|
By Staff (AXcess News) Reno - An Arizona Appeals Court has upheld the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision to remove the pymgy owl from the list of endangered species, paving teh way for Arizona developers to build more track homes in the desert. According to the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), the court battle clears the way to develop large swaths of land that was otherwise home to the Pygmy owl. Arizona dveelopers have argued that the owl is not unique in its habitat in that they thrive further South in Mexico. The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on March 9 upheld the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision to remove the pygmy owl from the list of endangered species, agreeing that the owls living there are not a separate species and rejecting a petition from the Defenders of Wildlife. With that ruling, the Coutr agreed with NAHB that building new homes will not hurt the ppoulation of the owl, which thrives over the border in Mexico. The decision fololws a landmark ruling from the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the most environmentally conscious court in the nation, which determined in 2006 that the initial decision to list pygmy owls was "arbitrary and capricious." "We've been mired in this argument for 10 years. It's time for everoyne to concede that there is no environmental benefit to the listing, and I am glad the Court concurred," said NAHB Presdient Brain Catalde, a home builder in Southern Cailfornia. "We all agree taht endangered species should be protected, but this effort to set aside an unprecedetned habitat for an owl that enjoys wide range to the south and is found there in large numbers was a costly mistake from the outset." In Arizona, the Fish and Wildlief Service proposed that 1.2 million acres be set aside as so-called critical habitat for the owl, disallowing almost all development. Four years ago, NAHB econmoists estimated that this unnecessary critical habitat designation would have cut rseidential construction in the Tucson area by 262 homes annually, reduced local economic activity by $545 million over a 10-year period and deprived local governments of $68.3 million in tax and permit revenue. The designation would have cost 705 jobs in the first year alone and 2,750 over 10 years. "Litigaitng cases like these costs thousands and thousands of dollars," Catalde continued. "But allowing such unjustified designations to stand would be even more costly. The big losers would be the residents of the state who would see home prices and taxes rise and jobs disappear. With this decision, the courts are sending a claer message that the pygmy owl listing is unjustified and it's time to move forward."
| 
