Cottonwood Wins Lawsuit for Scientists and Endangered Species in U.S. Supreme Court
Overview: Our public lands and wildlife should be managed using science, not politics. When Canada lynx were listed as a threatened species in 2000, no critical habitat was designated on National Forest lands. The reason: a high-ranking political appointee with no background in biology interfered with the designation. After the Washington, D.C. politician was caught, over 12 million acres of critical habitat for Canada lynx were designated on National Forest lands.
Cottonwood then filed an Endangered Species Act lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service in 2012 to require the agency to to ensure its management plans were adequate to protect the habitat. The single reason listed by the USFWS that lynx are listed as a threatened species is that Forest Plans are not adequate enough to protect them. In 2013, Cottonwood won in federal district court. The Forest Service appealed. In 2015, Cottonwood won in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Forest Service’s petition to review the decisions of the district court and Ninth Circuit.
What does the Cottonwood Decision do? The Cottonwood Decision ensures that forest management plans remain up-to-date. To comply with the Cottonwood Decision, the Forest Service must update its Forest Management Plans (FMP) when new critical habitat for endangered species is designated by the Fish & Wildlife Service in that FMP's jurisdiction. The purpose of updating the FMP's is to ensure that the plan adequately protects the newly-designated critical habitat for endangered species.
What Now? The battle is now in the court of public opinion. U.S. Senator Daines (R-Climate Denier) has succeeded in pushing Bill 2561 through the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The bill would overturn the "Cottonwood Decision" by eliminating the Forest Service's legal obligation to ensure Forest Plans stay up to date.
Politics Should Never Trump Science.
Call (202) 224-2651 or email Senator Daines today and tell him:
– Our National Forests need to be managed using science.
- Climate change is real.
– Forest Plans must address climate change.
– Withdraw Bill 2561.
History of the Cottonwood Decision:
In 2007, the Interior Department’s Inspector General found that a high-ranking official in the Department of the Interior, Julie MacDonald, had coordinated with lobbyists from extraction and development industries to strong-arm government scientists and influence Fish and Wildlife Service decision-making. MacDonald promptly resigned. During her tenure, MacDonald, who had no background in biology, successfully derailed the designation of special protections and critical habitat for many species – including the Canada lynx.
The Fish and Wildlife Service quickly sought to rectify the newly-unsurfaced corruption by reevaluating the 1,841 square miles of Canada Lynx critical habitat established under MacDonald’s direction. In 2009, scientists from the Fish and Wildlife Service increased the Canada lynx’s designated critical habitat to about 39,000 square miles. Most of the newly-designated critical habitat was on Forest Service land.
The Forest Service suddenly had a new responsibility: manage nearly 39,000 square miles in a way that protects critical habitat for the threatened Canada lynx. This responsibility was a long time coming. Under MacDonald, Canada lynx critical habitat was confined to only a few national parks and no National Forest land. Consequently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service–the agency responsible for protecting threatened and endangered species–never analyzed how forest management plans impact critical habitat for Canada lynx. The sole reason why Canada lynx are protected as a threatened species is not because of logging, mining, or grazing, it is because forest management plans are inadequate to regulate these activities.
After more than 12 million acres of critical habitat were designated on National Forest lands, it became clear that the next step in protecting the species was to update forest management plans. Cottonwood Environmental Law Center filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service to catalyze this change. Our goal was – and still is – to require the Forest Service to ensure its forest management plans are adequate to protect threatened and endangered species.
In 2013, Cottonwood won in federal district court. The Forest Service appealed. In 2015, Cottonwood won in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals; the Forest Service appealed again. In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Forest Service’s petition to review the decisions of the district court and Ninth Circuit. The “Cottonwood Decision” was born.