Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Rutledge files yet another lawsuit against a federal environmental rule: critical habitat

Posted By on Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:20 AM

RUTLEDGE: Opposes critical habitat rule. - BRIAN CHILSON
  • BRIAN CHILSON
  • RUTLEDGE: Opposes critical habitat rule.
Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge has made it a point to sue the federal Environmental Protection Agency at every turn, in an effort to prevent stricter enforcement of clean air and clean water laws under the Obama administration. Now she's taking on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well.

On Tuesday, the attorney general's office announced that Rutledge and Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange would lead a coalition of 18 states in a challenge of new rules concerning "critical habitat" for endangered and threatened species, implemented by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

The states object to a modification of the definition, which took effect earlier this year, that allows certain areas to be declared as critical habitat for endangered species even if the species does not currently occupy that land. In yesterday's release, Rutledge called the change a "dramatic expansion of federal power over land rights [that] has the potential to threaten economic development across the nation."

Though generally critical of the rule change, a February article from the National Law Review sheds light on why exactly the federal environmental regulators want the enhanced authority. It's not for the sake of a "land grab," red-state AGs like Rutledge would have us believe — it's largely because of climate change, which has already shifted the range of many species' habitats and will continue to do so:
The Services go on to explain that “[a]s the effects of global climate change continue to influence distribution and migration patterns of species, the ability to designate areas that a species has not historically occupied is expected to become increasingly important.” For example, such areas may provide important connectivity between habitats, serve as movement corridors, or constitute emerging habitat for a species experiencing range shifts in latitude or altitude (such as to follow available prey or host plants). Where the best available scientific data suggest that specific unoccupied areas are, or it is reasonable to infer from the record that they will eventually become, necessary to support the species’ recovery, it may be appropriate to find that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species and thus meet the definition of “critical habitat.”” Id.
If you don't believe climate change is real, though, there's no need to worry about such things. It's telling that the word "climate" appears nowhere in the complaint filed yesterday.

Along with Alabama and Arkansas, the suit includes Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Here's the full release from the Arkansas AG:

Rutledge, Strange Lead Coalition Challenging Expansion of Critical Habitat Definition
Says, it ‘has the potential to threaten economic development across the nation’

LITTLE ROCK – Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge and Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange are leading a coalition of 18 states in a lawsuit challenging new federal rules that broadly expand the definition of “critical habitats” for endangered and threatened species.

The states charge that the rules would allow the federal government “to designate areas as occupied critical habitat, containing the physical and biological features essential to conservation, even when those areas are neither occupied nor contain those features.” The new rules effectively declare that any area currently unoccupied by an endangered species but may potentially host an endangered species could be classified as critical habitat subject to stringent regulations.

“This dramatic expansion of federal power over land rights has the potential to threaten economic development across the nation,” said Attorney General Rutledge. “As an avid sportsman and landowner, I want our endangered species to be protected for future generations, but these new rules will mire wide swaths of land in bureaucratic red tape under the notion that the property might theoretically someday be beneficial to a certain species, even when there is no actual research or data to support that speculation.”

The proposed rules would also allow the federal government to prevent activities it deems could adversely affect habitat features that do not even exist. The states note, “[f]or example, under the Final Rules, the Services could declare desert land as critical habitat for a fish and then prevent the construction of a highway through those desert lands, under the theory that it would prevent the future formation of a stream that might one day support the species. Or the Services could prevent a landowner from planting loblolly pine trees in a barren field if planting longleaf pine trees might one day perhaps be more beneficial to an endangered or threatened species.”

The lawsuit was filed today in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama against the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Joining Rutledge and Strange in the lawsuit are the states of Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Tags: , , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store

Favorite

Speaking of...

Comments (14)

Showing 1-14 of 14

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-14 of 14

Add a comment

More by Benjamin Hardy

Readers also liked…

  • State Police issues statement on Jason Rapert 'threats'

    The State Police have issued a minor clarification in what appears to be an effort to soothe an enraged Sen. Jason Rapert, exposed here as overly excited about both a Conway parking lot question from a constituent as well as some inflammatory Internet rhetoric that he's interpreted as a dire threat on his life. State cops took his reports seriously, they say. But in the end, they found nothing actionable.
    • Sep 15, 2015
  • 2nd guilty plea in bribery case over state mental health services

    Arkansas Business reports here on a federal court filing Wednesday that shows a second person has pleaded guilty to a bribery scheme to help a major contractor of the state Department of Human Services.
    • Sep 17, 2015
  • From Dallas, creative thinking about the Interstate 30 project

    An urban planner in Dallas says freeways are not always the answer. Incorporating some creativity already being used in Dallas and looking at the Interstate 30 project from a broader perspective, here are ideas that Arkansas highway planners have not considered. But should.
    • Nov 6, 2015

Most Shared

  • Workers stiffed

    How is it going with the great experiment to make the Republican Party the champion of the sons and daughters of toil instead of the oligarchs of wealth and business?
  • Former state board of education chair Sam Ledbetter weighs in on Little Rock millage vote

    Ledbetter, the former state Board of Education chair who cast the decisive vote in 2015 to take over the LRSD, writes that Education Commissioner Johnny Key "has shown time and again that he is out of touch with our community and the needs of the district." However, Ledbetter supports the May 9 vote as a positive for the district's students and staff.
  • O'Reilly's fall

    Whom the gods would destroy, they first make TV stars.

Visit Arkansas

Fishing the Diamond Lakes of Arkansas

Fishing the Diamond Lakes of Arkansas

Arkansas angler and fishing expert Billy Murray shares his extensive knowledge of the Diamond Lakes of Arkansas

Most Viewed

Most Recent Comments

Blogroll

Slideshows

 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation