The U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico granted New Mexico’s motion for summary judgment in a case brought by the Humane Society seeking to invalidate State trapping regulations related to cougars (Puma concolor). Plaintiffs argued that the regulations, which amended existing regulations that authorize trapping of cougars, violate the Endangered Species Act’s … Continue Reading
On November 30, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. California Department of Fish & Wildlife, Case No. S217763 (Nov. 30, 2015). The decision comes at the conclusion of a nearly five-year legal battle over the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (“CDFW”) approval of an environmental … Continue Reading
Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), it is unlawful to “pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill . . . any migratory bird” protected by the Act. 16 U.S.C. 703(a) & 704(a). In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that although the MBTA … Continue Reading
In an article forthcoming in the Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Dr. Dennis Murphy and I examine a proposal by the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to amend the existing regulations that implement the interagency consultation process set out in Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act by codifying their pre-existing practice … Continue Reading
The Trinity River Hatchery, which is operated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and funded by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, has a production capacity of approximately 40 million salmonid eggs. Operations at the Hatchery are intended to mitigate for lost salmonid habitat due to the construction and operation of various water projects. … Continue Reading
On January 31, 2013, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a proposed rule to regulate the impact of United States Navy exercises on marine mammals. The rule would affect areas off the Southern California, Atlantic, and Hawaiian coastlines. The proposed rule is in response to the Navy’s request for authorization to incidentally take (e.g., harm … Continue Reading
In a recent decision out of Oregon, a United States District Court found that plaintiffs do not need to prove a likelihood of future take to prevail on a Section 9 claim. Stout v. U.S. Forest Service, ECF No. 112 (D. Or. April 24, 2012). Plaintiffs, ranchers who had been partially enjoined from grazing on certain banks because of potential impacts … Continue Reading
