- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Alaska
- /
- Alaska Oil & Gas Association v. Jewell
Litigation
Alaska Oil & Gas Association v. Jewell
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
06/08/2016
Decision
Order issued.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for rehearing en banc of its ruling upholding the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS’s) designation of critical habitat for polar bears. The court said no judge had requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc.
05/06/2016
Petition For Rehearing
Petition for rehearing en banc filed.
The State of Alaska, Alaska Native organizations, oil and gas industry trade groups, and an Alaska municipality submitted a petition for rehearing en banc to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which in February reinstated the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS’s) designation of critical habitat for polar bears. The petitioners said that rehearing was “urgently needed” because the February opinion conflicted with precedent requiring that the Endangered Species Act’s best scientific data available standard required decisions based on “substantial evidence.” The petitioners also said that the February opinion improperly relied on “post hoc explanations.” The petition contended that the opinion mischaracterized the district court’s decision—which vacated the critical habitat designation—as requiring “current use” by polar bears in order for designation to be warranted. (The Ninth Circuit had said that the FWS had properly taken future climate change into account in designating the critical habitat.)
02/29/2016
Decision
Ninth Circuit reversed district court's vacating of designation.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS’s) designation of critical habitat for polar bears. The Ninth Circuit reversed a decision by the district court for the District of Alaska that vacated the entire designation. The Ninth Circuit said that the district court had improperly required that FWS identify specific elements within the designated critical habitat areas that were essential to polar bear conservation and currently in use by polar bears. The Ninth Circuit said this requirement was directly counter to the Endangered Species Act’s conservation purposes. The Ninth Circuit instead considered whether the designated areas “contained the constituent elements required for sustained preservation of polar bears,” and found that FWS’s designation of terrestrial denning habitat and barrier island habitat was not arbitrary and capricious. In reaching this conclusion, the Ninth Circuit said that FWS had properly taken future climate change into account in designating the critical habitat. The Ninth Circuit also said that FWS had satisfied its obligations to consider concerns raised by the State of Alaska.
Summary
Challenge to designation of polar bear critical habitat.