Page 1 of 1

Grazing plan threatening Fossil Creek overturned by Court

Posted: Jan 25 2012 9:19 am
by Al_HikesAZ
Fossil Creek gets some protection from a Federal Court. Just reporting the facts, not making any political comments :--:

http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/news/20 ... d-species/
Citing violations of the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act, a federal district court judge on Monday overturned a U.S. Forest Service decision allowing cattle grazing across a 42,000-acre area of the Fossil Creek watershed on the Coconino National Forest in central Arizona.
The permit holder, J.P. Morgan-Chase & Co., which maintains interests in the historic Ward Ranch of Rimrock, Ariz., reintroduced about 290 cows in September 2009.

“In authorizing this grazing plan, the feds gave Fossil Creek and its endangered species short shrift in favor of J.P. Morgan-Chase,” said McKinnon. “We’re glad the court is demanding a course correction.”

Download a copy of the ruling here.

Re: Grazing plan threatening Fossil Creek overturned by Cour

Posted: Jan 25 2012 10:37 am
by chumley
The ruling holds that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to adequately consider the potential effects of cattle grazing on the endangered Chiricahua leopard frog when it issued a “biological opinion” authorizing the grazing plan. The court also ruled that the Fish and Wildlife Service failed to adequately quantify the amount of incidental “take,” or harm, to the leopard frog, and failed to analyze the effect of the approved plan on the frog’s chances of recovery — all violations of the Endangered Species Act.
So this decision is all about protecting a frog. What's funny is that there are probably a thousand detrimental things that grazing will cause in that drainage, but for some reason, the only way to stop it is to use the ESA and some obscure frog. There's something wrong with the way we manage public lands.

It also made me look into exactly what the "Wild and Scenic River" designation means. Apparently not a whole lot. It prevents dams and immediate shoreline development from being built and that's about it. Oh well.