September, 09 2009, 03:56pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jenny Harbine, Earthjustice, (406) 586-9699
Suzanne Asha Stone, Defenders of Wildlife, (208) 861-4655
Louisa Willcox, Natural Resources Defense Council, (406) 222-9561
Melanie Stein, Sierra Club, (307) 733-4557
Noah Greenwald, Center for Biological Diversity, (503) 484-7495
Court Finds Wolf Delisting is Likely Unlawful; Declines to Stop Wolf Hunts
MISSOULA, Montana
Late Tuesday evening, a federal district court issued an order finding that the delisting of wolves
in the northern Rockies was likely illegal, but declined to stop wolf
hunts in Idaho and Montana. In the ruling, the court stated that the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision to remove protections from
wolves in Idaho and Montana while retaining protections for Wyoming
wolves appeared to be "a practical determination that does not seem to
be scientifically based."
The court order came
in an ongoing lawsuit seeking to restore federal Endangered Species Act
protections to wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains until wolf
numbers are stronger, the states develop an adequate legal safety net,
and connectivity between recovery areas is ensured. The order came just
over a week after Idaho's wolf-hunting season opened on September 1 in
two of the state's 12 hunting units. Montana is set to begin wolf
hunting on September 15.
Idaho
authorized the killing of 220 wolves in a wolf hunt, which represents
25 percent of the last official Idaho wolf population estimate at the
end of December 2008. Montana has authorized the take of 75 wolves in a
wolf hunt, which is 15 percent of its last official wolf population
estimate.
The court declined to stop the hunts
because it held that a single hunting season at these levels in Idaho
and Montana would not "irreparably harm" the wolf population as a
whole.
The wolf hunting is in addition to wolf
killing due to livestock conflicts, defense-of-property wolf killing,
and natural mortality, which last year accounted for more than 200 wolf
deaths in Idaho and Montana. The hunting would occur throughout the
states, including in core wilderness regions where wolves have
virtually no conflicts with livestock. The combined loss of all these
wolves threatens the recovery of the still-vulnerable regional wolf
population in the northern Rockies.
Under the
challenged U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wolf delisting rule, Idaho
and Montana are free to reduce the wolf population down to 150 per
state - a potential loss of roughly two-thirds of the region's wolves.
No other endangered species has ever been delisted at such a low
population level and then immediately hunted to even lower,
unsustainable levels.
The wolf hunts threaten to
cripple the regional wolf population by isolating wolves into
disconnected subgroups incapable of genetic or ecological
sustainability. The wolf hunts would also allow the killing of the
breeding alpha male and female wolves, thereby disrupting the social
group, leaving pups more vulnerable.
Wolves are
still under federal protection in Wyoming because a federal court
previously ruled that Wyoming's hostile wolf-management scheme leaves
wolves in "serious jeopardy." The Fish and Wildlife Service in the
recent past held that a state-by-state approach to delisting wolves was
not permitted under the Endangered Species Act, but the federal
government flip-flopped on its earlier position and this year took
wolves in Idaho and Montana off the endangered species list while
leaving those in Wyoming on the list.
In addition to Wyoming,
the states of Idaho and Montana have refused to make enforceable
commitments to maintain viable wolf populations within their borders.
Earthjustice
represents Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council,
Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, The Humane Society of the
United States, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Friends of the
Clearwater, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Oregon Wild, Cascadia
Wildlands, Western Watersheds Project, Wildlands Network, and Hells
Canyon Preservation Council.
###
"We're
disappointed that wolves will continue to be hunted in the short term,
but we're very encouraged that the court has expressed agreement that
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acted illegally by delisting wolves
under the current rule." Suzanne Stone, Northern Rockies representative of Defenders of Wildlife
"In the big picture, this is a win," said Louisa Willcox, senior wildlife advocate at NRDC.
"We feel good about the judge's analysis of the merits of our case. The
Department of Interior has clearly missed an opportunity to get this
right. We need a national wolf recovery plan and this piecemeal effort
just won't get us there."
"We are encouraged by the
fact that Judge Molloy agrees that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
violated the Endangered Species Act when removing protections for
wolves. However, we are disheartened that public hunting will be
allowed to continue in Idaho and Montana this fall. Wolves are at the
brink of recovery in the northern Rockies and we believe a public hunt
is premature and could negatively impact their chance to make a full
recovery." Melanie Stein, Sierra Club representative
"Today's
order affirms that removal of protections for wolves in the northern
Rockies before they have fully recovered was illegal," said Noah Greenwald, endangered species program director with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Although the court's decision to leave wolves unprotected is a setback for recovery, we hope it is a temporary one."
"Here in Oregon, we just had two young wolves killed after conflicts with livestock," said Rob Klavins with the conservation group Oregon Wild.
"The last thing our neighbors need to be doing is shooting these still
recovering animals for sport. We hope that the state-sponsored hunts
can be ended soon and recovery can begin once again."
"In
keeping with Judge Molloy's findings in this Order, WWP looks forward
to the overturning of the delisting of wolves in the northern Rockies
and the ending of hunting of wolves," said Jon Marvel, executive director of Western Watersheds Project.
"Today's ruling is a split decision," said Doug Honnold of Earthjustice,
who represents the conservation groups in the wolf-delisting lawsuit.
"We are glad the court agreed with us that the Fish and Wildlife
Service violated the Endangered Species Act. We are deeply saddened by
the fact that the court decided not to stop the Idaho and Montana wolf
hunts this year."
LATEST NEWS
Biden's Bid to Tax the Rich Could Be the 2024 Lift the President Needs
New polling finds a majority of Americans across party lines support raising taxes on billionaires.
Mar 27, 2024
During his State of the Union address, U.S. President Joe Biden declared that he wants to raise taxes on the rich, and polling results published Tuesday show that both Democratic and Republican voters in important swing states support doing so.
The polling firm Morning Consult reports that 69% of registered voters in seven swing states say they support raising taxes on billionaires. That includes states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
One of the most consistently popular policy proposals, across parties, is raising taxes on the rich. https://t.co/1fwJK5z0EN
— David Roberts (@drvolts) March 26, 2024
The poll found 58% of Republicans, 83% of Democrats, and 66% of independents support raising taxes on billionaires. The poll also found similar numbers of voters support raising taxes on people who make more than $400,000 per year.
Biden's 2025 budget plan includes a hike in taxes on the rich that would generate significant revenue for the federal government.
"Biden proposes to raise $503 billion over the next decade by imposing a 25% tax on people who claim more than $100 million in assets—a source of wealth that has long been beyond the reach of the [Internal Revenue Service]," The Washington Postreports.
In a New York Times opinion piece that was published on Wednesday, Felicia Wong, president and chief executive of the progressive advocacy organization Roosevelt Forward, outlined how opinions have changed about how much wealth is too much and if it should be more heavily taxed.
"Should we have trillionaires? Should we even have billionaires? According to at least one recent analysis, the economy is on track to mint its first trillionaire—that is 1,000 billion—within a decade. Such staggering accumulations of wealth are made possible in large part by the fact that America's federal tax burden is so comparatively light," Wong wrote. "After a long period of seeming to venerate the 1 %, or the 1% of 1% of 1%, American sentiment is swinging hard against this imbalance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Groups Warn Gang Crackdown in El Salvador Has Led to Human Rights Crisis
"Reducing gang violence by replacing it with state violence cannot be a success," said one Amnesty International official.
Mar 27, 2024
Two years after Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele declared a "state of exception" that was originally adopted for a 30-day period in response for a spate of apparent gang killings, the government is boasting that its policies have driven down the homicide rate by 70%—but international rights defenders on Wednesday warned the crackdown has plunged the country into a human rights crisis.
Amnesty International said that according to local victims' movements and human rights groups, El Salvador's former murder rate has been replaced by 327 cases of forced disappearances since March 2022, as well as 78,000 arbitrary detentions as police have raided neighborhoods, particularly in low-income areas.
"A total of approximately 102,000 people [are] now deprived of their freedom in the country—a situation of prison overcrowding of approximately 148% percent and at least 235 deaths in state custody," said Amnesty.
Bukele adopted the state of emergency after El Salvador reported its deadliest peak in apparent gang violence in recent history, with gangs blamed for 92 people's deaths over three days in March 2022.
Under the emergency order, authorities have suspended the right to privacy in communications, to be informed of the reason for one's arrest, and to be taken before a judge within 72 hours of an arrest. A report by Human Rights Watch in December 2022 also warned of "torture, or other cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment against people accused of crimes." Officers told people during arrests only that they were following "orders from the president," and in some cases, told people they were being taken to a police station for "questioning" when they were actually under arrest.
"The insistence of Nayib Bukele's government on maintaining the state of emergency, the adoption of disproportionate measures, and the denial, minimization, and concealment of reported serious human rights violations reflect the government's unwillingness to fulfill its duty to respect and promote human rights in the country," Ana Piquer, Amnesty International's Americas director, said Wednesday. "It also demonstrates its inability to design comprehensive long-term measures to address the root causes of violence and criminality without forcing the population to choose between security and freedom."
Amnesty's statement came a day after Justice and Security Minister Gustavo Villatoro said Bukele's government plans to continue its strategy to "eradicate this endemic evil."
"This war against these terrorists will continue," said Villatoro in a televised address.
Despite outcry from domestic and international human rights groups, Bukele won his reelection campaign in a landslide last month. El Faro reported that Bukele's government had violated some election rules including airing ads within three days of the election and campaigning on Election Day. Some poll workers also wore clothes identifying them as supporters of Bukele's Nueva Ideas party, and police allegedly blocked journalists from working near polling locations, prompting accusations of intimidation and harassment by the Association of Journalists of El Salvador.
The Due Process of Law Foundation released a report Tuesday warning that Bukele's government could be guilty of crimes against humanity as it continues its crackdown.
"Well over 76,000 people, including minors, have been detained under the state of exception, accused of having ties to gangs," wrote the group. "Many or most of these detentions appear to be occurring without any reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person may have committed a crime. Mere physical appearance—including having tattoos—seems to be enough to put people at risk of arrest, with young men from poor districts a particular target. Arrests of this nature are in themselves discriminatory, and may well qualify as arbitrary. According to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, under customary
international law, 'The legal basis justifying... detention must be accessible, understandable, nonretroactive, and applied in a consistent and predictable way.'"
Amnesty noted on Wednesday that human rights defenders and dissidents also face "increased risk" under the state of emergency, "as they are criminalized." As Common Dreams reported this week, five water defenders are scheduled to stand trial on April 3 for allegedly killing a military informant, an accusation for which the government has produced no proof.
"In the absence of any kind of evaluation and checks and balances within the country, and with only a timid response from the international community, the false illusion has been created that President Bukele has found the magic formula to solve the very complex problems of violence and criminality in a seemingly simple way. But reducing gang violence by replacing it with state violence cannot be a success," said Piquer. "The authorities in El Salvador must focus the state response on comprehensive policies that respect human rights and seek long-term solutions."
"The international community," she added, "must respond in a robust, articulate and forceful manner, condemning any model of public security that is based on human rights violations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Revolving Door Spins as Ex-Fossil Fuel Regulator Joins Carbon Capture Firm
"This move is intended to make sure policymakers continue to make bad bets on carbon capture ever working," said one critic.
Mar 27, 2024
CarbonCapture Inc. on Wednesday announced the appointment of Neil Chatterjee to its board of directors—sparking fresh criticism of technology to capture and store carbon dioxide, the former U.S. regulator, and the revolving door between government and industry.
Chatterjee was appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in 2017 by then-President Donald Trump, now the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. Chatterjee served as FERC's chair twice before his term expired in 2021. Prior to joining the commission, he advised U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on energy.
"After greenlighting oil and gas expansion at FERC, Chatterjee is now capitalizing off of attempts to undo those harms," Hannah Story Brown, a senior researcher in climate and governance at the Revolving Door Project, told Common Dreams. "It would have been far less costly to the public interest and the public purse if Chatterjee had helped stanch the flow of carbon pollution into our atmosphere when he was in the position to."
"After greenlighting oil and gas expansion at FERC, Chatterjee is now capitalizing off of attempts to undo those harms."
Food & Water Watch policy director Jim Walsh said that "the so-called 'carbon capture' industry relies on billions of dollars in giveaways from the federal government, so it should not be a surprise that a company like this would add a Beltway insider to its board of directors."
CarbonCapture Inc.'s statement on Chatterjee celebrates his "deep ties in Washington and across the industry," saying that "in his time on Capitol Hill and at FERC, he established a reputation as a bipartisan operator who built alliances and cut through red tape."
The company's CEO, Adrian Corless, said that Chatterjee's "deep understanding of the energy landscape in the U.S. and abroad will be incredibly important as we source large amounts of clean energy in the face of grid expansion challenges and bottlenecks."
The firm builds "deeply modular" direct air capture (DAC) machines, which "use solid sorbents that soak up atmospheric CO2 when cooled and release concentrated CO2 when heated," as its website details. "The captured CO2 can then be permanently stored underground or used to make synthetic fuels, low-carbon concrete, carbon black, or other industrial products that require clean CO2."
Stressing the need to "decarbonize the atmosphere as quickly as possible," Chatterjee said Wednesday that "CarbonCapture's groundbreaking, modular direct air capture machines have put our country on the fast track to scale a proven solution at the speed and cost necessary to make a meaningful impact."
Food & Water Watch agrees that the warming world requires swift and sweeping action on planet-heating pollution. Along with advocating for a rapid and just global phaseout of fossil fuels, the group prioritizes "calling foul on fake solutions" to the climate emergency.
"The fossil fuel industries are eager to tout carbon waste sequestration and direct air capture because they bolster the dominance of dirty energy sources like oil and gas," Walsh told Common Dreams. "This is why they are called 'false solutions'—they delay the necessary actions to get off fossil fuels."
Citing an International Energy Agency analyst in an article about the "major hurdles" that remain as DAC ramps up, Yale Environment 360reported last week that "about three-quarters of all globally captured CO2 (which comes mainly from industrial flue stacks) is currently being used for enhanced oil recovery," which involves injecting CO2 into wells to bury it and extract more oil.
As a pair of Walsh's colleagues detailed for Food & Water Watch's website last year, other issues with DAC include the technology's high energy needs, toxic solvents, and risky storage options.
"Carbon capture has a long history of failure in the real world, but these companies have had great success in securing billions in government handouts."
"Carbon capture has a long history of failure in the real world, but these companies have had great success in securing billions in government handouts," Walsh said. In terms of Chatterjee's appointment, he added that "this move is intended to make sure policymakers continue to make bad bets on carbon capture ever working."
As Story Brown pointed out, "Neil Chatterjee's prototypical spin of the revolving door, moving from pro-industry regulator to regulated industry, comes with added irony."
"As a regulator, he positioned himself as preferring market-based 'solutions' over government mandates, subsidies, and regulations," she explained. "But all that skepticism apparently vanished when he joined the carbon capture business, whose only hope of profitability comes from government subsidies like those in the Inflation Reduction Act."
Corless was among those who welcomed what Timecalled a "bonanza for the carbon capture industry" in the 2022 legislation. Shortly before President Joe Biden signed the bill, the CEO said that "it's going to make it easy for us to raise the capital to build the project earlier and to build it faster."
However, it's not just the government that is bankrolling CarbonCapture Inc. and similar ventures, as Story Brown noted.
"Neil Chatterjee hasn't left the lure of market magic behind," she said. "His firm has pre-sold millions in carbon removal credits so that energy-guzzling firms from Amazon to Aramco can greenwash their operations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular