March 30, 2005

CONTACT:
Linda Krop, EDC, 805-963-1622
John Buse, CBD, 312-237-1443

Federal Judge Rules that US Fish & Wildlife
Service Improperly Denied Endangered Species Protection for San Fernando Valley Spineflower

Five Environmental Groups Prevail in Lawsuit
Brought to Protect Rare Plant Species Threatened by Newhall Ranch Development

CALIFORNIA (MARCH 30, 2005) On Friday, March 25, a federal district court judge ruled in favor of five environmental organizations, finding that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when the agency rejected a request to list the San Fernando Valley Spineflower as a threatened or endangered species. Specifically, Judge James Robertson found that the Service did not justify its explanation that although the plight of the Spineflower warranted protection under the ESA, a listing decision was "precluded" due to other higher priorities for the agency.

The Environmental Defense Center (EDC), a public interest law firm, filed the lawsuit in July 2003 in the Washington, D.C. federal district court on behalf of the California Native Plant Society, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Santa Clara River, Heal the Bay, and Save Open Space. The lawsuit was based on a petition brought by the City of Calabasas in 1999, seeking protection for this incredibly rare plant species. The San Fernando Valley Spineflower is a small, white-flowered annual that was thought to be extinct, but was rediscovered in May 1999. Prior to 1929, the plant had been found in many locations in Ventura, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties. Today, the San Fernando Valley Spineflower is known to occur only at two locations: on the Ahmanson Ranch in Ventura County, and on the site of the proposed Newhall Ranch development in Los Angeles County. The primary threat to the Spineflower is habitat destruction.

Despite the strong evidence that the Spineflower is endangered and warrants protection under the ESA, the Service has not taken the required steps to protect the species. Concerned that the Ahmanson Ranch project posed a threat to the newly rediscovered Spineflower, the City of Calabasas petitioned the Service to list the Spineflower as an endangered species in December 1999. The Service did not respond to this petition. Instead, the Service relied on an October 1999 determination that the Spineflower was a "candidate" for listing and issued a "warranted but precluded" finding that the Spineflower is in need of protection but that listing is precluded by other priorities within the agency. A candidate species is not afforded any protections under the ESA.

The Service issued additional "warranted but precluded' findings for the Spineflower in January 2001, October 2001, June 2002, and May 2004. As with the first finding, these actions provided no protection for the Spineflower, despite imminent development threats at both Ahmanson and Newhall Ranches. Although the Ahmanson Ranch has since been preserved, massive development plans for the Newhall Ranch will significantly jeopardize the existence of this rare species.

In his ruling, the Judge found that the Service failed to substantiate its claim that other listing petitions were of higher priority and therefore left the agency without the funding or resources to evaluate the status of the Spineflower. The Judge also directed the Service to address the plaintiffs' claim that the agency had violated the ESA by failing to demonstrate expeditious progress towards listing of this and other species.

"This decision should break the bureaucratic logjam that has left the San Fernando Valley Spineflower unprotected by the federal Endangered Species Act, despite the acknowledged threat of extinction," said John Buse, formerly lead counsel on the case for the Environmental Defense Center and currently on staff with the Center for Biological Diversity. "At this point, there is no longer any excuse for Fish and Wildlife Service's failure to protect this rare plant."