Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service

Good Law
450 F.3d 930·2006 WL 1521120
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 5, 200604-55084California6,411 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

We must decide whether the Endangered Species Act requires the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to complete formal designation of critical habitat for an endangered fish species listed over thirty-five years ago.

I

A

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service”) listed the unarmored threespine stickleback (“stickleback”), a small, scaleless freshwater fish, as an endangered species in 1970 under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1599 . The stickleback is found chiefly in parts of Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, and San Diego counties in southern California. The stickleback prefers to make its nest where there is ample vegetation and a gentle flow of water, avoiding areas with either too much or no water flow. In fact, the rate of water flow is a key factor in preferred stickleback habitat.

In 1980, the Service proposed a rule designating three stream zones of the Santa Clara River watershed as critical habitat for the stickleback but never completed the designation.

In 1990, the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) awarded CEMEX, Inc., a contract to mine fifty-six million tons of sand and gravel from a location in Los Angeles County’s Soledad…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.