no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

WND EXCLUSIVE
Land grab for animal that can't survive there
'Critical habitat' established though critter hasn't appeared in state for 50 years

Email
Print Print



supreme-court-wikipedia-feature
There probably are not many people with serious antagonism toward the dusky gopher frog.

But the question before the U.S. Supreme Court is whether the federal government has the right to take over private property for the frog’s habitat despite admitting the animal never could survive there.

The Pacific Legal Foundation is challenging a 2012 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designation of more than 1,500 acres of Louisiana as “critical habitat” for the frog on behalf of one of the landowners, Edward Poitevent.

The complaint argues the frog hasn’t been seen in Louisiana – let alone on the private land in question – in more than 50 years.

“Moreover, this land cannot sustain the frog: the Fish and Service admits the frog could never survive (in ESA parlance, ‘be conserved’) on Edward’s land without significant, expensive changes to the land, including regularly prescribed burnings and an entire tree repopulation,” states the complaint.

“No matter to the government; it believes one day Edward and the other landowners will simply ‘cooperate’ with the government’s plan for their property and invest millions of dollars to try and create habitat for the frog to survive.”

The complaint argues “the only place you’ll find the critter, in its actual real world habitat, is nearly 70 miles away from Edward’s property.”

That would be in Mississippi.

Oral arguments in the case, Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will be heard Oct. 1 before the Supreme Court.

“Under the Endangered Species Act, the critical habitat designation prevents Edward and his fellow landowners from using their own land as they wish in the future without the federal government’s permission,” says the complaint.

Among its arguments: The government can’t call the land “critical habitat” because it’s not even “habitat.”

“The ordinary dictionary meaning of the term is ‘the place where a particular species of animal or plant is normally found,'” the complaint noted.

The government argues the Endangered Species Act does not necessarily require a “habitat” to be habitable.” The ESA defines two kinds of critical habitat, occupied and unoccupied, and references the “features essential to conservation” only in connection with occupied habitat.

The PLF complaint addressed the government’s argument: “Under this reading, if all habitat is required to be habitable, i.e., to have the ‘essential features,’ then the specification that occupied habitat have the ‘essential features’ would be redundant.”

The brief asserts U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s position “boils down to nothing more than ‘critical habitat is what we say it is.'”

“No objective, enforceable criteria that a court could apply to this or any future designation can be gleaned from the critical habitat designations identified by the service,” the brief argues.

“The service’s assertions that Unit 1 might be habitat, conditionally (if the landowners change their minds and dedicate significant money and effort to establish functional habitat on their property) and in the future (i.e., after the condition is met), are not germane to whether the service can designate Unit 1 now, because the ESA allows the service to designate only those areas that meet the criteria at the time of designation.”

The site cannot be designated as essential, the complaint says, because it is no currently “adequate.”


Unfortunately there are so many holdovers from previous administrations and they are still hell bent on destroying the American economy.

Mike Easterday

The craziness of a government agency strikes again.

meridianlesilie Loc: mars

i think seems like the government should go out of business everything they do is not for us ... we need a government for us that do not infringe on our rights & they do good for us not everything else !!!!!!

Big dog

I would suppose that ANY land COULD be made habitable with enough $. Including Chicago.

bahmer

The U.S. fish and wildlife section should be housed in an insane asylum and put that plaque on the door "U.S. Fish and Wildlife Section".

maryjane

But the socialists are convincing millions of our citizens and noncitizens that we need MORE government giving everyone MORE free things such as housing, higher education, total healthcare, guaranteed income, a job for everyone, etc. And, unfortunately, we have many millions of non-working citizens and non-working noncitizens and i*****l a***ns that are ALL in favor of such, in favor of all they can get without earning any of it. And THEY give not one thought to where the money for it all will come from, nor do they care as long as they get theirs. The socialists will turn the USA into a total welfare state which has no chance of anything but total collapse eventually. Sad and bad times ahead for our country and our descendants. No worries for the i******s and non-citizens. When there is nothing left for them to steal from us, they can simply take all they have and return to THEIR countries.