August, 13 2009, 01:36pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jeff Miller, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 499-9185
Lawsuit Filed Challenging Improper Bush-Era Removal of Endangered Species Protection for Sacramento Splittail
SAN FRANCISCO
The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a lawsuit challenging a
politically tainted decision by the Bush administration to strip the Sacramento
splittail, an imperiled fish species native to the Central Valley and San
Francisco Bay-Delta, of Endangered Species Act protections - a 2003 decision
engineered by disgraced former Bush administration official Julie MacDonald. The
lawsuit is part of a larger campaign on the part of the Center for Biological
Diversity to undo Bush-administration decisions that weakened protections for
dozens of endangered species.
"The Bush
administration regularly put industry interests over conservation and let
politics dictate endangered species decisions, but the delisting of the
splittail was one of the most outrageous cases of political interference,
manipulation of science, and blatant conflict of interest," said Jeff Miller,
conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Three
investigations by the inspector general and a report by the Government
Accountability Office to Congress concluded that Julie MacDonald illegally
tampered with the splittail listing decision."
"It should
be a no-brainer for the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Obama administration
to clean up this shameful relict of the Bush legacy and again protect the
splittail," said Miller. "The splittail has severely declined since delisting;
federal protection is needed to prevent the extinction of splittail and other
native fish species that share its habitat in the Delta and Central Valley."
Conservation
groups petitioned for Endangered Species Act protection for the splittail in 1992 and the Fish and Wildlife
Service proposed listing the species in 1994. The agency delayed listing until a
Center lawsuit and court order forced the Service to take action. In 1999 the
splittail was listed as a threatened species. After litigation by water agencies
challenging the listing, a court ordered the Service to review the status of the
splittail. In 2003 the Service removed the splittail from the threatened list
despite strong consensus by agency scientists and fisheries experts that it
should retain its protected status.
The
delisting decision, which expressly ignored the most recent splittail population
trend studies, was overseen by Bush administration official Julie MacDonald,
former deputy assistant secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks at the Department
of the Interior. MacDonald resigned in disgrace following a scathing misconduct investigation
by the Interior Department's inspector general revealing the depths of her
corruption. MacDonald, who owned an 80-acre farm in the Yolo Bypass - a
floodplain that is key habitat for the splittail - edited the splittail decision
in a manner that appeared to benefit her financial interests. Two subsequent
inspector general investigations concluded that MacDonald should have recused
herself from the listing review process, and that she edited and interfered with
the scientific data used in the decision.
Background
The
Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys
macrolepidotus) is a minnow native to the upper San Francisco Estuary and
the Central Valley. Splittail are primarily
freshwater fish but can tolerate moderately salty water. They are found mostly
in slow-moving marshy sections of rivers and dead-end sloughs, though
floodplains are important for spawning. The splittail once occurred in lakes and
rivers throughout the Central Valley as far north as Redding on the Sacramento
River and as far south as the Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River, as well as in
the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Massive water diversions and alteration
of important spawning and rearing habitat have driven the species to near
extinction. Formerly common in the Sacramento,
San Joaquin, Feather, and American rivers, the splittail is extirpated from all
but a fraction of its former range and now is largely restricted to the Delta,
Suisun
Bay, Suisun Marsh, and Napa
Marsh.
The
splittail is estimated to be only 35 to 60 percent as abundant in the Delta as
it was in 1940, and the percentage decline over the species' historic range is
much greater. Splittail numbers in the Delta have declined steadily since 1980,
and in 1992 numbers declined to the lowest on record. Although population levels
appear to fluctuate widely from year to year based on freshwater outflow, since
the 2003 delisting of the species available data (2003-2007) shows splittail
abundance has dropped to low levels for five consecutive years. The remnant
populations of splittail in the Delta require adequate freshwater outflow and
periodic floodplain inundation to thrive. Splittail are threatened by
unsustainable water diversions, the effects of dams, wetlands habitat loss,
pesticide impacts, and predation and competition by introduced
species.
The
manipulation of science for the benefit of private interests reached new heights
at the Fish and Wildlife Service under the Bush administration. By suppressing,
twisting, and ignoring information from its own biologists, the administration
illegally removed or withheld Endangered Species Act protections for numerous
species. In many cases, government and university scientists carefully
documented the unauthorized editing of scientific documents, the overruling of scientific experts, and the
falsification of economic analyses. Many of the illegal decisions were
engineered by MacDonald.
The Center
kicked off a Cleaning up the Bush Legacy Campaign in 2007, seeking to reinstate protections for 60 imperiled species and more than
8 million acres of habitat wrongly denied federal protection because of
political interference. The campaign has already met with significant success:
in response to Center lawsuits, the Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed to redo
critical habitat designations for 19 species and reconsidered listing the rare,
highly imperiled Mexican garter snake as an
endangered.
Unsustainable
water diversions from the Delta have caused the collapse of many fish runs in
the Delta and Central Valley. Since
2002, delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, Sacramento splittail, and striped bass have declined
catastrophically and the state's largest salmon run of Central Valley fall-run
chinook is suffering from record decline, forcing cancellation of commercial and
recreational salmon fishing in California for the second straight year. White
and green sturgeon numbers in San
Francisco Bay and the
Sacramento River have also fallen to alarmingly
low levels. The southern green sturgeon population was federally listed as
threatened in 2006.
Because
federal and state agencies have so mismanaged the Bay-Delta, California's largest and
most important estuary, courts and federal agencies have begun to order changes
in water export operations to protect fish populations. In 2007, an Alameda County court ruled that the California
Department of Water Resources had been illegally pumping water out of the Delta
without a permit to kill delta smelt and other fish species listed under the
California Endangered Species Act. A federal court also rejected a federal
"biological opinion" allowing high water exports and ordered reduced Delta
pumping. In 2008, a federal judge invalidated a water plan that would have
allowed more pumping from the Delta at the expense of protected salmon and
steelhead trout. Earlier this year the National
Marine Fisheries Service determined that pumping operations of the Central
Valley Project jeopardize the
long-term survival of winter and spring-run Chinook salmon, green
sturgeon, Central Valley steelhead, and orcas
that feed on the salmon, and mandated a 5-7% reduction in Delta water exports to
save salmon.
More
information on the Sacramento splittail
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
Protesters Arrested Disrupting Macy's Parade Over Genocide in Gaza
"What we are witnessing right now in Palestine is one of the greatest human rights issues of our time," said Seven Circles Alliance.
Nov 23, 2023
A small number of demonstrators were arrested on Thursday for disrupting the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade on Sixth Avenue in New York City to protest Israel's "ongoing ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians" in the Gaza Strip.
"Floats, marching bands, and the parade's iconic balloons were navigating around the protesters as cops moved in to make arrests," the New York Daily Newsreported. "Protestors clad in white jumpsuits, some emblazoned with the words 'Colonialism,' 'Militarism,' and 'Ethnic Cleansing' poured fake blood on one another and the roadway."
Taking credit for the direct action, Seven Circles Alliance said in a statement that the coalition of climate, social justice, and political activists is calling on the United States to "cease its support for Israel's occupation of Palestine" and for both the U.S. and Israel to recognize the International Criminal Court (ICC).
"A free Palestine and the liberation and decolonization of all people, everywhere is deeply linked with the climate movement," the alliance asserted. "If the powers of the West are unabashedly supporting genocide and ethnic cleansing, it is crystal clear that they will not budge an inch in addressing climate breakdown and preventing societal collapse. Climate is a human rights issue, and what we are witnessing right now in Palestine is one of the greatest human rights issues of our time."
The direction action wasn't the only expression of solidarity with Palestine during Thursday's parade. Someone riding on the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe float also held up a Palestinian flag.
Israeli airstrikes and raids in Gaza have killed more than 14,500 Palestinians, including over 6,000 children, since Israel declared war in response to a Hamas-led attack on October 7. The assault has also displaced about three-quarters of the besieged strip's 2.3 million residents and devastated civilian infrastructure.
Massive street protests around the world over the past several weeks have pressured political leaders to demand a cease-fire and path toward peace in Gaza, while genocide experts and other critics of Israel's war—including some Israelis—have advocated for action by the ICC.
Some U.S. lawmakers have also called for a cease-fire, but President Joe Biden has stressed his "unwavering" support for Israel and asked Congress to authorize $14.3 billion for the war effort, on top of the $3.8 billion in military aid that Israel already gets from the United States annually.
A four-day pause in fighting is scheduled to begin at midnight to allow for the release of 150 Palestinian women and children from Israeli prisons as well as 50 hostages held by Hamas.
"A temporary pause in the violence is not enough," U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress, said earlier this week. "We must move with urgency to save as many lives as possible and achieve a permanent cease-fire agreement."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AOC Says $20 Million Offer to Unseat Tlaib Exemplifies 'Corruption of Our Politics'
Hill Harper rejected the offer from the Michigan businessman, saying he wants to "break the stranglehold wealthy special interests have on our politics."
Nov 23, 2023
Recent news out of Michigan, where actor and union organizer Hill Harper is running for U.S. Senate and U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib has recently angered pro-Israel lawmakers and donors for her staunch support for Palestinian rights, offered an illustration of the "corruption" of the American political system, said one progressive House member late Wednesday.
As Politico reported, Harper recently rejected $20 million from an anti-Palestinian rights enterpreneur, Linden Nelson, who offered the money in exchange for Harper dropping out of his Senate race and running instead against Tlaib (D-Mich.) for her House seat.
The offer came on October 16, the day Tlaib joined Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) in introducing a resolution to back an immediate de-escalation and cease-fire in Gaza. The blockaded enclave was then nine days into a relentless bombardment by Israel, which was launched October 7 in retaliation for Hamas' attack on southern Israel but had already killed nearly 3,000 Palestinian civilians, including 1,000 children, at the time.
The death toll has now grown to more than 14,500 people, including 6,000 children.
Tlaib, the only Palestinian American member of Congress, has been the subject of vitriol from lawmakers who believe the U.S. should continue supporting Israel regardless of what human rights groups and the United Nations have warned may amount to war crimes in Gaza. Earlier this month, 22 Democrats joined Republicans in voting to censure Tlaib for using the rallying cry for Palestinian rights, "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free."
Pro-Israel Democrats are reportedly searching for a candidate to primary Tlaib, and last month, according to Politico, Nelson reached out to Harper offering $10 million in bundled donations directly to his campaign and $10 million in independent expenditures—if he would agree to be that House candidate instead of continuing his Senate run.
"The fact that in the U.S. just one wealthy person can make a call and offer millions to unseat an official they dislike tells you everything about the corruption of our politics," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Nelson has been involved with the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the past, and has donated to both Democratic and Republican lawmakers.
AIPAC toldThe Hill that it "was absolutely not involved in any way in this matter" and said Nelson has not donated to the organization in over a decade, but considering the group's efforts to defeat other pro-Palestinian rights progressives in recent elections, Ocasio-Cortez expressed skepticism.
Harper, who is running for Sen. Debbie Stabenow's (D-Mich.) seat against the more conservative Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), echoed Ocasio-Cortez, saying Nelson's rejected offer exemplifies a "broken political and campaign finance system that's tilted towards the wealthy and powerful."
"I'm running to be a voice for the people," said Harper. "I'm not going to run against the only Palestinian American in Congress just because some special interests don't like her. I'm running because I want to break the stranglehold wealthy special interests have on our politics, whether it's the Israel lobby, the NRA, or Big Pharma."
Harper himself has called for a "humanitarian cease-fire" in Gaza this month, saying in a statement, "The answers to ensure long-term peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians are neither simple nor pain-free, but one truth stands firm: violence against defenseless children, trapped and frightened, is abhorrent, regardless of who is behind it."
Saurav Ghosh, director for federal reform at the Campaign Legal Center, toldPolitico that Harper and Nelson would have broken the law if they had moved forward with the deal.
Nelson's offer, said Jewish-led anti-Zionist group IfNotNow, is "a clear example of how groups like AIPAC and [its super PAC, Democratic Majority for Israel] try to undermine the will of voters and attack representatives who truly represent our values."
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Nation Publishes Gaza Genocide Article Killed by Harvard Law Review
"Palestine brings to legal analysis an unmasking force: It unveils and reminds us of the ongoing colonial condition that underpins Western legal institutions," argues Rabea Eghbariah.
Nov 23, 2023
The Nation this week published a piece about Israel's genocidal war on the Gaza Strip that the Harvard Law Review commissioned from a Palestinian scholar but then refused to run after several days of internal debate, a nearly six-hour meeting, and a board vote.
The essay—"The Ongoing Nakba: Towards a Legal Framework for Palestine," by Rabea Eghbariah, a human rights attorney and doctoral candidate at Harvard Law School—begins: "Genocide is a crime. It is a legal framework. It is unfolding in Gaza. And yet, the inertia of legal academia, especially in the United States, has been chilling."
The controversy over Eghbariah's own piece helps prove his point. In an email to Eghbariah and Harvard Law Review president Apsara Iyer, online chair Tascha Shahriari-Parsa, one of the editors who commissioned the blog article, called the bid to kill it an "unprecedented decision" by the academic journal's leadership.
The Interceptreported on that email and others from those involved:
"As online chairs, we have always had full discretion to solicit pieces for publication," Shahriari-Parsa wrote, informing Eghbariah that his piece would not be published despite following the agreed-upon procedure for blog essays. Shahriari-Parsa wrote that concerns had arisen about staffers being offended or harassed, but "a deliberate decision to censor your voice out of fear of backlash would be contrary to the values of academic freedom and uplifting marginalized voices in legal academia that our institution stands for."
Both Shahriari-Parsa and the other top online editor, Sabrina Ochoa, told The Intercept that they had never seen a piece face this level of scrutiny at the Law Review. Shahriari-Parsa could find no previous examples of other pieces pulled from publication after going through the standard editorial process.
In a statement, the Harvard Law Review said that it "has rigorous editorial processes governing how it solicits, evaluates, and determines when and whether to publish a piece. An intrinsic feature of these internal processes is the confidentiality of our 104 editors' perspectives and deliberations. Last week, the full body met and deliberated over whether to publish a particular blog piece that had been solicited by two editors. A substantial majority voted not to proceed with publication."
According to The Nation, 63% of editors who participated in the anonymous vote opposed publication.
"At a time when the Law Review was facing a public intimidation and harassment campaign, the journal's leadership intervened to stop publication," 25 editors said in a statement shared with The Nation and The Intercept. "The body of editors—none of whom are Palestinian—voted to sustain that decision."
"We are unaware of any other solicited piece that has been revoked by the Law Review in this way," they added. "This unprecedented decision threatens academic freedom and perpetuates the suppression of Palestinian voices. We dissent."
Eghbariah wrote in an email to an editor: "This is discrimination. Let's not dance around it—this is also outright censorship. It is dangerous and alarming."
It is also part of a broader trend identified by more than 1,700 lawyers and law students. In a letter to the American Bar Association last week, they noted "increasing instances of discrimination and censorship faced by Palestinian, Muslim, Arab, South Asian, Black, Indigenous, immigrant, and other communities within law schools, universities, law firms, and other corporate entities, particularly due to their expression of support for the Palestinian people."
Since Israel declared war in response to a Hamas-led attack on October 7, genocide experts around the world have used the term to describe Israeli airstrikes and raids that have killed more than 14,500 Palestinians in Gaza—among them over 6,000 children—and destroyed infrastructure including residential, educational, medical, and religious buildings.
"Some may claim that the invocation of genocide, especially in Gaza, is fraught. But does one have to wait for a genocide to be successfully completed to name it? This logic contributes to the politics of denial," Eghbariah wrote in his essay.
After pointing to both statements from Israeli politicians and the forming consensus among genocide scholars, he stressed that "genocide is the material reality of Palestinians in Gaza: an entrapped, displaced, starved, water-deprived population of 2.3 million facing massive bombardments and a carnage in one of the most densely populated areas in the world."
"And yet, leading law schools and legal scholars in the United States still fashion their silence as impartiality and their denial as nuance. Is genocide really the crime of all crimes if it is committed by Western allies against non-Western people?" he added. "This is the most important question that Palestine continues to pose to the international legal order. Palestine brings to legal analysis an unmasking force: It unveils and reminds us of the ongoing colonial condition that underpins Western legal institutions."
Eghbariah also explained the term Nakba, or "catastrophe," which is used to describe the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Palestinians during the creation of the modern state of Israel in the 1940s—and argued that "the Nakba is ongoing."
"The Nakba is both the material reality and the epistemic framework to understand the crimes committed against the Palestinian people," he wrote. "And these crimes—encapsulated in the framework of Nakba—are the result of the political ideology of Zionism, an ideology that originated in late 19th-century Europe in response to the notions of nationalism, colonialism, and antisemitism."
"We must imagine that one day there will be a recognized crime of committing a Nakba, and a disapprobation of Zionism as an ideology based on racial elimination. The road to get there remains long and challenging, but we do not have the privilege to relinquish any legal tools available to name the crimes against the Palestinian people in the present and attempt to stop them," he concluded. "The denial of the genocide in Gaza is rooted in the denial of the Nakba. And both must end, now."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular