Endangered Species Act

Of course elections matter, and executive branch changes may bring real and meaningful policy change.  But the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) limits the executive branch’s discretion to shape policy by requiring that policy changes be accompanied by a “reasoned explanation” generally set forth in an administrative record. A recent Ninth Circuit decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland — addressing Trump Administration changes to federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) listings — illustrates the guardrails the APA imposes that apply to all executive decision-making.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Decision on Pacific Walrus Illustrates Executive Branch Limits

On Thursday, September 22, 2016, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed a new rule to list the rusty patched bumble bee as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act.[1] The rule would likely mean new restrictions for farmers and other landowners in parts of the 13 states where the bees are currently thought to exist. Specifically, it would prohibit harming or harassing the bees, which could limit the use of certain pesticides and herbicides. These restrictions would be imposed despite uncertain science about current bee populations and threats facing the species. Interested parties now have until November 21, 2016 to comment on the proposed rule and underlying scientific data.
Continue Reading FWS Proposes New Endangered Species Listing: Should Farmers “Bee” Worried?