50 CFR 424.19 - Impact analysis and exclusions from critical habitat

Cite as50 CFR 424.19
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
245 practice notes
  • N. N.M. Stockman's Ass'n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., No. CIV 18-1138 JB\JFR
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of New Mexico
    • 13 October 2020
    ...the Secretary determines to be appropriate, and will compare the impacts with and without the designation.’ " Response at 19 (quoting 50 C.F.R. § 424.19(b) )(alteration in Response and not in 50 C.F.R. § 424.19(b) ). Fish & Wildlife argues that the Endangered Species Act is ambiguous, and......
  • New Mexico Cattle Growers v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife, No. 98-0275 LH/DJS-ACE.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of New Mexico
    • 21 December 1999
    ...such area as part of the critical habitat," unless to do so would result in the extinction of the species. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 424.19. In other words, after this two part analysis, the FWS is authorized, but not required, to exclude areas based upon its In addition, the FWS ......
  • Alaska Oil & Gas Assoc. v. Salazar, Case Nos. 3:11–cv–0025–RRB, 3:11–cv–0036–RRB, 3:11–cv–0106–RRB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Alaska
    • 11 January 2013
    ...534 F.Supp.2d 1013, 1031(D.Ariz.2008). 94. ARI PBCH0045510–14. 95. ARI PBCH0045510. 96. Docket 77 at 22–23. 97. Docket 58 at 16. 98.50 CFR § 424.19 (2005) (emphasis added). 99.Bennett, 520 U.S. at 172, 117 S.Ct. 1154 (quoting 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2) (2003)). 100.Home Builders Ass'n of N. Cal......
  • Cape Hatteras Access Pres. Alliance v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, Civil Action No. 09-0236 (RCL)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • 17 August 2010
    ...has discretion when it comes time to decide whether to exclude areas from a critical habitat designation. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 424.19; see also CHAPA I, 344 F.Supp.2d at 127. Specifically, "[t]he Secretary may exclude any area from critical habitat if he determines that the b......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • New Mexico Cattle Growers v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife, No. 98-0275 LH/DJS-ACE.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of New Mexico
    • 21 December 1999
    ...such area as part of the critical habitat," unless to do so would result in the extinction of the species. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 424.19. In other words, after this two part analysis, the FWS is authorized, but not required, to exclude areas based upon its In addition, the FWS ......
  • Alaska Oil & Gas Assoc. v. Salazar, Case Nos. 3:11–cv–0025–RRB, 3:11–cv–0036–RRB, 3:11–cv–0106–RRB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Alaska
    • 11 January 2013
    ...534 F.Supp.2d 1013, 1031(D.Ariz.2008). 94. ARI PBCH0045510–14. 95. ARI PBCH0045510. 96. Docket 77 at 22–23. 97. Docket 58 at 16. 98.50 CFR § 424.19 (2005) (emphasis added). 99.Bennett, 520 U.S. at 172, 117 S.Ct. 1154 (quoting 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2) (2003)). 100.Home Builders Ass'n of N. Cal......
  • Cape Hatteras Access Pres. Alliance v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, Civil Action No. 09-0236 (RCL)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • 17 August 2010
    ...has discretion when it comes time to decide whether to exclude areas from a critical habitat designation. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 424.19; see also CHAPA I, 344 F.Supp.2d at 127. Specifically, "[t]he Secretary may exclude any area from critical habitat if he determines that the b......
  • N. N.M. Stockman's Ass'n v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., No. CIV 18-1138 JB\JFR
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of New Mexico
    • 13 October 2020
    ...the Secretary determines to be appropriate, and will compare the impacts with and without the designation.’ " Response at 19 (quoting 50 C.F.R. § 424.19(b) )(alteration in Response and not in 50 C.F.R. § 424.19(b) ). Fish & Wildlife argues that the Endangered Species Act is ambiguous, and......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT