Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

In a lawsuit challenging federal reviews and authorizations for a 314-acre multi-use development in the City of Chico, the federal district court for the Eastern District of California ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to assess best scientific data and incorporate climate change into its analysis of impacts on vernal pool species. The court allowed the plaintiffs to introduce extra-record studies for the purpose of demonstrating “that there was a contemporary body of scientific data discussing climate change and its impact on vernal pool species.” The court said that “general references to threats” such as changes in hydrologic patterns and habitat loss that “may, but not necessarily, implicate climate change” was insufficient to satisfy FWS’s obligations. The court also rejected FWS’s argument that its biological opinion expressly incorporated other documents that expressly discussed climate change’s impacts on ESA-listed vernal pool species. The court ruled for the federal defendants on NEPA and Clean Water Act claims, as well as on all but one other ESA claim.

Two environmental groups filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Eastern District of California challenging federal authorizations for a 314-acre multi-use development in the City of Chico. They asserted claims under the Endangered Species Act, NEPA, the Clean Water Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. The allegations in support of their Endangered Species Act claims included that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had ignored best available science when establishing the environmental baseline for its jeopardy analysis for listed species (vernal pool shrimp and meadowfoam), including information that the species’ habitats were adversely affected by and increasingly vulnerable to climate change.