3, subd. (b)(2) (change must comply with applicable requirements of the Fish and Game Code and the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531, et seq.)).[vi] Doug Coty, Moderator of Association of California Water Agencies Conference, California WaterFix Legal Panel, (June 8, 2016), available athttps://mavensnotebook.com/2016/06/08/legal-panel-attorneys-discuss-upcoming-california-water-fix-hearing/.[vii] U.S. Rev. Stats., secs.

HighlightsThe U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Feb. 15, 2024, issued an order vacating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of the state of Florida's application to assume permitting authority from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) within the state.This Holland & Knight alert reviews the court case and decision, as well as its potential impacts on the state.The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Feb. 15, 2024, issued an order vacating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of the state of Florida's application to assume permitting authority from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) within the state.The plaintiffs alleged that the federal defendants violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq., and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., in the transfer of permitting authority to Florida in the final days of the last administration.BackgroundThe ESA prohibits unpermitted "take" of endangered species. 16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(B). "Take" is broadly defined to include any action that may "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect" a species. 16 U.S.C. § 1532(19). It also includes habitat modification that kills or injures wildlife. 50 C.F.R. § 17.3. Under the ESA's implementing regulations, an "action agency" is required to "review" its actions "at the earliest possible time to determine whether any action may affect listed species or critical habitat." 50 C.F.R. § 402.14(a). If the action agency determines that an "action may affect a listed species or critical habitat," the agency must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to ensure that its contemplated action "is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species." 16 U.S.C.

determined at this time because “information sufficient to perform a required analysis of the impacts of the designation is lacking.” The ESA allows the Service an additional year to publish a critical habitat designation, meaning that a critical habitat determination should be expected by July 2024.Next StepsThe Service must issue a final listing rule or withdraw the proposed rule within one year of publication of the proposed rule (i.e., by July 3, 2024). The Service is currently accepting comments on the proposed listing until September 1, 2023. On July 31, 2023, the Service will hold a public informational session from 5 to 6 p.m. and a public hearing from 6 to 8 p.m., Mountain Standard Time. We encourage you to contact the authors with questions about this proposed listing, to seek assistance in drafting comments, or for guidance on the CCAA options and to discuss your company’s permitting or compliance needs.--- 88 Fed. Reg. 42661 (July 3, 2023), Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2022-0162. 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. 88 Fed. Reg. at 42667 (citing, inter alia, a 1998 study that predicted a 25 percent reduction in the abundance of DSLs at a well density of 13.64 well pads per square mile (“well pads/mi2”) and a 50 percent reduction at a density of 29.82 well pads/mi2, and recommending that densities in New Mexico be limited to 13 well pads/mi2).Id. at 42668. 69 Fed. Reg. 77167 (Dec. 27, 2004). 75 Fed. Reg. 77801 (Dec. 14, 2010). 77 Fed. Reg. 36871 (June 19, 2012).Defenders of Wildlife v. Jewell, 70 F.Supp.3d 183 (D.D.C. 2014), aff’d 815 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2016).See 85 Fed. Reg. 43,203-43,204 (July 16, 2020). 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(3)(B).Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland et al., No. 1:22-cv-00387-SMV-LF (August 25, 2022). 16 U.S.C. § 1532(19). 50 C.F.R. § 17.3. 88 Fed. Reg. 42661 at 42667-68. Id. at 42668. The proposed listing observes that sand mines have only been developed in the Texas portion of the DSL’s range, specifically the Monahans Sandhills. Id. (observing that by the end of 2

This practice note provides an overview of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., and discusses the obligations of real estate developers and property owners with respect to the ESA. Congress enacted the ESA in 1973 to protect and recover imperiled species and their habitats. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (collectively, the Services) together administer the ESA. FWS has jurisdiction over terrestrial and freshwater species, whereas NMFS has jurisdiction over marine wildlife and anadromous fish (fish that live the majority of their life in the sea but for spawning in freshwater). More than 1,600 species are currently listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA in the United States.The presence of an endangered or threatened species on private or public land that overlaps with real estate development may impose certain duties, such as avoiding unauthorized take and, in the case of federal agencies, requiring consultation with FWS or NMFS before issuing a federal permit or other authorization that

iately suspend paraquat’s registration for the same reasons that it should cancel the herbicide’s registration.California Fish & Game Code § 2055The letter cites several sections of the California Fish & Game Code while arguing for the reevaluation, suspension and cancellation of paraquat’s registration in the state.The letter cites California Fish & Game Code § 2055, which states that all state agencies such as the Department of Pesticide Regulation “shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species.” The letter claims that several endangered and threatened species in California are threatened by paraquat, including:The San Joaquin kit foxThe giant kangaroo ratThe Fresno kangaroo ratThe yellow-billed cuckooThe Swainson’s hawkThe tricolored blackbirdThe greater sandhill craneThe valley elderberry longhorn beetleThe vernal pool fairy shrimpChinook salmonCoho salmonSteelhead troutThe California tiger salamanderThe California red-legged frog16 U.S.C. § 1531The letter cites 16 U.S.C. § 1531 while arguing that paraquat’s registration in California should be reevaluated, suspended and canceled. This section of the United States Code states that federal agencies “shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species.”California Environmental Quality ActThe letter notes that a California appellate court recently affirmed that any reevaluation decision made by the Department of Pesticide Regulation must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. The letter argues that this means that any reevaluation decision made by the department must comply with the CEQA policy regarding “avoiding significant adverse effects on the environment where feasible.”Letter Notes Paraquat’s Links With Parkinson’s DiseaseThe letter argues that a “plethora of studies” have linked exposure to paraquat with Parkinson’s disease.Parkinson’s disease is a progressive, neurodegenerative disorder of the brain which affects motor control. The disease has no cure and there are no treatme

The Petition also requests that the Service concurrently designate critical habitat for the species.Pursuant to the ESA, codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., the Service maintains lists of endangered and threatened wildlife and plants (i.e., the Lists). Such Lists are maintained in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations.The Petition describes the bog turtle as North America’s smallest and rarest turtle species.

Their shells were also used for jewelry, beads, ornaments, and ceremonies.The Xerces Society formally petitioned to list the western ridged mussel as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. The petition was filed under 5 U.S.C. 553(e) and 50 CFR 424.14(a), which grants interested parties the right to petition for issue of a rule from the Secretary of the Interior.

Recent studies by the National Association of Environmental Professionals and others have consistently concluded that complex environmental impact statements typically take around five years, and occasionally take 10 or more.As review times have lengthened over the last two decades, NEPA’s critics have objected that the delays in completing the review process can kill worthy projects.All agencies are further instructed to conduct the same analysis with regard to consultation under the Endangered Species Act, 16 USC §§ 1531 et seq., and to evaluate and report on other existing emergency authorities that may support accelerating approvals.In addition to subjecting them to the mandates to all agencies, the order includes specific instruction to the DOT and the Corps. DOT is directed to evaluate its ability to expedite highway and other transit projects under its jurisdiction.

By notice letter dated April 21, 2020, the Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”) notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA” or “the Agency”) that the group believes EPA’s March 26, 2020 policy, “COVID-19 Implications for EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program,” (“Temporary Policy”) violates the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531–1544 (“ESA”). See attached link for “CBD Letter.”

Download PDFThe United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS” or “the Service”) announced yesterday in the Federal Register that it has initiated status reviews for 10 animal and plant species under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”). See 85 Fed. Reg. 15795.Two of the species have ranges that include the State of Arkansas.Pursuant to the ESA, codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq., the Service maintains Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (collectively referred to as “the List”). The Service maintains the List in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 50 CFR 17.11 (for animals) and 50 CFR 17.12 (for plants).