Expert Support for Public Interest Litigation
The Center for Sustainable Economy assists non-profit organizations seeking to enforce federal, state, and local laws protecting the quality of our environment and sustainability of our communities through public interest litigation. We work with a network of experienced attorneys who litigate under statues such as the federal National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, Clean Water Act, Freedom of Information Act and their state level counterparts. We supply expert declarations in the fields of environmental economics, conservation biology, and planning. We prepare administrative level comments and appeals on both a programmatic and site specific basis, and help organizations develop systems to monitor upcoming threats.
Recent examples of our public interest litigation support include:
CSE and its partner Redefining Progress submitted comments in opposition of a major expansion of unsustainable aquaculture operations in the Gulf of Mexico. The federal government and states are now considering opening up the entire Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to aquaculture, or fish farming. The Gulf of Mexico and California are among the first regions targeted. Last fall, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DPEIS). While there are many types of low-impact aquaculture operations, the operations contemplated by the DPEIS include high trophic level carnivorous species that consume many times their weight in feed taken from wild fish stocks, pose additional risks to wild stocks through genetic contamination and disease, generate significant water pollution, and adversely affect a wide range of ecosystem services provided by healthy marine habitats. Read:
DPEIS comments
American Bird Conservancy and Forest Conservation Council vs. Federal Communications Commission, Docket # 06-1165, D.C. District Court of Appeals.
American Bird Conservancy and Forest Conservation Council vs. Federal Communications Commission, Docket # 05-1112, D.C. District Court of Appeals. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has decided to proceed with a proposed rulemaking to protect migratory birds. This victory comes in response to petitions and lawsuits filed by CSE (formerly Forest Conservation Council), American Bird Conservancy, and Friends of the Earth. Around 50,000,000 birds are killed by communication towers in the U.S. each year. If passed, the FCC rulemaking will mandate measures be taken by tower owners proven to help prevent these bird deaths at nearly 90,000 towers. The notice of this proposed rulemaking was issued on November 7, 2006. The FCC will continue taking public comments for 60 days from this date. Read:
Forest Conservation Council et al. v. United States Forest Service, Appeal No. 05-35166. CSE (formerly Forest Conservation Council) and seven other plaintiffs seek to compel the U.S. Forest Service to consider the wide range of ecosystem service benefits associated with unlogged forests as well as the externalized costs of logging when the agency prepares timber sales and other management activities on national forest lands. Without considering these benefits and costs, Forest Service decisions are biased in favor of logging. This case is now under appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments on September 11th. Read:
American Bird Conservancy, Forest Conservation Council, and Conservation Council for Hawaii v. Federal Communications Commission, CV-05-00461 DAE LEK. In the summer of 2005, Forest Conservation Council, American Bird Conservancy, and the Conservation Council for Hawai`i today filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Honolulu against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) citing the agency's failure to protect two imperiled birds - the Newell's Shearwater, or 'A'o, and Hawaiian Petrel, or 'Ua'u - from fatal collisions at seven large communication towers on Kaua'i and the Big Island. CSE (formerly Forest Conservation Council) developed the factual basis for the lawsuit and filed the administrative level petitions prior to the suit. The lawsuit is currently in the appeal stage. Read: