United States Ninth Circuit

In a dispute involving the impact of a portion of a proposed timber harvest on the endangered northern spotted owl, the court rules that an Incidental Take Statement by the Fish and Wildlife Service authorizing the taking of all the owls associated with a harvest is invalid because: 1) a withdrawal of a portion of a Biological Opinion left the Statement without an underlying factual predicate; 2) the Statement presented a nonnumerical measure of take without explaining why no number was provided; and 3) the Statement set a measure of take that did not allow for reinitiation of consultation.

Appellate Information

• Argued 07/28/2006
• Decided 02/16/2007
• Published 02/16/2007

Judges

• TASHIMA, Circuit Judge:, Before: GOODWIN, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Kristen L. Boyles, Earthjustice, Seattle, WA, Stephanie M. Parent, Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center, Portland, OR, for the plaintiffs-appellants., Mark C. Rutzick, Portland, OR, for amicus curiae American Forest Resource Council.


• For Appellees:
  
• R. Justin Smith, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division, Washington, D.C., for the defendants-appellees.