstances, emphasizing the need to address threats which
impact all tortoises regardless of origin.

Translocation of desert tortoises has received mixed reviews in the
scientific literature and, as noted, may not be a viable option for the
Sonoran desert tortoise. There are several factors that must be
considered in deciding whether or not to translocate tortoises into new
areas, including temporary or longer-term holding conditions of
tortoises; the propensity for post-release, long-distance movements;
drought; the status of receiving population; and disease screening,
among other factors (Berry 1986a, p. 113; Field et al. 2007, pp. 232,
237, 240, 242; Martel et al. 2009, p. 218). Translocated Mojave desert
tortoises have been shown to settle at release sites, travel in
straight lines for substantial distances, or disperse up to
approximately 4 miles (6.4 km) (Berry 1986a, p. 113). Translocated
desert tortoises may disrupt social hierarchies in receiving
populations by displacing residents or they may be displaced themselves
(Berry 1986a, p. 113). Howland and Rorabaugh (2002, p. 341) suggest
that translocation of Sonoran desert tortoises may not be a viable tool
for conservation because most intact Sonoran desert tortoise
populations in Arizona are currently considered relatively healthy, and
likely occur at or near carrying capacity. Mullen and Ross (1997, pp.
145-146) found that translocated Mojave desert tortoises have a lower
survivorship than resident individuals (especially when moved during
the summer versus during the spring), but that negative effects
commonly associated with translocations are generally short-lived (1-2
years).

A 2004 population viability analysis for the Mojave desert tortoise
recommended that a minimum of 50,000 individuals are required for a 50
percent chance of persistence for 500 years, yet extrapolation of
Sonoran desert tortoise population data from southern Arizona suggest
that most populations number less than 20,000 individuals, with some as
low as several hundred (Edwards et al. 2004, p. 496). Because the
average generation time of a Sonoran desert tortoise is approximately
12-15 years and much of the urban development is relatively recent, the
full effect of developments as barriers to genetic exchange among
Sonoran desert tortoise populations cannot be fully assessed at this
time (Edwards et al. 2004, p. 486). Edwards et al. (2004, p. 495)
further cautioned that their estimates of gene flow are contingent on
what occurred pre-settlement, and should not be taken as evidence that
natural immigration or emigration still occurs.

In conclusion, the literature documents that urban development and
population growth, roads and highways, canals, railroad tracks, and
other types of development threaten the Sonoran desert tortoise by
creating barriers to movement in Arizona and, perhaps to a lesser
extent, in Sonora, Mexico. The creation of barriers affects the
tortoises’ genetic exchange capacity within and between populations,
which in turn affects their ability to recolonize habitat in the event
of population declines or extirpations, and may lead to isolation and
eventual genetic bottlenecking. This threat acts synergistically with
other factors as discussed above.

[Federal Register: December 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 239)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 78093-78146]

The litanty of threats to plants and animals containined in petitions for endangered species listings and in US Fish and Wildlife decision to list…read like sermons on the evil of huamn activity.

The next step in the process is to throw the net as far and as wide as possible to define where the threatened or endangered plant or animal lives, could live, or once lived.

For prime example, Center for Biological Diversity is pushing for a “critical habitat” designation of most of southern and eastern Arizona for the jaguar.

Not coinci