Jeff Barnard THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
GRANTS PASS, Ore. -- The government must provide for the recovery of the northern spotted owl, not just its survival, when considering how much logging can be allowed in old growth forests designated as critical habitat, a federal appeals court ruled.
The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco was the third since 2001 to find that the standard that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses to measure the harm caused by government projects within critical habitat for threatened and endangered species goes against the will of Congress in enacting the Endangered Species Act.
Similar rulings were made three years ago by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans in a case involving the gulf sturgeon, and this week by a U.S. District Court in California in a case involving the desert tortoise.
"Habitat loss is the number one cause of the loss of endangered species," said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. "The Bush administration has pulled out every stop to kill critical habitat. After this string of losses, the administration needs to just cash in its chips and start obeying the law."
The next step for conservationists will be to use this ruling to block old growth timber sales that the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management is planning in areas designated for logging under the Northwest Forest Plan, said attorney Stephanie Parent, who represents the conservation groups.
In particular, they will be trying to stop logging of old growth timber sales along the Interstate 5 corridor. The owls need to safely cross the freeway while searching for mates and moving to new territories, Parent said.
Once a plant or animal is declared threatened or endangered, the Endangered Species Act requires designation of habitat critical to its recovery.
Any government project within that critical habitat must be reviewed by a federal agency to see if it will adversely modify or destroy the habitat.
The Bush administration has judged those cases by the standard that they can go forward to the point they jeopardize the survival of the species.
Environmentalists have argued that the law requires a higher standard. The habitat must be good enough that the species can eventually be taken off the endangered species list.