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 to threatened Middle Columbia River steelhead (MCR steelhead), filed an action against the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service alleging, among other claims, that the Forest Service had taken steelhead ...
Nossaman’s Endangered Species Law & Policy blog focuses on news, events, and policies affecting endangered species issues in California and throughout the United States. Topics include listing and critical habitat decisions, conservation and recovery planning, inter-agency consultation, and related developments in law, policy, and science. We also inform readers about regulatory and legislative developments, as well as key court decisions.
Stay Connected
RSS Feed
Categories
- Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
- Budget
- CEQA
- CESA
- Climate Change
- Congress
- Conservation
- Construction Projects
- Consultation
- Continuing Education
- Court Decisions
- Critical Habitat
- Delisting
- Endangered Species Act
- Event
- Fish & Wildlife Service
- Freedom of Information Act
- Government Administration
- Legal
- Legislation
- Listing
- Litigation
- Migratory Bird
- National Marine Fisheries Service
- NEPA
- Pacific Northwest
- project
- Publications
- Regulatory Reform
- Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
- SEPA
- Speaking Engagements
- Supreme Court
- Texas
- Timberland
- Water Issues