Latest news with #Yuccabrevifolia
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Judge rules against decision not to protect Joshua tree
A Los Angeles federal judge has ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision not to provide Endangered Species Act protections for the imperiled Joshua tree is unlawful, according to court papers obtained on Thursday. U.S. District Judge Wesley L. Hsu ruled Monday that the USFWS decision to not provide ESA protections for the Joshua tree is illegal and sidesteps climate science. WildEarth Guardians sued the USFWS twice in Los Angeles to secure federal projections for the Joshua tree after initially petitioning to list the Joshua tree as 'threatened' in 2015. The two species of Joshua tree, Yucca brevifolia and Yucca jaegeriana, face severe climate impacts that will cause the desert icon to become functionally extinct by the end of the century without immediate and robust action, according to the environmental organization. 'The agency's decision, for a second time, reflected a massive disconnect from what the best available science shows — that climate change and wildfire will prevent Joshua trees from successfully recruiting new generations over the coming years,' Jennifer Schwartz, managing attorney for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement. 'I feel hopeful that a federal court recognizes the need to actually assess these risks to the Joshua tree's survival. Now it's up to the service to actually follow the court's order.' Hsu agreed with conservationists on all claims, determining 'that the service has not provided a rational explanation as to why climate change alone does not threaten the species to become threatened or endangered.' WildEarth Guardians said the USFWS' analysis failed to adequately take into account climate change modeling that clearly shows Joshua trees run the risk of extinction due to increasing temperature, drought and wildfire. The court order states that the USFWS 'provides no explanation as to why it did not use current trends and standards regarding greenhouse gas emissions as a basis for its decision, when this data currently is available.' WildEarth Guardians has been fighting for federal protections for the Joshua tree since the organization's initial petition to list the species as 'threatened' under the ESA in September 2015, citing the severe impacts of climate change on the native succulent. In August 2019, the USFWS first denied listing protection for what it clarified were actually two distinct species of Joshua tree — eastern Joshua tree (Yucca jaegeriana) and western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia) — because it believed neither species was likely to face a danger of extinction in the next 80 years, according to WildEarth Guardians. This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Joshua tree protection ruling
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Federal court rules against attempt to withhold Endangered Species Act protections from Joshua tree
A federal court in California sided with environmentalists, striking down a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) attempt to withhold protections for the Joshua tree under the Endangered Species Act. The Central District of California ruled on Monday that the FWS decision to not provide ESA protections for the Joshua tree is unlawful and sidesteps climate science. MORE: Extra moisture on West Coast allowing climate-sensitive Joshua trees to recover: Experts Known for its twisted stalks and unusual outline, the Joshua tree is native to the arid southwestern U.S. and thrives in harsh desert environments. In 2015, WildEarth Guardians, an environmental nonprofit group, petitioned the FWS to list Joshua trees as a threatened species, but a second 2023 species status assessment by the FWS found that neither Joshua tree species -- Yucca brevifolia and Yucca jaegeriana -- requires protections. The FWS said it looked at threats from wildfire, invasive grasses, climate change and habitat loss and fragmentation. It found that none of the threats rose to the level to meet the definition of a threatened or endangered species throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges, according to the assessment. "Through our scientific assessment, the Service determined that Joshua trees will remain an iconic presence on the landscape into the future. Although the two species do not need the protections of the Endangered Species Act, the Service cares deeply about Joshua trees and their roles in the desert environment," said Service Pacific Southwest Regional Director Paul Souza in a statement in 2023. "We are coordinating closely with partners to ensure the long-term conservation of these species, including the National Park Service and other Federal agencies, and the State of California, which is also considering measures for the protection of Joshua trees." However, multiple studies have shown that shifts in climate in the Mojave Desert is a major contributor to weather events that threaten Joshua trees, including wildfires. "The agency's decision, for a second time, reflected a massive disconnect from what the best available science shows -- that climate change and wildfire will prevent Joshua trees from successfully recruiting new generations over the coming years,' Jennifer Schwartz, managing attorney for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement sent to ABC News. MORE: Human skeletal remains found just off trail in Joshua Tree National Park After the FWS analysis was released, WildEarth Guardians sued the FWS "for its failure to follow federal law" in denying protections for the Joshua tree. The Central District of California ruled in favor of the environmental nonprofit's claims, writing in the decision "that the Service has not provided a rational explanation as to why climate change alone does not threaten the species to become threatened or endangered." "The Service provides no explanation as to why it did not use current trends and standards regarding greenhouse gas emissions as a basis for its decision, when this data currently is available," the decision states. The court also noted that when assessing the "foreseeable future" of the Joshua tree, the FWS only looked to the middle of the 21st century, while the end of the 21st century is the commonly used timeline for most scientific assessments. "It is essential that the Service considers climate change's effect on habitat suitability in relation to young Joshua trees, and not just the persistence of stronger, adult Joshua trees," the order states. MORE: This is how climate change may alter 10 of the world's natural wonders The federal court has instructed the FWS to reconsider whether the Joshua tree should receive ESA protections with more scientific analysis. The ruling "serves as yet another reminder that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must completely grapple with the ongoing and incoming threats from human-created climate change," Casey Bage, legal fellow for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement sent to ABC News. Bage noted that the science "is clear" in this case. "We must face these facts head-on in order to protect Joshua trees -- and other species -- to give them the fighting chance that they deserve," Bage said. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment. Federal court rules against attempt to withhold Endangered Species Act protections from Joshua tree originally appeared on
14-05-2025
- General
Federal court rules against attempt to withhold Endangered Species Act protections from Joshua tree
A federal court in California sided with environmentalists, striking down a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) attempt to withhold protections for the Joshua tree under the Endangered Species Act. The Central District of California ruled on Monday that the FWS decision to not provide ESA protections for the Joshua tree is unlawful and sidesteps climate science. Known for its twisted stalks and unusual outline, the Joshua tree is native to the arid southwestern U.S. and thrives in harsh desert environments. In 2015, WildEarth Guardians, an environmental nonprofit group, petitioned the FWS to list Joshua trees as a threatened species, but a second 2023 species status assessment by the FWS found that neither Joshua tree species -- Yucca brevifolia and Yucca jaegeriana -- requires protections. The FWS said it looked at threats from wildfire, invasive grasses, climate change and habitat loss and fragmentation. It found that none of the threats rose to the level to meet the definition of a threatened or endangered species throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges, according to the assessment. "Through our scientific assessment, the Service determined that Joshua trees will remain an iconic presence on the landscape into the future. Although the two species do not need the protections of the Endangered Species Act, the Service cares deeply about Joshua trees and their roles in the desert environment," said Service Pacific Southwest Regional Director Paul Souza in a statement in 2023. "We are coordinating closely with partners to ensure the long-term conservation of these species, including the National Park Service and other Federal agencies, and the State of California, which is also considering measures for the protection of Joshua trees." However, multiple studies have shown that shifts in climate in the Mojave Desert is a major contributor to weather events that threaten Joshua trees, including wildfires. "The agency's decision, for a second time, reflected a massive disconnect from what the best available science shows -- that climate change and wildfire will prevent Joshua trees from successfully recruiting new generations over the coming years,' Jennifer Schwartz, managing attorney for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement sent to ABC News. After the FWS analysis was released, WildEarth Guardians sued the FWS"for its failure to follow federal law" in denying protections for the Joshua tree. The Central District of California ruled in favor of the environmental nonprofit's claims, writing in the decision "that the Service has not provided a rational explanation as to why climate change alone does not threaten the species to become threatened or endangered." "The Service provides no explanation as to why it did not use current trends and standards regarding greenhouse gas emissions as a basis for its decision, when this data currently is available," the decision states. The court also noted that when assessing the "foreseeable future" of the Joshua tree, the FWS only looked to the middle of the 21st century, while the end of the 21st century is the commonly used timeline for most scientific assessments. "It is essential that the Service considers climate change's effect on habitat suitability in relation to young Joshua trees, and not just the persistence of stronger, adult Joshua trees," the order states. The federal court has instructed the FWS to reconsider whether the Joshua tree should receive ESA protections with more scientific analysis. The ruling "serves as yet another reminder that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must completely grapple with the ongoing and incoming threats from human-created climate change," Casey Bage, legal fellow for WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement sent to ABC News. Bage noted that the science "is clear" in this case. "We must face these facts head-on in order to protect Joshua trees -- and other species -- to give them the fighting chance that they deserve," Bage said.
