Latest news with #EndangeredSpeciesAct
CBS News
a day ago
- Politics
- CBS News
Florida agency asks court to overturn judge's decisions on protecting manatees in northern Indian River Lagoon
Describing the case as having "exceptional importance," the Florida Department of Environmental Protection this week argued a federal appeals court should overturn decisions that required the agency to take a series of steps to protect manatees in the northern Indian River Lagoon. The department filed a 56-page brief and an accompanying motion to "expedite" the case at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. It is fighting a ruling by U.S. District Judge Carlos Mendoza that the department violated the federal Endangered Species Act and an order that included a moratorium on constructing and installing septic systems around the northern Indian River Lagoon, which is primarily in Brevard County. The brief disputes that the department, which in recent years gained permitting authority over septic systems, has violated the Endangered Species Act. Also, the brief contends the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission — not the Department of Environmental Protection — is constitutionally responsible for wildlife-related issues. "This case is of exceptional importance because the district court's injunction compels the wrong agency to create new government programs and commandeers that same agency to enforce federal law," the brief said. The environmental group Bear Warriors United in 2022 filed the lawsuit against the department, after Florida had a record 1,100 manatee deaths in 2021, with the largest number, 358, in Brevard County. The lawsuit argued, in part, that sewage discharges into the lagoon led to the demise of seagrass, a key food source for manatees, and resulted in starvation deaths and other harm to the animals. Mendoza in April ruled the department violated the Endangered Species Act and followed in May with the order that included a moratorium on new septic tanks in the area and other measures, such as requiring the establishment of biomedical-assessment and supplemental-feeding programs for manatees in the area. Septic tanks discharge nitrogen that can cause harmful algae blooms in waterways. Also, Mendoza directed the state to seek what is known as an "incidental take" permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. That process would include the state developing a conservation plan, which could provide "permanent protection and management of habitat for the species," according to information about such permits on the federal agency's website. The Department of Environmental Protection appealed to the Atlanta-based appellate court and unsuccessfully sought a stay that would have at least temporarily put Mendoza's order on hold. It followed on Monday with the 56-page brief. The brief raised a series of issues, including contending that Bear Warriors United did not have legal standing to pursue the case. "Plaintiff's theory of causation turns on a lengthy, convoluted and speculative chain of events in which DEP (the Department of Environmental Protection) issues permits for septic tanks, the tanks are installed and used by third parties, those septic tanks release excessive pollutants into the lagoon, the pollutants combine with preexisting legacy pollutants to harm manatees' food sources, the manatees are injured or killed from emaciation, and plaintiff's members then see the injured manatees and face injury to their recreational or business interests," the department's attorneys wrote. "This chain of causation far exceeds that of other ESA (Endangered Species Act) cases in which plaintiffs were found to have standing." Also, the brief contended that factors other than septic-tank discharges contributed to pollution in the waterway. "According to the allegations in the complaint (the lawsuit), significant amounts of nitrogen-containing untreated sewage have also been released within the past eight years as a result of Hurricanes Ian, Irma, and others and from damaged sewer lines," the brief said. "In each case, DEP took appropriate enforcement action against the municipalities responsible for those releases." But in ruling this spring, Mendoza said that under the agency's regulations, it would take at least a decade for conditions in the northern Indian River Lagoon to start to recover. "This is due to the previously and currently permitted discharge of legacy pollutants via wastewater into the north IRL (Indian River Lagoon)," Mendoza wrote. "These legacy pollutants caused the death of seagrasses — the manatee's natural forage — and the proliferation of harmful macroalgae. Legacy pollutants, as their name suggests, persist in the environment and cause harmful effects long after they have entered the system." Mendoza added, "What all this means is that FDEP would have to reduce nutrients entering the IRL to a low enough level and for a long enough time for nutrients to cycle out of the system to allow seagrasses to return at significant levels. Conversely, if FDEP does not reduce nutrient levels, there will continue (to) be harmful algal blooms and, in turn, no seagrass recovery and more manatee takings." After the 1,100 manatee deaths in 2021, the state had 800 manatee deaths in 2022, before the number dropped to 555 in 2023 and 565 in 2024, according to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission data. As of July 18, 477 deaths had been reported this year, with the largest number, 95, in Brevard County. Manatees are classified by the federal government as a threatened species.
E&E News
6 days ago
- General
- E&E News
Critical habitat for two Texas salamanders draws lawsuit
Texas residents are challenging the Fish and Wildlife Service's designation of critical habitat for the Georgetown and Salado salamanders, two threatened species that have been whipsawed by litigation. Previous lawsuits filed by environmentalists pushed the federal agency to protect the two salamanders under the Endangered Species Act and designate 1,315 acres in central Texas as critical habitat. Now, it's city and county officials' turn to seek judicial help in reconsidering a decision they say relied on flimsy science. 'Despite much research, little is known about the history, life cycle, and basic habitat needs of the salamanders, including, but not limited to, the limits of surface and subsurface occupation of habitat, the precise water quality conditions necessary for the species,' attorney Paul Weiland wrote in the federal lawsuit filed in San Antonio. Advertisement Weiland added that the FWS's 'admitted lack of information concerning the basic life history and needs of the salamanders' should have led the agency to a conclusion that critical habitat for the two species was 'not determinable.'
CBS News
24-07-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Florida federal judge shuts out conservation groups from lawsuit aimed at protecting North Atlantic right whales
A Florida federal judge Wednesday refused to allow conservation groups to intervene in a lawsuit to help defend a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales, after the groups expressed concerns about the Trump administration's commitment to the protections. U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell's decision came in a lawsuit filed in March by Florida resident Gerald Eubanks, who piloted his boat, M/V Determination III, from Florida to South Carolina in 2022. He was later fined $14,250 by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for violating a speed limit designed to protect the whales. The lawsuit, which names as defendants the agency known as NOAA and U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, challenges the fine and the legitimacy of a speed-limit rule. The 2008 rule limits speeds to 10 knots for vessels that are over 65 feet during certain times and places off the East Coast. The groups Whale and Dolphin Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife, Conservation Law Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity filed a motion in March to intervene in the case. The request said the groups have long sought to protect right whales from being struck by vessels and pointed to years of clashes with the federal government about the issue. "The recent change in presidential administration further suggests that defendants (NOAA and Lutnick) may not adequately represent conservation groups' interests. … The current (Trump) administration has already staked out its interest in limiting the reach of the ESA (Endangered Species Act) and MMPA (Marine Mammal Protection Act) and in identifying regulations implementing these statutes for suspension, revision or rescission," the motion said, referring to two key laws. "If it determines that the vessel speed rule is at odds with its current policy objectives, it may not share conservation (groups') goal of mounting a vigorous legal defense. While defendants have not yet asserted their position, this administration change casts additional doubt on the adequacy of their representation." But in her ruling Wednesday, Honeywell wrote that the groups "failed to identify actions by the new presidential administration that indicates a risk of shift in policy." "The government seeks to enforce plaintiff's citation by defending the validity of the vessel speed rule, and conservation groups seek to protect right whales by defending the validity of the same rule," Honeywell wrote. "Thus, conservation groups' objective in defending the vessel speed rule is identical to that of the government." The NOAA website describes North Atlantic right whales as "one of the world's most endangered large whale species." It said about 370 of the whales remain. They migrate each fall from areas such as New England and Canada to calving grounds off Northeast Florida, Georgia and South Carolina. The lawsuit, which is pending in federal court in Tampa, said Eubanks was fined for traveling about 18 knots for 200 miles. It contends NOAA did not have authority under federal law to issue the speed-limit rule. It said that if the rule is supported by law, it would demonstrate "rulemaking power so broad and unconstrained as to constitute a delegation of lawmaking power" that would violate the U.S. Constitution.
Yahoo
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House committee signs off on delisting grizzly bear
Grizzly bear photographed in Yellowstone National Park on May 19, 2020. (Photo by Jim Peaco/National Park Service) The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources on Tuesday narrowly voted in favor of delisting the grizzly bear from the Endangered Species Act, pushing legislation long sought by western state elected officials to the next step in the congressional process. House Resolution 281, the Grizzly Bear State Management Act of 2025, was introduced by Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyoming, along with Montana's two Republican congressmen, Reps. Ryan Zinke and Troy Downing. The legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to remove the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem population of grizzly bears from the Endangered Species Act, restoring a ruling by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued in 2017 during the first Trump Administration. That rule was later vacated by a federal circuit court, and the agency, under the Biden administration, reversed its stance and recommended the grizzly stay on the list, and under federal jurisdiction. 'The GYE grizzly population has exceeded the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's recovery goals for over two decades,' Hageman said during the committee's markup hearing. 'Since a mere 3% of species listed under the ESA have ever been delisted the ESA desperately needs a success story like the GYE grizzly bear. The grizzly is, in fact, the poster child for how the ESA has failed in terms of what it was intended to do and how it has actually been implemented.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX But Democrats on the committee pushed back against the bill, arguing that the proposal amounted to a political football and could jeopardize the continued recovery of the species. The court ruling that vacated the 2017 delisting rule cited the federal government's 'failure to consider long term genetic effects on other populations and concerns that the decision was driven by political pressure … instead of the best available science,' ranking member Rep. Jared Huffman, D-California, said. He said the decision continued the partisan game played with the ESA, ignored consultation with Native American tribes on a culturally significant species, and removed public input from the process. 'To legislatively delist the population located around Yellowstone in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, from the ESA and then block judicial review, that is not going to lead us down the path of success,' Huffman added. 'That's going to lead us to some really unfortunate consequences.' Grizzly bears throughout the contiguous states were listed under the Endangered Species Act in 1975 when there were only an estimated 300 to 400 animals left in the wild. Currently, FWS estimates there are roughly 2,314 grizzlies living between Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and parts of Washington. During the last decade, a saga of proposed delisting actions, lawsuits and petitions have left the fate of grizzly bears overshadowed with questions. Montana previously petitioned FWS to delist the species in the GYE and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem, centered around Glacier National Park and the Bob Marshall Wilderness, but the agency rejected the petition early this year. A similar petition from Wyoming was also rejected in the final weeks of the Biden administration. Instead, FWS proposed a new comprehensive approach to federal grizzly management, including consolidating grizzlies living in six distinct recovery zones into a single population. That move would have prevented sub-populations, such as the GYE, from being considered for delisting separately from the species as a whole. Montana officials derided that decision, with Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, a Republican, saying the administration was embracing a 'scorched earth strategy,' in its final days. He added that he looked forward to working with the Trump administration on a new path forward. Rep. Zinke shared similar sentiments at the time: 'Thankfully the political hands pulling the strings at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are about to be fired and President Trump will no doubt immediately rescind this train-wreck decision.' Zinke briefly served as Interior Secretary during Trump's first administration, and was in office when the 2017 delisting was announced. Zinke's office did not respond to a request for comment about the committee's vote on the 2025 rule or questions about preventing judicial review. But Montana Sen. Steve Daines praised Tuesday's vote in a post on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, that 'delisting the grizzly bear is long overdue.' Ahead of the committee vote, more than 50 conservation organizations signed onto a letter urging representatives to vote against the legislation. 'The grizzly bear populations in those locations are stable and growing, but conservationists remain concerned about the geographic and genetic isolation of those populations, the threat of increased human-induced mortality through hunting or predator control if they were delisted and management returned to the states of Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, and the effects of delisting particular populations on grizzly bears in the rest of the lower-48 states,' the letter states. Chris Servheen, a retired FWS grizzly bear recovery coordinator who petitioned the federal government to consider managing grizzlies as a single population — the plan the agency put forth this year — said in a statement that the efforts to delist grizzlies by congressional actions ignored key components of the ESA. 'The current administration and Congress are working to defund grizzly bear science and monitoring, dramatically reduce funding for federal land management agencies in grizzly range, increase timber harvest and road building in grizzly habitat, and weaken or eliminate the fundamental laws that grizzly recovery depends on like the ESA, the National Environmental Policy Act and the United States Forest Service Roadless Rule,' Servheen said. 'At the same time, recreation pressure on public lands and private land development are accelerating rapidly in grizzly habitat putting even more stress on grizzlies. Congressional delisting while the cumulative impacts of these actions are ongoing is irresponsible and will result in immediate declines in grizzly numbers and range.' During the committee discussion, Rep. Hageman hammered home her argument that the reason environmental groups and previous administrations had pushed to keep the grizzlies listed was for 'controlling large swaths of land and water resources. It's that simple.' She said that both individual states, and the federal government, have limited resources to spend on issues like endangered species, and they should be allocated to where the need is highest. 'There are species that truly do need our protection and need the resources to be made available so that we can protect them and recover them,' she said. 'When we are wasting money on a recovered species, those are resources that cannot be used for that purpose.' Democrats proposed three amendments to the bill — one to require DOI to follow the new 2025 species assessment issued by FWS that considered all grizzlies in the lower 48 to be considered a single population; another to require more tribal consultation in management decisions for grizzlies; and a third that sought to strip out the prohibition on judicial review in the bill. All three amendments failed on party-line votes. On the discussion over judicial review, Hageman said the point of the bill is to carry out the purpose and intent of the Endangered Species Act, and removing the legal provision amounted to a 'gift to the radical environmental lobby.' 'Until the bear has returned to state control where it belongs, lawsuits and ever shifting recovery standards will stand in the way activist judges have stood in the way of delisting for far too long,' she said. Hageman added that when the grey wolf was delisted in 2011, during the Obama administration, a similar provision was put into that legislation. The committee voted 20-19 along party lines to recommend approval by the full House of Representatives. Huffman gave notice that he intended to file 'dissenting or minority views,' on the measure for the full chamber. Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, and Rep. Pete Stauber, R-Minn, also cosponsored the legislation. Daily Montanan is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Daily Montanan maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Darrell Ehrlick for questions: info@ SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
AFP
18-07-2025
- Science
- AFP
Fireflies will still light up summers, despite a decline in diversity
"We are the last generation to see fireflies," says text over a July 14, 2025 post on TikTok, which gathered more than 30 million views and includes images -- some of which appear to be computer-generated -- of the little lantern bug. Image Screenshot of a TikTok post taken July 17, 2025 Similar posts expressing concern about extinction gained traction across platforms in July 2025, coinciding with the height of the insect's season in North America, where they are mainly observed between the months of May and September. While climate stressors on certain firefly varieties exist, others have adapted well to urban habitat changes, making it unlikely that they will disappear by the end of the century, scientists say. "In short, no, we will not be the last generation to see fireflies," Clyde Sorenson, a professor in the department of entomology and plant pathology at North Carolina State University, told AFP July 16, 2025 (archived here). There are over 2,000 species of fireflies, found on every continent except Antarctica (archived here). Crepuscular fireflies, such as the Common Eastern firefly, continue to proliferate in big eastern US cities, as they adapt to ambient light and may thus be more resilient to light pollution (archived here). These are what we call habitat generalists, Sorenson explained. By nature, they are highly adaptable species (archived here). Varying adaptability What is at risk over the next generation, however, is firefly diversity, scientists say. Many species that are habitat specialists -- rather than generalists -- live in ecosystems that have been significant human caused changes. They can face threats to their ecosystems due to human development, pesticide use, light pollution, climate change and natural disasters. "Species which use coastal marshes or mangroves could be displaced as sea level rise eliminates their habitats," Sorenson said. This is the case for the rare Bethany Beach firefly, endemic to Delaware wetlands (archived here and here). The Bethany Beach firefly is the first of its type to be proposed for listing as threatened under the US Endangered Species Act, a federal law enacted in 1973 to protect species of fish, wildlife, and plants, as well as their habitats, from extinction. Rising sea levels, in addition to more frequent and severe storms, threaten to degrade and eventually destroy their habitats, with the majority of the Bethany Beach firefly population likely to be lost to high-tide flooding by 2100, according to climate models (archived here and here). "The greatest threats to the Bethany Beach firefly are the compounding impacts from climate change on habitat availability," the US Fish and Wildlife Service said in a September 30, 2024 statement (archived here.) Three main threats other species of fireflies have also been petitioned to be listed on the Endangered Species Act: the Florida intertidal firefly, the southwest spring firefly, the mysterious lantern firefly, and the loopy five firefly. Some are currently under review for acceptance, but none is currently listed as of July 2025. Candace Fallon, a senior endangered species conservation biologist at the nonprofit Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, told AFP that at least 18 species of fireflies in the United States are at risk of extinction (archived here and here). "Up to a third of firefly species may be at risk once we compile enough information to conduct a thorough assessment of data deficient species," she said Sarah Lower, a biologist at Bucknell University, told AFP that it is essential to consider "the greater likelihood of losing" local firefly populations due to human developments and changes in ecosystems (archived here). "If the field next door becomes a paved parking lot with streetlights on all night long," and if that area "represents the last remaining population of a particular species, then that species could go extinct," she explained July 16. Lynn Faust, an advisory consultant on firefly studies with US state and national parks, agreed (archived here). "Fireflies have many, many challenges in today's world. Habitat destruction from development is one of the biggest," Faust, who has studied fireflies for 35 years, said July 17. She added, however: "My personal experience is the fireflies are doing very well as long as the three things I mentioned above are not happening to their habitat." Individuals can contribute to firefly conservation by maintaining native vegetation on their properties, limiting the use of insecticides and reducing night-time lighting as much as possible (archived here). AFP has previously written about other claims misconstruing the impact of changes in climate and human pollution on species and ecosystems.
