50 C.F.R. 17.84 - Special rules-vertebrates

Cite as50 C.F.R. 17.84
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
124 practice notes
  • Defenders of Wildlife v. Tuggle, No. CV 08-280 TUC DCB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • March 31, 2009
    ...Population of the Mexican Gray Wolf in Arizona and New Mexico (Final Rule), 63 Fed. Reg. 1752 (January 12, 1998) (codified at 50 C.F.R. 17.84(k)). The Service classified the wolf as a nonessential experimental population, subject to release under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), section 10......
  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, No. CV-15-00019-TUC-JGZ (l)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • March 30, 2018
    ...To date, the "essential" designation has never been applied to an experimental population of any species. See 50 C.F.R. §§ 17.11, 17.84. As with the other provisions of the ESA, conservation and recovery are at the heart of Section 10(j). See Defs. of Wildlife v. Tuggle, 607 F. Supp. 2d 109......
  • Wyoming v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, No. 04-CV-0123-J.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Wyoming
    • March 18, 2005
    ...environmental impact statement was filed.3 In November 1994, the United States Department of Interior (Interior) promulgated a rule, 50 C.F.R. § 17.84(i)(the Final Rule), authorizing the introduction of experimental, non-essential gray wolf populations into Yellowstone Park and central Idah......
  • WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, CV-13-392-TUC DCB
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Arizona
    • July 27, 2015
    ...will not be considered unavoidable, accidental, or an unintentional take" that is immune from criminal prosecution under the ESA." 50 C.F.R. § 17.84(k)(15). Laws of the United States include both federal statutes and federal regulations. Reid v. Johnson & Johnson , 780 F.3d 952, 963–964 (20......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
41 cases
  • Defenders of Wildlife v. Tuggle, No. CV 08-280 TUC DCB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • March 31, 2009
    ...Population of the Mexican Gray Wolf in Arizona and New Mexico (Final Rule), 63 Fed. Reg. 1752 (January 12, 1998) (codified at 50 C.F.R. 17.84(k)). The Service classified the wolf as a nonessential experimental population, subject to release under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), section 10......
  • Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, No. CV-15-00019-TUC-JGZ (l)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Arizona
    • March 30, 2018
    ...To date, the "essential" designation has never been applied to an experimental population of any species. See 50 C.F.R. §§ 17.11, 17.84. As with the other provisions of the ESA, conservation and recovery are at the heart of Section 10(j). See Defs. of Wildlife v. Tuggle, 607 F. Supp. 2d 109......
  • Wyoming v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, No. 04-CV-0123-J.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Wyoming
    • March 18, 2005
    ...environmental impact statement was filed.3 In November 1994, the United States Department of Interior (Interior) promulgated a rule, 50 C.F.R. § 17.84(i)(the Final Rule), authorizing the introduction of experimental, non-essential gray wolf populations into Yellowstone Park and central Idah......
  • WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, CV-13-392-TUC DCB
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Arizona
    • July 27, 2015
    ...will not be considered unavoidable, accidental, or an unintentional take" that is immune from criminal prosecution under the ESA." 50 C.F.R. § 17.84(k)(15). Laws of the United States include both federal statutes and federal regulations. Reid v. Johnson & Johnson , 780 F.3d 952, 963–964 (20......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • The scope of federal authority under the Endangered Species Act: implications for local land use planning.
    • United States
    • Albany Law Review Vol. 65 Nbr. 2, December 2001
    • December 22, 2001
    ...women and commerce). (141) 214 F.3d 483 (4th Cir. 2000). (142) Id. at 486. (143) Id. More specifically, the case challenged regulation 50 C.F.R. 17.84(c), Wildlife and Fisheries Rules (1998), which extended, with certain exceptions, the ESA's section 9 takings prohibition to experimental po......
  • Enforcement and Citizen Suits
    • United States
    • Endangered species deskbook
    • April 22, 2010
    ...endangered species or threatened species within any State; or 25. Id . §1540(a)(3), ELR Stat. ESA §11(a)(3). 26. For example, under 50 C.F.R. §17.84(c)(4)(iii), [a]ny private landowner, or any other individual having his or her permission, may take red wolves found on his or her property in......

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