DOCSLIB.ORG

New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse; Final Rule, 81 Fed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse; Final Rule, 81 Fed Case 1:18-cv-01138-JB-JFR Document 43 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 241 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO NORTHERN NEW MEXICO STOCKMAN’S ASSOCIATION and OTERO COUNTY CATTLEMAN’S ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, vs. No. CIV 18-1138 JB\JFR UNITED STATES FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE and GREG SHEEHAN, Principal Deputy Director & Acting Director of the United States Fish & Wildlife Service, in his official capacity, Defendants, and CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY and WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, Intervenors. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiffs’ Opening Brief in Support of Petition for Review, filed August 8, 2019 (Doc. 26)(“Petition”); (ii) Petitioners’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 40)(“P. Remedy Brief”); (iii) Federal Respondents’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 41)(“D. Remedy Brief”); and (iv) Respondent- Intervenors’ Brief on Remedy, filed December 6, 2019 (Doc. 42)(“I. Remedy Brief”). The Court held a hearing on October 31, 2019. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiffs Northern NM Stockman’s Association (“Northern NM Stockman’s Association”) and Otero Cattleman’s Association (“Otero Cattleman’s Association”)(collectively, “the Stockman’s Associations”) suffer economic injury to establish associational standing under Article III of the Constitution of the United States of America to challenge the decision made by Defendants United States Fish & Wildlife Service and its Principal Deputy director and acting director, Greg Sheehan (collectively, “Fish & Wildlife”), to designate land on which members of the Stockman’s Associations graze cattle as critical habitat designation1 (“the designation”) for the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (“Jumping Mouse”); (ii) whether Fish & Wildlife’s use of the “incremental effects” 1The Endangered Species Act requires Fish & Wildlife to designate “critical habitat” for all species that Fish & Wildlife lists as threatened or endangered. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3)(A)(i). See 16 U.S.C. § 1532(5) (defining “critical habitat”). Case 1:18-cv-01138-JB-JFR Document 43 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 241 approach2 -- which the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit explicitly rejected in 2001, see New Mexico Cattle Growers Ass’n v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 248 F.3d 1277, 1285-86 (10th Cir. 2001)3 -- when Fish & Wildlife considered economic impacts associated with the designation, violates Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1552(b)(2), and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706 (“APA”); (iii) whether Fish & Wildlife abused its discretion by not considering designation costs, such as compensating the members of the Stockman’s Associations for reducing the value of their water rights with respect to property 2 In New Mexico Cattle Growers Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 248 F.3d 1277, 1285 (10th Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit described the “incremental effects approach” in the following manner: The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), which controls CHDs [critical habitat designations], requires FWS [Fish & Wildlife] to perform an economic analysis of the effects of the CHD before making a final designation. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2). In order to determine what the “economic impact” of a [critical habitat designation] will be, FWS has adopted an incremental baseline approach (the “baseline approach”). The baseline approach utilized by FWS is premised on the idea that the listing of the species (which will occur prior to or simultaneously with the CHD will have economic impacts that are not to be considered. The primary statutory rationale for this position comes from 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(1)(A), which states that listing determinations be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.” Thus, the baseline approach moves any economic impact that can be attributed to listing below the baseline and, when making the [critical habitat designation], takes into account only those economic impacts rising above the baseline. New Mexico Cattle Growers Ass'n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 248 F.3d at 1280. 3In New Mexico Cattle Growers Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Tenth Circuit rejected Fish & Wildlife’s use of the incremental approach, concluding that “the baseline approach to economic analysis is not in accord with the language or intent of the [Endangered Species Act].” 248 F.3d at 1285. The Tenth Circuit rationalized the holding based on its statutory interpretation of the text of the Endangered Species Act: The statutory language is plain in requiring some kind of consideration of economic impact in the [critical habitat designation] phase. Although 50 C.F.R. § 402.02 is not at issue here, the regulation's definition of the jeopardy standard as fully encompassing the adverse modification standard renders any purported economic analysis done utilizing the baseline approach virtually meaningless. We are compelled by the canons of statutory interpretation to give some effect to the congressional directive that economic impacts be considered at the time of critical habitat designation. Bridger Coal Co./Pac. Minerals, Inc. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, 927 F.2d 1150, 1153 (10th Cir. 1991)(“We will not construe a statute in a way that renders words or phrases meaningless, redundant, or superfluous.”). Because economic analysis done using the FWS's baseline model is rendered essentially without meaning by 50 C.F.R. § 402.02, we conclude Congress intended that the FWS conduct a full analysis of all of the economic impacts of a critical habitat designation, regardless of whether those impacts are attributable co-extensively to other causes. New Mexico Cattle Growers Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 248 F.3d at 1285. - 2 - Case 1:18-cv-01138-JB-JFR Document 43 Filed 10/13/20 Page 3 of 241 within the designation, an interference which the Stockman’s Associations allege amounts to a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America; (iv) whether the Stockman’s Associations administratively waived their claims challenging Fish & Wildlife’s decision not to exclude particular units of land -- Units 3 and 44 -- from the designation, because no Stockman’s Associations members raised this issue for these units, except for subunit 3C, during the proposed designation’s public comment period; (v) whether a sufficiently reasoned explanation supports Fish & Wildlife’s conclusion not to exclude Units 3 and 4 from the designation, because it could not identify any disproportionate costs; and (vi) whether the Court should vacate the designation in its entirety, or tailor vacatur in a manner that leaves untouched critical habitat protections for the Jumping Mouse, should the Court remand to Fish & Wildlife to comply with its statutory obligations. The Court concludes that: (i) the Stockman’s Associations show sufficient concrete economic injuries to establish Article III associational standing to challenge Fish & Wildlife’s critical habitat designation for the Jumping Mouse species; (ii) Fish & Wildlife’s decision to use the incremental effects approach to consider economic impacts associated with the designation is consistent with the Endangered Species Act’s § 4(b)(2); (iii) Fish & Wildlife did not abuse its discretion by failing to consider other designation costs, such as compensating the members of the Stockman’s Associations for reducing the value of their water rights, and the interference with members’ water rights does not amount to a taking under the Fifth Amendment; (iv) the Stockman’s Associations administratively waived their claims challenging Fish & Wildlife’s decision not to exclude Units 3 and 4 from the designation because no member of the Stockman’s Associations raised any challenge to the inclusion of these units, except for subunit 3c, during the proposed designation’s public comment period; (v) notwithstanding the waiver, however, Fish & Wildlife has provided a sufficiently reasoned explanation to support its conclusion not to exclude Units 3 and 4 from the designation pursuant to the Endangered Species Act’s § 4(b)(2) and its internal Section 4(b)(2) Policy governing its decision-making standards regarding exclusion. Furthermore, because of the Court’s rejection of the Stockman’s 4Units 3 and 4 of the designation are located within the State of New Mexico’s Jemez and Sacramento Mountains, respectively, and the subunits comprising units 3 and 4 are in the following locations: (i) 3A -- San Antonio: San Antonio Creek; (ii) 3B -- Rio Cebolla; (iii) 3C -- Rio de las Vacas; (iv) 4A -- Silver Springs: Silver Springs Creek; (v) 4B -- Upper Peñasco: Rio Peñasco; (vi) 4C -- Middle Peñasco: Rio Peñasco; (vii) 4D -- Wills Canyon: Mauldin Springs; and (viii) 4E -- Agua Chiquita Canyon: Agua Chiquita Creek. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse; Final Rule, 81 Fed. Reg. 14,264, 14,297-98 (Mar. 16, 2016)(to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 17) - 3 - Case 1:18-cv-01138-JB-JFR Document 43 Filed 10/13/20 Page 4 of 241 Associations challenges here, it deems remedy unnecessary in this case. If the Court were to have ruled favorably on any one of the aforementioned questions, however, the Court would not still vacate the critical habitat designation in its entirety; rather, it would tailor vacatur in a narrow manner as to address only the units in which the Stockman’s Associations’ members show concrete injuries. This tailored vacatur, therefore, would leave untouched remaining units of the critical habitat designation. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This case involves Fish & Wildlife’s designation of critical habitat (“the designation”) for the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (“the Jumping Mouse”) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I Have Been Working on a Book, Stand-Ins, on The
    Workshop Participants: I have been working on a book, Stand-Ins, on the causes and consequences of temporary leadership in government, business, and religion, which is aimed at a more general audience. Given recent events, I have returned to more traditional scholarship to explore some of the issues involving temporary leadership (and the lack thereof) in federal agencies, among other topics. This paper is brand new, incomplete, and unpolished. Given its length, I would recommend reading the Introduction (pp.1-5), Scope of Actings (pp.13-27), and Statutory Questions (pp.33-42). I look forward to your reactions and suggestions for improvement. AJO Actings Anne Joseph O’Connell Stanford Law School April 1, 2019 Please do not cite or distribute beyond the workshop without permission. I. Introduction Stand-in leaders do not usually command much attention. They step up in moments of need to keep organizations running. The stereotypical interim leader is therefore a caretaker—in place to maintain stability; not to implement major changes. But not all interim leaders are caretakers. Some are auditioning for the permanent job. And a few are there to shake up the organization—so-called “fixers”. The scope of temporary leadership is vast—after all, traditional leaders are transitory, and selection procedures for more permanent leaders take time. On the public side, there are interim leaders in all branches of the federal government. In Congress, there are appointed senators, chosen by their state’s governor to fill in for an elected senator who has died or resigned, perhaps in disgrace or perhaps to take a different job.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals of the California Desert
    MAMMALS OF THE CALIFORNIA DESERT William F. Laudenslayer, Jr. Karen Boyer Buckingham Theodore A. Rado INTRODUCTION I ,+! The desert lands of southern California (Figure 1) support a rich variety of wildlife, of which mammals comprise an important element. Of the 19 living orders of mammals known in the world i- *- loday, nine are represented in the California desert15. Ninety-seven mammal species are known to t ':i he in this area. The southwestern United States has a larger number of mammal subspecies than my other continental area of comparable size (Hall 1981). This high degree of subspeciation, which f I;, ; leads to the development of new species, seems to be due to the great variation in topography, , , elevation, temperature, soils, and isolation caused by natural barriers. The order Rodentia may be k., 2:' , considered the most successful of the mammalian taxa in the desert; it is represented by 48 species Lc - occupying a wide variety of habitats. Bats comprise the second largest contingent of species. Of the 97 mammal species, 48 are found throughout the desert; the remaining 49 occur peripherally, with many restricted to the bordering mountain ranges or the Colorado River Valley. Four of the 97 I ?$ are non-native, having been introduced into the California desert. These are the Virginia opossum, ' >% Rocky Mountain mule deer, horse, and burro. Table 1 lists the desert mammals and their range 1 ;>?-axurrence as well as their current status of endangerment as determined by the U.S. fish and $' Wildlife Service (USWS 1989, 1990) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • Version 2020-04-20 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops
    Version 2020-04-20 Dark Kangaroo Mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus) Species Status Statement. Distribution Dark kangaroo mouse is an inhabitant of the Great Basin Desert. Most of its distribution lies in Nevada and Utah, but it also occurs in small areas of California, Idaho, and Oregon (Auger and Black 2006, Hafner and Upham 2011). Within Utah, individual specimens of this species have been classified in two ways. They have either been attributed to one of two state-endemic subspecies (Microdipodops megacephalus leucotis and M. megacacephalus paululus) (Oliver 2018), or they have been attributed to one of three or four genetically distinct units (Hafner and Upham 2011, Light 2013, Andersen et al. 2013). Table 1. Utah counties currently occupied by this species. Dark Kangaroo Mouse BEAVER IRON JUAB MILLARD TOOELE Abundance and Trends When first described in the 1800’s, dark kangaroo mouse was considered locally common. Research in Utah over the last two decades failed to locate any individuals at most historically documented locations (Auger and Black 2006, Haug 2010, Phillips 2018). The Utah findings mirror rangewide concern of small, fragmented, and declining populations (Hafner and Upham 2011, Andersen et al. 2013). Statement of Habitat Needs and Threats to the Species. Habitat Needs Dark kangaroo mouse habitat generally consists of sandy shrubland with sparse vegetative cover. In Utah, most localities are in stabilized dunes along the margins of historical Lake Bonneville. Appropriate habitat is naturally fragmented and isolated. Threats to the Species Version 2020-04-20 Invasive plants, specifically cheatgrass, and the resulting changes in vegetative cover and fire cycle are the greatest threat to dark kangaroo mouse.
    [Show full text]
  • INTERIOR Energy Companies Paid Bernhardt More Than $80K Last Year
    INTERIOR Energy companies paid Bernhardt more than $80K last year Corbin Hiar, E&E News reporter Published: Thursday, May 11, 2017 David Bernhardt filed documents ahead of his confirmation hearing to be Interior deputy secretary that said he will recuse himself for a year from issues involving companies he had lobbied for. Photo courtesy of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP. Interior deputy secretary nominee David Bernhardt earned at least $80,000 last year working for a host of energy and environmental interests, disclosure forms show. He agreed to recuse himself for one year from matters involving any of the companies as well as other former clients of his or his law firm, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP. The documents Bernhardt filed in order to advance through the confirmation process were signed off on earlier this week by the Interior Department's top ethics official. Bernhardt's financial disclosure report was filed with the independent Office of Government Ethics on March 6, more than a month before the White House formally nominated him for Interior's second-highest post (Greenwire, April 28). The disclosures show Bernhardt made more than $1.1 million last year from Brownstein Hyatt, where he is a partner, and a holding company of the law firm. The disclosure report lists the following clients as paying him at least $5,000 for his legal services in 2016: Targa Resources Co. LLC, Noble Energy Co. LLC, NRG Energy Inc., Sempra Energy, Lafarge North America - Western Region, Safari Club International Foundation, Active Network LLC, Statoil Gulf Services LLC, Cobalt International Energy, Rosemont Copper Co., Independent Petroleum Association of America, Taylor Energy Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Elusive Documents Depository) 6-30-1960 Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert University of Utah Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/elusive_docs Recommended Citation University of Utah, "Studies on the Ecology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert" (1960). Elusive Documents. Paper 117. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/elusive_docs/117 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository) at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Elusive Documents by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Studies on the Euology and Epizoology of the Native Fauna of the Great Salt Lake Desert~ REPORT PERIOD January 1 to December 31, 1959 ANNUAL SUMMARY PROGRESS REPORT of the EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR and STAFF Ecology and Epizoology Series N o. 44, June 30, 1960 Ecological and Epizoological Research University of Utah *Supported by U.S. Army Chemical Corps Contr act No. DA·42·007·403·CML-427, with the University of U tah S'IUDIES CN 'IHE ECOLOGY AND EPIZOOLOGY OF THE NA TIVE FAUNA of the GREAT SALT lAKE DESERT* REPORT PERICD January 1 to December 31, 1959 ANNUAL SUMMARY PROGRESS REPORT of the EXECUTIVE DIREC'roR and STAFF Ecology and Epizoology Series .No. 44, June 30, 1960 Ecological and Epizoological Research University of Utah *Supported by U. S . Army Chemical Corps Contract No.
    [Show full text]
  • The People Shaping the Trump Administration
    The People Shaping the Trump Administration Despite Running on a Pledge to ‘Drain the Swamp’ and Crack Down on Special Interests, Donald Trump Has Filled His Transition Team With Lobbyists and Others With Potential Conflicts November 16, 2016 – Donald Trump rode to the White House by raging about alleged rampant corruption in Washington and pledging to “drain the swamp.” Each of the five points in the ethics platform he issued in October focused on diminishing the influence of lobbyists.1 These included a promise to impose a five-year ban on former executive branch officials lobbying the federal government. Trump further promised to crack down on special interest-influence by expanding the definition of lobbyist to include consultants and others who trade on inside government information and expertise.2 But Trump’s nascent transition team, which will shape his administration, is swarming with lobbyists and other special interests. Many of the lobbyists are working for the transition on areas for which they currently are lobbying the federal government. Meanwhile, many of those who aren’t lobbyists appear to have potential conflicts of interest. Vice president-elect Mike Pence reportedly said on November 15 that the transition team would be purged of lobbyists, but the transition team has not made the point official.3 Even if true, that remedy would not address cases such as a defense contractor working on defense interests, or a lawyer for health care interests working on health care reform. Here are brief summaries of individuals who have been reported in the media as overseeing agencies or policies for Trump’s transition team.
    [Show full text]
  • A Report to the President U.S
    A Report to the President U.S. Department of the Interior 2017-2021 REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT 2017-2021 U.S. Department of the Interior JANUARY 15, 2021 Report to the President Report to the President U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT The Department of the Interior (Department) has focused on improving the ways we serve the American public, while moving forward with your policy priorities. In doing so, the Department has made incredible progress furthering conservation stewardship, expanding opportunities to hunt and fish on public lands, improving core administrative functions, creating a common-sense regulatory regime, and enhancing our Nation’s energy independence. On behalf of the more than 65,000 Secretary David L. Bernhardt dedicated employees who work diligently across our Nation to accomplish important missions in service to the American people, I am pleased to present the Department’s Summary of Actions Report for 2017- 2021. This report highlights the Department’s major and historic achievements toward fulfilling your vision on behalf of all Americans. David L. Bernhardt Secretary of the Interior Page 1 Report to the President PURPOSE AND INTRODUCTION Secretary Bernhardt and First Lady Melania Trump at Grand Teton National Park From the beginning days of the Trump-Pence Administration, President Donald J. Trump gave clear direction to the Department of the Interior (Department, DOI, or Interior). He set priorities and ambitious goals, challenging Federal agencies through Governmentwide Executive orders, Presidential memoranda, and other actions to deliver better results for the American people. Interior has worked relentlessly to implement the President’s agenda for the betterment of our society and economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Coping with Chaos: Unpredictable Food Supplies Intensify Torpor Use in an Arid-Zone Marsupial, the Fat-Tailed Dunnart (Sminthopsis Crassicaudata)
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Science - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health 2010 Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid-zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) Adam J. Munn University of Sydney, [email protected] Pippa Kern University of Sydney Bronwyn M. McAllan University of Sydney Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers Part of the Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Munn, Adam J.; Kern, Pippa; and McAllan, Bronwyn M.: Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid-zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) 2010. https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers/5074 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Coping with chaos: unpredictable food supplies intensify torpor use in an arid- zone marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) Abstract The severity, duration and amplitude of extreme weather events are forecast to intensify with current climate trends, over both long (e.g. seasonal) and short (e.g. daily) time-scales. As such, the predictability of food supplies for many small endotherms is likely to become increasingly important. Numerous small mammals and birds combat food shortages using torpor, a controlled reduction in metabolic rate and body temperature that helps lower their daily energy requirements. As such, torpor often has been cited as a key feature allowing some small endotherms to survive highly unpredictable climates, such as tropics or dry deserts, but mensurative demonstrations of this are lacking.
    [Show full text]
  • SW Great Basin Mini-Trip Report Vladimir Dinets in Late May 2015 I Took Steve Linsley on a Mini-Tour of the SW Part of the Great Basin
    SW Great Basin mini-trip report Vladimir Dinets In late May 2015 I took Steve Linsley on a mini-tour of the SW part of the Great Basin. Steve is an experienced mammal watcher, so he was looking for uncommon species rather than a high species count. The trip proved to be a pleasant, relaxing experience: we would set traps in the evening, spotlight until after midnight, get up at dawn, pick up the traps, sleep until the hotel checkout time, then drive to another location and get another nap in the afternoon. We ended up seeing only about 30 species, but got a few that are generally difficult to see in the area. The moon was near full, but it didn’t seem to have much effect. If you’d like me to take you on a similar trip, the cost is $950-1200 pp, depending on the number of participants (4 max). A few days earlier I did a scouting trip to Mono Lake and Tonopah area, and found that, unlike in lowland California, the rodent numbers were generally high. Three hours of night driving between Coaldale and Mono Lake produced a dispersing juvenile Botta’s pocket gopher, Ord’s kangaroo rat, long-tailed pocket mouse, a few deer mice, and a possible Merriam’s shrew. Twenty traps set in sagebrush desert S of Mono Lake for half a night got three deer mice, two little pocket mice, two Great Basin pocket mice, and one Panamint kangaroo rat. I also noted some snowshoe hare tracks along the road to Saddlebag Lake near Tioga Pass.
    [Show full text]
  • The Executive Branch's Limited Authority To
    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2020 The Rocky Road to Energy Dominance: The Executive Branch’s Limited Authority to Modify and Revoke Withdrawals of Federal Lands from Mineral Production Robert L. Glicksman Hillary M. Hoffman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons The Rocky Road to Energy Dominance: The Executive Branch’s Limited Authority to Modify and Revoke Withdrawals of Federal Lands from Mineral Production Hillary M. Hoffmann* & Robert L. Glicksman** 33 GEO. J. ENVTL L., Issue # 2 (forthcoming) Abstract The Trump Administration’s implementation of its America First Energy Plan, whose goal is achieving U.S. “energy dominance,” has relied heavily upon public mineral development. Mineral development on federal lands is largely governed by statute. The statutory legal mechanisms by which the Executive Branch can “open” or “close” an area of federal lands to mineral development, whether onshore or offshore, are withdrawal, modification, and revocation. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) are the primary statutes that govern onshore and offshore mineral development on over 2 billion acres of federal lands. Both FLPMA and OCSLA authorize withdrawals, which the Executive can use to place federal lands off limits to mineral development. FLPMA also authorizes modifications and revocations, which can remove constraints on such development. The Trump Administration has relied on both statutes in its quest to expand the areas that are available for private mineral disposition through modification or revocation of withdrawals by prior administrations. The authority provided by FLPMA and OCSLA to determine the availability of federal lands for mineral development is subject to a series of substantive and procedural constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 1A APPENDIX a UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS, TENTH CIRCUIT ———— Nos
    APPENDIX 1a APPENDIX A UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, TENTH CIRCUIT ———— Nos. 17-7042, 17-7044 ———— The CHEROKEE NATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DAVID BERNHARDT, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Department of the Interior; TARA KATUK MAC LEAN SWEENEY, in her official capacity as Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior; EDDIE STREATER, in his official capacity as Eastern Oklahoma Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Defendants, and UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS IN OKLAHOMA; UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND OF CHEROKEEE INDIANS IN OKLAHOMA CORPORATION, Intervenors Defendants-Appellants. ———— 2a THE CHEROKEE NATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DAVID BERNHARDT, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Department of the Interior; TARA KATUK MAC LEAN SWEENEY, in her official capacity as Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior; EDDIE STREATER, in his official capacity as Eastern Oklahoma Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Defendants-Appellants, and UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS IN OKLAHOMA; UNITED KEETOOWAH BAND OF CHEROKEEE INDIANS IN OKLAHOMA CORPORATION, Intervenors-Defendants. ———— Filed September 5, 2019 ———— OPINION EID, Circuit Judge. Intervenor-Appellant the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma (UKB) is a federally recognized Indian tribe located in eastern Oklahoma. The UKB are descended from the historical Cherokee Indian tribe. In 2000, the UKB purchased an undevel- oped 76-acre parcel of land near Tahlequah, Oklahoma, with the intention of developing it into a tribal and cultural center (Subject Tract, or Subject Parcel). The 3a Subject Parcel sits entirely within the boundaries of the former reservation of Appellees the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (Nation).
    [Show full text]
  • List of Government Officials (May 2020)
    Updated 12/07/2020 GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS PRESIDENT President Donald John Trump VICE PRESIDENT Vice President Michael Richard Pence HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar II Attorney General William Barr Secretary of Interior David Bernhardt Secretary of Energy Danny Ray Brouillette Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Benjamin Carson Sr. Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao Secretary of Education Elisabeth DeVos (Acting) Secretary of Defense Christopher D. Miller Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin Secretary of Agriculture George “Sonny” Perdue III Secretary of State Michael Pompeo Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross Jr. Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie Jr. (Acting) Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Ralph Abraham Jr. Alma Adams Robert Aderholt Peter Aguilar Andrew Lamar Alexander Jr. Richard “Rick” Allen Colin Allred Justin Amash Mark Amodei Kelly Armstrong Jodey Arrington Cynthia “Cindy” Axne Brian Babin Donald Bacon James “Jim” Baird William Troy Balderson Tammy Baldwin James “Jim” Edward Banks Garland Hale “Andy” Barr Nanette Barragán John Barrasso III Karen Bass Joyce Beatty Michael Bennet Amerish Babulal “Ami” Bera John Warren “Jack” Bergman Donald Sternoff Beyer Jr. Andrew Steven “Andy” Biggs Gus M. Bilirakis James Daniel Bishop Robert Bishop Sanford Bishop Jr. Marsha Blackburn Earl Blumenauer Richard Blumenthal Roy Blunt Lisa Blunt Rochester Suzanne Bonamici Cory Booker John Boozman Michael Bost Brendan Boyle Kevin Brady Michael K. Braun Anthony Brindisi Morris Jackson “Mo” Brooks Jr. Susan Brooks Anthony G. Brown Sherrod Brown Julia Brownley Vernon G. Buchanan Kenneth Buck Larry Bucshon Theodore “Ted” Budd Timothy Burchett Michael C.
    [Show full text]