Laserfiche WebLink
? <br />i <br />259 F.3d 1244, *; 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17639, **; <br />53 ERC (BNA) 1368; 31 ELR 20864 <br />OPIlVION: <br />[* 1246] <br />EBEL, Circuit Judge. <br />The Coalition for Sustainable Resources <br />("Coalition") challenges the United States Forest <br />Service's failure to implement particular forest- <br />management practices in the Medicine Bow National <br />Forest in Wyoming, including increased timber <br />harvesting. The Coalition alleges that these practices <br />would increase the amount of water in the Platte River in <br />Nebraska and thereby promote the recovery of several <br />endangered and threatened species utilizing that habitat. <br />The district court dismissed the case as not yet ripe for <br />review, and also found that the Coalition had failed to <br />state a claim upon which relief can be granted because <br />the Endangered Species Act does not require federal <br />agencies to adopt particular conservation measures. <br />We hold that this case is not yet ripe, and we <br />therefore lack subject-matter jurisdiction. Here, the <br />Coalition is challenging the Forest Service's inaction, but <br />this inaction is not sufficiently fmal for review. The <br />Forest Service is currently a cooperating agency in <br />developing a conservation strategy for the Platte River <br />species and is also revising its [**3] forest plan for the <br />Medicine Bow. Because the agency has adopted a <br />reasonable timeframe to study this problem, given the <br />complexity and urgency of the issues, we conclude that <br />judicial review is not warranted at this time. We therefore <br />AFFIRM the district court's dismissal for lack of <br />jurisdiction and VACATE its disposition on the merits. <br />BACKGROUND <br />The Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. ,¢ ,¢ 1531- <br />1544, is a comprehensive scheme for the protection of <br />listed endangered and threatened species and their <br />habitat, regulating the activities of both governmental <br />[*1247] and private entities. The Act's ultimate goal is <br />"conservation," bringing these species to the point where <br />legal protections are no longer necessary. 16 U.S.C. § § <br />1531(b), 1532(3). The Department of the Interior's Fish <br />and Wildlife Service and the Deparhnent of Commerce's <br />National Marine Fisheries Service share primary <br />responsibility for administration of most parts of the Act. <br />16 U.S.C. § 1532(15); 50 C.F.R. § 17.2(b). At issue in <br />this case, however, is a provision covering all other <br />federal agencies, including the Department of <br />Agriculture's [**4] Forest Service. These agencies <br />"shall, in consultation with and with the assistance of the <br />Secretaries of the Interior and of Commerce, utilize their <br />authorities in furtherance of the purposes of [the <br />Page 2 <br />Endangered Species Act] by carrying out programs for <br />the conservation of endangered species and threatened <br />species." 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(1). <br />The Platte River in Nebraska is home to the <br />whooping crane, least tern, pallid sturgeon, and piping <br />plover, all species listed as endangered or threatened <br />under the Endangered Species Act, and part of the river <br />has been designated "critical habitat" for the whooping <br />crane. The Coalition alleges that more water (some <br />238,000 acre-feet per year) is needed in the Platte River <br />to meet target flows established for the listed species. <br />The Coalition alleges that the Fish and Wildlife Service <br />has determined that a loss of as little as 0.7 acre-feet of <br />water per year from the South Platte River drainage in <br />Colorado is likely to jeopardize the continued existence <br />of these species and adversely modify the designated <br />critical habitat. n3 <br />n3 The Final Biological Opinion referenced <br />by the Coalition's allegation does refer to a <br />proposed action that could reduce flow by 0.7 <br />acre-feet annually, but that Opinion makes it clear <br />that this particular action is only a"very small <br />proportion of the depletions in the Platte River <br />system" which cumulatively could have the <br />adverse effects alleged by the Coalition. <br />**5 <br />The Department of the Interior and the states of <br />Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming have signed a <br />"Cooperative Agreement for Platte River Research and <br />Other Efforts Relating to Endangered Species Habitats <br />Along the Central Platte River, Nebraska.° The purpose <br />of this plan is to study the listed species dependant on the <br />Platte River and implement a recovery plan. Although it <br />is not a signatory, the Forest Service is participating as a <br />"cooperating agency" in the development of an <br />Environmental Impact Statement for the Cooperative <br />Agreement. The recard reflects that a program would be <br />developed by the end of 2000. n4 <br />n4 The district court concluded that the study <br />would be complete by July 2000. Intervenor <br />Biodiversity Associates similarly informed us in <br />its brief that the work "should be fmished later <br />this year [2000]." However, the parties have not <br />given us a status report on those expected <br />timetables.