Safari Club
International v. Jewell
The California
Department of Fish and Game is moving forward with significant restrictions on
fish stocking companies – including hatcheries and private fishing lakes and
ponds – that threaten their ability to stay in business. The regulations are
based on the very unscientific premise that stocked fish always and everywhere
have negative effects on indigenous species and habitat. Read more
California
Cattlemen's Association v. Kempthorne
On October 2, 2008,
PLF filed a complaint in the federal District Court of the District of Columbia
challenging the listing of the polar bear as a "threatened" species
under the Endangered Species Act. PLF represents a wide spectrum of small businesses,
food producers, family farmers, property owners, employers and consumers as
well as the poor and minorities nationwide who would be harmed by restrictive
regulations that will likely result from the polar bear listing. Read more
California Sea
Urchin Commission, California Abalone Association, California Lobster and Trap
Fishermen’s Association, and Commercial Fishermen of Santa Barbara v. Jacobson
Concerned that oil
spills threatened to wipe out the sea otter through its entire range, the
Service sought permission from Congress to create an experimental population of
otters that would be located on San Nicholas Island, which could be used to
repopulate the range in the event of an oil spill. The Service needed express
authorization from Congress to implement this program, which it received. Read more
Decker v.
Northwest Environmental Defense Center
Northwest
Environmental Defense Center (NEDC) brought suit in federal District Court in
Oregon against the State of Oregon and several timber companies, alleging that
the State and timber company defendants had violated the Clean Water Act by
discharging, as part of their forest road construction and maintenance, stormwater
into jurisdictional waters without a required permit. Read more
Drakes Bay
Oyster Company v. Salazar
Drakes Bay Oyster
Company’s operations are carried out under a Reservation of Use and Occupancy
from the National Park Service that began in 1972, and was set to expire on
November 30, 2012. The Reservation of Use and Occupancy provided that the Park
Service could issue a Special Use Permit to allow Drakes Bay Oyster Company to
continue operations after that date. Read more
Friends of Tahoe
Forest Access v. United States Department of Agriculture
PLF attorneys
represent Friends of Tahoe Forest Access and other recreational enthusiasts in
challenging the United States Forest Service's illegal decision to bar
recreational vehicles from hundreds, if not thousands, of miles of roads and
trails in the Tahoe National Forest that were previously open to off-road
enthusiasts. Read more
Markle
Interests, LLC v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Can federal
officials label private property as “critical habitat” for an endangered
species, when the land is acknowledged not to be usable for the species, and
may never be usable habitat? Read more
North Sacramento
Land Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Pacific Legal
Foundation litigation has compelled the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to issue
by September 28, 2012, the determination on whether the Valley elderberry
longhorn beetle should be removed from the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA)
list. Read more
People for the
Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Does the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service have authority to list the Utah prairie dog
under the Endangered Species Act? Representing the Town of Paragonah, Utah, PLF
attorneys argue that it does not. Because the Utah prairie dog is found only in
Utah and has no commercial value, federal regulation of this species exceeds
Congress's power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. Read more
Sackett v. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
In an unanimous
opinion, the Supreme Court rules that landowners have a right to direct,
meaningful judicial review if the EPA effectively seizes control of their
property by declaring it to be "wetlands." The Court rules in favor
of PLF clients Mike and Chantell Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, who were told
by EPA -- and by the Ninth Circuit -- that they could not get direct court
review of EPA's claim that their two-thirds of an acre parcel is
"wetlands" and that they must obey a detailed and instrusive EPA
"compliance" order, or be hit with fines of up to $75,000 per day. Read more
Save Crystal
River, Inc. v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
In this action, PLF
attorneys represent Save Crystal River, Inc., a nonprofit coalition
and partnership of friends, neighbors, young parents, retirees, career
professionals, business owners, residents, and community leaders who are united
in their commitment to maintain and protect the unique quality of life for all people
in the community of Crystal River, Citrus County, Florida. Read more
Smith v. United
States Army Corps of Engineers
Peter and Françoise
Smith own and live on property in Santa Fe, New Mexico, which contains a dry
arroyo or creek bed. After a neighbor complained about the Smiths removing some
scrub vegetation from the arroyo, the Army Corps of Engineers initiated an
investigation and issued a Jurisdictional Determination claiming that it has
regulatory control over the arroyo, under the Clean Water Act. Read more
Stewart and
Jasper Orchards v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
In a misguided
scheme to help a fish that's on the Endangered Species Act list—the delta
smelt—federal restrictions have severely cut the pumping into the water system
that serves millions of people in Central and Southern California. Read more
No comments:
Post a Comment