Here’s a significant turn of events involving a story I reported on earlier: a US District Court judge ruled on Friday 25 July 2014 that the Bering/Chukchi Sea population of bearded seal (Erignatha barbatus) was improperly given ‘threatened’ species status in 2012. Judge Beistline ordered the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) “to correct deficiencies in its study of the population.“
Bearded seals are important secondary prey species for polar bears in some regions of the Arctic (Thiemann et al. 2008), after ringed seals (which were also listed as ‘threatened’ in 2012).
Among other points made in his written decision, the judge is quoted as saying (reported here):
“A listing under the ESA based upon speculation, that provides no additional action intended to preserve the continued existence of the listed species, is inherently arbitrary and capricious.” [my emphasis]
“Arbitrary and capricious” — now that’s a slap-down. He also reportedly called the ESA listing “an abuse of discretion.”
The question is, how often have other ESA listings – not challenged in court – been based on similarly arbitrary and capricious decisions that also involved an abuse of discretion?
More quotes from Judge Beistline’s decision, and reaction to it, below.
Continue reading
You must be logged in to post a comment.