The case was heard by a three judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The three justices hearing the appeal are all female. One judge is an Obama appointee, one is a Bush appointee and one is a Clinton appointee.
The ESA is clearly broken in this country. The USFWS can list a species as endangered with little effort. The problem is what happens when a species has recovered to the point where delisting is an option? The criteria for delisting are never firmly established in advance before the listing of the animal takes place. The ESA has no legal requirement for where any challenges to delisting are to be heard in the Federal District Court. There is no expedited process for hearing and appealing cases under the ESA. These cases drag through the court system at tremendous expense. It may well be four years before the wolf case is resolved judicially.
Right now, the only real way to resolve delisting issues involves legislative fixes for a particular species. That being said, "stand alone legislation" for delisting has almost no chance of ever passing. Campaign contributions from the various groups on both sides makes sure that stand alone delisting legislation never passes and in most instances is never voted upon. Passing legislation to delist a species usually involves amendments to funding bills or amendments to other legislation. That is the precedent set by the Simpson Tester Amendment delisting wolves in Idaho and Montana. Currently, wolf delisting is contained in amendments to two different pieces of legislation that have little to do with the ESA. Both are bottled up in the reconciliation process between the House and Senate. The two Senators from Wyoming and the single house member routinely give in on Wolf Delisting Amendments at the last minute. It makes it appear like they are doing something when in reality they are not.
The Grizzly Bear delisting ruling from the USFWS may or may not be issued in 2016. Right now they have opened up the comment period for yet another month. This was after they received five peer reviewed scientific evaluations on the delisting issue. The environmental groups (Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, etc.)will file suit if there is a ruling to delist the grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Because of the recent precedent set in the Wyoming and other Midwest cases on wolf delisting, the lawsuits will be all be filed in Federal District Court in Washington D.C. That is where the environmental groups feel that they have the best shot for a favorable ruling. Our judicial system and a lack of action by our politicians, has allowed this forum shopping to take place.
I testified for delisting of the grizzly bear at a hearing held in Cody, Wyoming this year. After the hearing was completed, I quizzed a young female attorney representing an eco-elite group from Missoula, Montana that was opposing delisting of the grizzly bear. My question was simple, what part of the Amy Berman Jackson (Federal District Court for D.C.) judicial opinion relisting the wolf in Wyoming did you like the best. She said the result or outcome. Obviously, she cared about the outcome and not the legal reasoning for the decision. The legal reasoning for the decision was extremely weak.
Here we sit on a broken system that involves issues important to sportsman. We spend a ridiculous amount of money trying to obtain a favorable outcome. That will continue to happen, until the entire ESA is changed or completely redone. What a mess.
just sayin...mh
