Wildlife Service says hands are tied by lawsuits
Environmentalists filed a lawsuit on behalf of the northern goshawk for listing as an endangered species
January 3, 2001
Web posted at: 10:14 a.m. EST (1514 GMT)
By Environmental News Network staff
Are environmentalists preventing endangered species from getting protection? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seems to think so.
In November, the service announced a freeze until September on listing more species as federally endangered or threatened.
Why? According to the agency, it's too busy dealing with lawsuits filed by environmental groups.
For some of the nearly 300 species presently under consideration and another 34 proposed to be listed, this suspension could mean extinction.
But the FWS says it has no choice. The lawsuits, explains agency spokesperson Hugh Vickery, "are using up every resource we have. The people who have brought about this flood of lawsuits are not helping endangered species."
The service is besieged by more than 60 lawsuits and has received another 80 notices of intent to sue. More than half of all the lawsuits require the agency to designate "critical habitat" for species already listed as endangered or threatened. But since habitat is already protected under the Endangered Species Act, says Vickery, the lawsuits consume time and resources that could be focused on listing and protecting other species.
Many environmental groups don't agree. For one thing, litigation is the only reason many species get listed in the first place, they say. Of 1,234 plants and animals currently listed, 74 percent are a result of lawsuits or citizen petitions, according to Kieran Suckling, science and policy director of the Center for Biological Diversity in Tucson.
The future of the black-footed ferret, thought to be extinct in 1972, looks promising, thanks to a successful captive breeding program
Nor does a listing often adequately safeguard habitat, he says. A critical habitat designation, on the other hand, protects places where the animal lives as well as areas where it could live.
For species on the brink, that's a vital distinction. Take the endangered ferrunginous pygmy owl, which numbers only 30 in all of Arizona. The Army Corps of Engineers had been providing permits for housing developments on land that was owl habitat. Since no owls could be found there, the corps argued, the land could be developed. After a critical habitat designation, however, development ceased.
While both sides agree that more money could help solve the problem, the ones currently paying the price during this legal logjam are the wait-listed species.
The listing process is notoriously slow already?at least 39 species have gone extinct while waiting for protection. One of the plants currently on hold, a single remaining population of the Ventura marsh milkvetch, was first petitioned to be listed in 1975.
"That's a species that could go extinct because of this," says Suckling. Others in jeopardy include coastal cutthroat trout in the Northwest, the Chiricahua leopard frog in Arizona and the Buena Vista Lake shrew in California.
On Dec. 13, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a formal notice of intent to sue to stop the FWS's moratorium, and this week the center plans to file a lawsuit. Suckling believes the moratorium will be struck down.
"This policy is outrageous," he says. "It's going to get laughed out of court."
**It better get struck down. I'm so sick and tired of everyone complaining about wildlife preserves, etc. Let'em keep building their nice fancy homes, and apartment complexes, and then when all the animals die we can watch them dig up the roads, so they can plant food for them to eat. Dumbasses.
:|
People need to learn to respect their environment, and respect animals homes as well as the homes to plants, etc. Only then will we be able to balance the chain of life.
Environmentalists filed a lawsuit on behalf of the northern goshawk for listing as an endangered species
January 3, 2001
Web posted at: 10:14 a.m. EST (1514 GMT)
By Environmental News Network staff
Are environmentalists preventing endangered species from getting protection? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service seems to think so.
In November, the service announced a freeze until September on listing more species as federally endangered or threatened.
Why? According to the agency, it's too busy dealing with lawsuits filed by environmental groups.
For some of the nearly 300 species presently under consideration and another 34 proposed to be listed, this suspension could mean extinction.
But the FWS says it has no choice. The lawsuits, explains agency spokesperson Hugh Vickery, "are using up every resource we have. The people who have brought about this flood of lawsuits are not helping endangered species."
The service is besieged by more than 60 lawsuits and has received another 80 notices of intent to sue. More than half of all the lawsuits require the agency to designate "critical habitat" for species already listed as endangered or threatened. But since habitat is already protected under the Endangered Species Act, says Vickery, the lawsuits consume time and resources that could be focused on listing and protecting other species.
Many environmental groups don't agree. For one thing, litigation is the only reason many species get listed in the first place, they say. Of 1,234 plants and animals currently listed, 74 percent are a result of lawsuits or citizen petitions, according to Kieran Suckling, science and policy director of the Center for Biological Diversity in Tucson.
The future of the black-footed ferret, thought to be extinct in 1972, looks promising, thanks to a successful captive breeding program
Nor does a listing often adequately safeguard habitat, he says. A critical habitat designation, on the other hand, protects places where the animal lives as well as areas where it could live.
For species on the brink, that's a vital distinction. Take the endangered ferrunginous pygmy owl, which numbers only 30 in all of Arizona. The Army Corps of Engineers had been providing permits for housing developments on land that was owl habitat. Since no owls could be found there, the corps argued, the land could be developed. After a critical habitat designation, however, development ceased.
While both sides agree that more money could help solve the problem, the ones currently paying the price during this legal logjam are the wait-listed species.
The listing process is notoriously slow already?at least 39 species have gone extinct while waiting for protection. One of the plants currently on hold, a single remaining population of the Ventura marsh milkvetch, was first petitioned to be listed in 1975.
"That's a species that could go extinct because of this," says Suckling. Others in jeopardy include coastal cutthroat trout in the Northwest, the Chiricahua leopard frog in Arizona and the Buena Vista Lake shrew in California.
On Dec. 13, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a formal notice of intent to sue to stop the FWS's moratorium, and this week the center plans to file a lawsuit. Suckling believes the moratorium will be struck down.
"This policy is outrageous," he says. "It's going to get laughed out of court."
**It better get struck down. I'm so sick and tired of everyone complaining about wildlife preserves, etc. Let'em keep building their nice fancy homes, and apartment complexes, and then when all the animals die we can watch them dig up the roads, so they can plant food for them to eat. Dumbasses.
:|
People need to learn to respect their environment, and respect animals homes as well as the homes to plants, etc. Only then will we be able to balance the chain of life.
:Q
Facebook
Twitter