Recent Victories

Defending Endangered Species Act protections for the bi-state sage-grouse

Our students challenged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s withdrawal of the proposed listing of the Bi-State Sage-Grouse as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.  In 2018, the N.D. Cal. sided with the Clinic in holding that that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s definition of what constitutes a “significant” part of a species’ range is an “impermissible interpretation” of the Endangered Species Act’s statutory language.  The Department of Fish and Wildlife was compelled to revisit the proposed listing, but once again came up short and decided not to list the BSSG in 2020. The Clinic sued again and won (see Complaint, Sep. 29, 2020, and Order on Summary Judgment, May 16, 2022).

ELC students scored a big court victory in our efforts to protect the bi-state sage-grouse in a case aimed at curbing impacts from off-road vehicles. In Sierra Trail Dogs Motorcycle and Recreation Club v. U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. District Court for Nevada upheld U.S. Forest Service measures designed to protect sage-grouse habitat from off-road vehicle impacts. The Clinic intervened in this litigation on behalf of several environmental groups to provide broader factual context for the District Court to understand the importance of the bi-state sage-grouse and to highlight the errors in the plaintiffs’ NEPA arguments.

Protecting native bumblebee populations

The Clinic intervened on behalf of Clinic clients the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Defenders of Wildlife, and the Center for Food Safety to defend the California Fish and Game Commission’s decision to protect four species of critically endangered native bumblebees under the California Endangered Species Act.  In Almond Alliance v. California Fish and Game Commission, several prominent agricultural interest groups challenged the Fish and Game Commission’s authority to list bees as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. But in a major win for Stanford Environmental Law Clinic clients, biodiverse ecosystems, and everyone who eats food, a California Court of Appeal ruled that the state can protect bumblebees under the California Endangered Species Act. The court’s ruling comes at a critical time: over one-third of California’s food production requires an animal pollinator, but many pollinator populations are plunging. The Fish and Game Commission can now move forward with protecting the four bumblebee species and other pollinators before it is too late. Read more here.

Protecting salmon habitat in Marin County, California

Our students successfully represented the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN) in its efforts to preserve the last remaining habitat of the critically imperiled Central California Coast coho salmon in Marin County, California.  After a decade of litigation, we initiated — and won — a new CEQA lawsuit to ensure the County properly mitigates impacts to salmon habitat in its development planning. This victory prompted settlement discussions with the County and ultimately, a new conservation ordinance that protects one of the most important remaining watersheds for coho salmon and steelhead in the state.

Successful challenge to toxic rodenticide

A California Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Stanford Environmental Law Clinic client, Raptors Are The Solution, finding that the discovery of new scientific information on the rat poison diphacinone requires the state to conduct proper environmental analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) before deciding whether to renew the rodenticide’s registration.

Thwarting environmentally harmful large-scale desalination

ELC, on behalf of clients California Coastkeeper Alliance; California Coastal Protection Network; and Orange County Coastkeeper, scuttled a large-scale commercial desalination project in Huntington Beach due to concerns about coastal resources and other environmental impacts.