preview

Sweet Home Chapter Of Communities For A Great Oregon

Decent Essays
Part A
Parties to the Case, Facts of the Case, and Business Reasons for the Dispute (30 points) Plaintiffs
Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon consisted of various landowners, logging companies, and timber workers in the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast, collectively referred to here as "Sweet Home”.
Defendant
Fish and Wildlife Director, Department of Interior, Secretary Bruce Babbitt 's interpretation of the ESA and his characterization of the word “harm”.
Facts of the Case and Business Reasons for the Dispute
According to United State Department of Justice, the plaintiffs in Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities For a Better Oregon charged that, under the Secretary’s characterization, they were powerless to develop and log on their property which was attributable to the presence of northern spotted owls and red-cockaded woodpeckers registered as threatened under the ESA. The plaintiffs challenged the regulation, contending that the characterization defied Congressional intention. (United State Department of Justice, 2015)
According to Wikipedia, 2015, the Secretary of the Interior and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) director translated the word “harm” in the characterization of “take” in Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act to symbolize an action which basically kills or injures wildlife. Under the statutory language of the Interior Department Regulation, these actions possibly will include considerable habitat conversion or mortification
Get Access