Welcome to the digital.law repository at the University of Washington

[82WashLRev0795] Piecemeal Delisting: Designating Distinct Population Segments for the Purpose of Delisting Gray Wolf Population Is Arbitrary and Capricious

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Tadano, Nicole
dc.contributor.author Washington Law Review
dc.date.accessioned 2010-01-25T21:35:52Z
dc.date.available 2010-01-25T21:35:52Z
dc.date.issued 2007-08
dc.identifier.citation 82 Wash. L. Rev. 795 (2007) en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0043-0617
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1773.1/213
dc.description.abstract Abstract: The Endangered Species Act (ESA) protects species that are in danger of extinction “throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” After thirty-three years of protection by the ESA, the gray wolf is gradually recovering from the brink of extinction. Pressure to remove protections for existing gray wolf populations has mounted as human interests have increasingly conflicted with the gray wolf’s resurgence. Most courts have defined the phrase “significant portion of its range” in the ESA to mean the historical range of a species. This interpretation is consistent with the legislative history of the ESA and the historical listing practices of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). However, the FWS has recently designated and delisted discrete and significant gray wolf populations—termed “Distinct Population Segments” (DPSs)—based on the gray wolf’s current range. This Comment argues that the FWS’s action of designating and delisting these gray wolf DPSs is contrary to the ESA. By limiting the delisting analysis to the area within the DPS boundaries, the FWS circumvents the statutory requirement to assess threats to the gray wolf throughout its historical range. Moreover, this action does not comport with the DPS Policy promulgated by the FWS and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries. Therefore the FWS’s action of designating and delisting these gray wolf DPSs is arbitrary and capricious. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Seattle: Washington Law Review, University of Washington School of Law en_US
dc.subject Comment en_US
dc.title [82WashLRev0795] Piecemeal Delisting: Designating Distinct Population Segments for the Purpose of Delisting Gray Wolf Population Is Arbitrary and Capricious en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2007 by Washington Law Review Association.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search digital.law


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account