California Sues Bush Administration To Save Endangered Species Act

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California is suing the Bush administration to block last-minute endangered species regulations that are intended to reduce input from federal scientists, state Attorney General Jerry Brown announced Tuesday.

Brown said the president is trying to gut the Endangered Species Act before he leaves office next month.

"Unfortunately, the Bush administration has had an antipathy to using sound science," Brown said in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "This is the latest assault as Bush goes out the door. It's intolerable."

The lawsuit was filed late Monday in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.

The Interior Department issued the revised rules this month. They allow federal agencies to issue permits for mining, logging and similar activities without getting a review from federal wildlife biologists if their own research shows the project will not affect plants and animals.

The changes also block agencies from using the Endangered Species Act to consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on ecosystems when reviewing projects such as new roads or coal plants on federal land.

Interior Department spokeswoman Tina Kreisher said the revised rules will continue to protect threatened and endangered species and noted that the law says federal agencies will ensure no listed animals are killed.

The lawsuit also names the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Marine Fisheries Service as defendants.

Story continues below

advertisement

Brown is asking the court to block the new rules, which could give the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama time to review them.

Obama has said he would work to reverse the changes. Because they take effect before he is sworn in, Obama would have to restart a lengthy rule-making process that could last up to a year.

Three environmental groups also have filed lawsuits challenging the revisions, which they say erode protections for endangered species.

Current rules require biologists in the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to sign off on dams, power plants, timber sales and other projects even when it is determined they are not likely to harm species.

The revised rules will reduce the independent reviews that government scientists have performed for 35 years. The idea is to accelerate a process that developers and other federal agencies have blamed for delays and cost increases.

Between 1998 and 2002, the Fish and Wildlife Service conducted 300,000 consultations for projects proposed for federal land. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which evaluates projects affecting marine species, conducts about 1,300 reviews each year.

California's lawsuit alleges that the Department of Interior failed to adequately consider public comments critical of the revisions before it finalized the rules.

California is home to 310 plant and animal species listed as endangered or threatened by the federal government, more than any state except Hawaii, according to the complaint.

Comments

[DAdvocate123]

I would personally kill every Polar Bear on Earth if it would bring us a permanent $30 barrel oil.

[Exusian]

But since it wouldn't, what's your Plan B, skippy?

[bluesvues]

Try doing a bit of research on Peak Oil before you load your gun. Do the research.

[doublels]

Very deeeep, intelligent comment (I say sarcastically). Typical. As long as something saves you money...ev­erything else be dammed (sic). Very republican of you..here, here.

[Beowolf741]

Go Jerry! We need a lot more ECOTOPIA and ECOTOPIA EMERGING! I'm not actually advocating secession like these two books fictional story lines deal with but the deep concern for ecology I'm all for.

[Gasparilla]

It would help if we stop insisting that we can take in millions of immigrants and then pretend it has no effect on the environment. A lot of the growth in California is from outside the country. And I already know the comments. Heard em all.

[pennybear7777]

Hear, hear!! California, the USA, and heck, the planet Earth has only one environmental problem: Over population.

[bluesvues]

It's not overpopulation, it's underthink­ing...unde­rreasoning­...underre­searching.­...underca­ring...und­erutilizin­g the talk we talk about Christianity and what Jesus really said (blessed are the peaceMAKERS, care for the poor, the elderly, each other; walk lightly on the earth I gave you; and so much more.)

Change those unders to overs and walk the religion we talk (contrary to popular belief, Jesus did NOT concentrate his ministry on war/decimation of the earth/illegal aliens/gay marriage/capital punishment/abortion and how to punish more those with whom we disagree) and we'd be well on the way to solving the Earth's - and our challenges.

Peace. Stand up. Do the research.

[surlybird]

So Cheney wants to go Condor hunting, what's the big deal. I mean aren't there like a few of them. Geez let the man bag his Condor.

[christopherflynn]

I'd have rather had cheney's father bag a condom the day he was conceived.­..

[surlybird]

Oh Snap!

I do that rite?

[MaybeMilo]

Bush is gonna burn in H3ll.

...but not soon enough.

[Pat15]

you cant blame the republicans we elected these SOB twice ..Look what they have done to the nation ...literal­ly destroyed it ..& we deserve it ...Republi­cans have nothing to offer to its citizens except the wedge issues god, guns, gay, abortion & on on . It took us 8 long years to realise the misery republicans have heaped on our nation...M­ay be we learned something I doubt it ..Just wait a few years ...They will be back ... .

[Phalanxman]

Excellent point, Pat. All people deserve exactly the government they get. I've said it for years.

[MNmommy]

Thank you AG Brown!

[M1]

Jerry Brown is keeping it real. He would make a great President.

[Phalanxman]

He ran, I think in '92. I supported him. He did not do well nationally. He may run for California governor again.

[jsgaetano]

I've been wondering how long everyone in the entire government would defer to this chump, rather than upholding rule of law.

The most amazing thing of all was how the far right extremists convinced America that the word of GWB trumped everything else, existing laws be damned.

[glockman]

Would those laws include property rights? You know, the ones that are trampled to save some three toed lizard, or some smelly newt?

[Querent]

No.

[Phalanxman]

None of your "rights" are absolute. This includes your so-called "property rights." If you don't like using your property responsibly, then divest yourself of it.

[bluesvues]

Whilst commenting on property rights, have you had a moment to go over Eminent Domain during this administration's assualt on the everyday person?

[fran-pan]

thank you Jerry Brown. Ithink you would make a terrific president.­. thanks for being the voice of sanity..

[LogicNow]

It's about time someone sues this SOB. And this is the least of his crimes.

[DougIndeap]

Actually, the recent revisions largely make commonsense changes to agency procedures to eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic review and drains on agency resources when the risk of adverse impacts on endangered species is remote. When there is the slightest realistic risk, the procedures remain as they are.

The exception is the revision to preclude agency review of the impact of their actions on species through climate change. On that, the agencies concluded--rightly or wrongly--that Congress never intended the Endangered Species Act to require federal agencies to regulate global warming. The courts and/or Congress will--and should--resolve that one.

[CalJane]

Oh yes we've seen this unnessary bureaucratic review all through this administration and look at where it's gotten us.

[DougIndeap]

I'm no fan of Bush--far from it. But the US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, which adopted this recent rule, largely got it right--trimming back administrative process when it truly is unnecessary and just a waste of time and effort. Some, though, see any reduction in process as a reduction in protection for the resource. It just ain't always so. In this instance, the agencies made some commonsense changes, little more. The rhetoric of the headlines and press releases is far removed from the reality. I'm afraid that in this instance, Jerry is doing more pandering than good.

[TJCole]

Jerry Brown is great and and an example of how our system was designed to work...

That's why these radical right wing usurpers hate him...they hate democracy, and the right of the people "to petition the government for a redress of grievances­...!"

You go Jerry...gi­ve'em hell...

[GORGOROTH]

To me, this is the epitome of evil. Humans need to do everything possible to save endangered species from extinction but Mr.Bush and his cronies are doing all they can to make sure that poor, defenseless animals do not get in the way of big business greed disguised as progress. Future generations are being cheated from being able to enjoy and live in a healthy world with a diversity of creatures as Mother Nature intended. It's bad enough what's happening with the destruction of the all-important Rain Forests which are the lungs of planet Earth, without adding more threats to life on this planet. People need to wake up and defend those who cannot defend themselves from the infringement of mankind! We are treating this planet like it's disposable and there will be a hefty price to pay as we lose species after species. Taken from us forever by the ignorance of Man and men like President Bush. Frightening and utterly sad.

[tompoe]

What government agency is going to defend Bush regulations once Obama takes office? Brown is bringing a lawsuit, which is a good thing. But, I don't understand why a company would rely on "bad" regulations, regulations marked for reversal, and enacting a business strategy that calls for taking court action to try and move their project forward, based on Bush's "bad" regulations. Let's just put an asterisk next to all suspect regulations, and have corporate media notify the public. Sort of like killing two birds with one stone. Bush regulations get dumped, and corporate media has to act like responsible news media.

[SolarPowerGuy]

"I don't understand why a company would rely on 'bad' regulations, regulations marked for reversal, and enacting a business strategy that calls for taking court action to try and move their project forward, based on Bush's 'bad' regulation­s."

Well, I hope you don't suffer from the misconception that corporations won't grab every advantage they can, out of some sense of preserving their good reputations. Most have no conscience, and they know that their customers will buy their stuff no matter what kind of lawsuits they get involved in.

So now, what's really going on here? GOP supporters get SOME time to steal SOME wealth from America's resource trust. The GOP is also kneecapping Obama on his way into office.

Will Obama reverse Bush's executive orders? Yes, but it will cost him some political capital to do so.

It will also take TIME. "Because they take effect before he is sworn in, Obama would have to restart a lengthy rule-making process that could last up to a year."

Twelve months is plenty of time for developers, and logging and mining interests, to run with the ball. And they can operate with impunity, unless judges can step in to issue injunctions, pending Obama's reversal of Bush's policy. Can they? Would they? Would challenges quickly find their way up to GOP-stacked appeals courts or even the Supreme Court?

[bluesvues]

Defend Bush regulations??? I have to say, wish it would work like that. But if the word 'corporate' is in front of it and it big, well...If you take a look at virtually all the heads of the agencies tasked with regulating­/overseein­g the safety, health & well-being of Food/Water­/Air/Wildl­ife, you will find behind almost every, single desk, an ex-(I use the 'ex' only semantically) scientist, ex-attorney, ex-employee of one of the big corporations who are creating the regulations - to suit them and their profit. Think the cleanup in Tennessee is going to be done properly (read: safe for the people and things living there)? Sure. "Clean Coal" is what caused it. And it isn't even being covered by mainstream (Liberal Media? That's a laugh!) Monsanto walks into the FDA and says, "hey, this chemical is okay." And after the FDA bows respectfully, it says, "okay." Ever wonder why cancers and other diseases have increased so dramatically?

Peace. Do the Research.