Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell

• Main Author: Shelkey, Kirsa
• Format: Text
• Language: unknown
• Published: ScholarWorks at University of Montana 2016
• Subjects: Arctic grayling; Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances; Big Hole; Collaboration; Montana; Distinct Population Segment; Endangered Species Act; Upper Missouri; Environmental Law; Land Use Law; Natural Resources Law; Water Law; Arctic
• Online Access: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/plrlr/vol0/iss7/11; https://scholarworks.umt.edu/context/plrlr/article/1504/viewcontent/auto_convert.pdf

Following years of pressure to list the upper Missouri River population of Arctic grayling as an endangered or threatened species, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service issued a 2014 Finding that listing the fish was “not warranted at this time.” The Service relied on voluntary Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances in the Big Hole River Basin to determine that listing criteria under the Endangered Species Act was not met and therefore listing was not necessary. Ultimately, the court deferred to agency expertise and found that the Service’s decision not to list the Arctic grayling was reasonable.