- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Defenders of Wildlife v. Jewell
Collection
Defenders of Wildlife v. Jewell
WildEarth Guardians v. Jewell ↗
9:14-cv-00250D. Mont.1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
10/16/2015
Response
Plaintiffs filed response to defendant-intervenors' motion for summary judgment and reply in support of their motion for summary judgment.
–
Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell ↗
9:14-cv-00247D. Mont.1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
10/13/2014
Complaint
Complaint filed.
A group of environmental organizations challenged the withdrawal of a proposal to list the distinct population segment of the North American wolverine in the contiguous United States as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. The complaint said that the wolverine resided in “high-altitude and high-latitude ecosystems characterized by deep snow and cold temperatures” and that its survival in the contiguous U.S. was threatened by climate change, as well as by other threats such as highly isolated and fragmented habitat, extremely low population numbers, intentional and incidental trapping, and disturbance by winter recreation activities. Plaintiffs alleged that the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) based the withdrawal of the proposed listing on “manufactured uncertainty as to climate modeling and wolverine habitat needs and reached speculative conclusions about the wolverine’s future prospects that run directly counter to all of the evidence in the record.” Plaintiffs also alleged that the FWS “arbitrarily dismissed” the non-climate factors that compounded the threat to the wolverine.
Defenders of Wildlife v. Jewell ↗
14-246-M-DLCD. Mont.16 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
04/04/2016
Decision
Order issued.
The federal district court for the District of Montana vacated the withdrawal by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of a proposal to list the distinct population segment of the North American wolverine as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The court described at length the 20-year period over which the FWS considered whether to list the DPS. The process culminated in the withdrawal of the proposed listing 18 months after it was proposed. In withdrawing the proposal, the FWS reversed course on its previous determinations regarding climate change’s impacts on the wolverine and said it did not have sufficient information to suggest the wolverine population would be at risk of extinction due to climate change. The court agreed with the plaintiffs that the FWS unlawfully ignored the best available science by dismissing the threat to the wolverine posed by climate change and also by dismissing the threat to the wolverine posed by genetic isolation and small population size. The court remanded the matter to the FWS, stating: “It is the undersigned's view that if there is one thing required of the [FWS] under the ESA, it is to take action at the earliest possible, defensible point in time to protect against the loss of biodiversity within our reach as a nation. For the wolverine, that time is now.”
11/20/2015
Reply
Reply filed by state defendant-intervenors in support of combined cross-motion for summary judgment.
–
11/20/2015
Reply
Reply brief filed by defendant-intervenors' American Petroleum Institute et al. in support of cross-motion for summary judgment.
–
11/06/2015
Reply
Reply filed by federal defendants' in support of cross-motion for summary judgment.
–