The Center for Biological Diversity last week gave the Bush
administration official notice of its intent to file a lawsuit for
illegally excluding global warming and ocean acidification threats from
a new rule protecting habitat for elkhorn and staghorn corals.
The suit was triggered by what the Center said is a loophole in a new
rule published by the federal government. The rule designates almost
3,000 square miles of reef area off the coasts of Florida, Puerto Rico,
and the U.S. Virgin Islands as critical habitat under the Endangered
Species Act for the threatened corals. The new rule was required by a
court-approved settlement of a 2007 lawsuit brought by the Center.
However, the Center says the new critical-habitat rule disregards the primary threats to coral habitat: elevated
seawater temperatures and ocean acidification–both believed to be effects of global warming.
The Center contends that when a species is listed under the Endangered Species Act, the
federal government must protect habitat that is essential to its
survival and recovery. In a similar situation earlier this year,
the Bush administration allowed the "threatened" listing of the polar
bear, but said it would not allow the Endangered Species Act to be used
to set climate change policy.
"The critical-habitat rule exposes the Bush agenda to ignore global
warming, while rising temperatures are driving corals extinct," said
Miyoko Sakashita, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity.
"The rule shows the double standard of the Bush administration. On one
hand, the law required the federal government to identify areas to
protect for the threatened corals. On the other hand, the
administration skirted the real threats to coral habitat, global
warming and ocean acidification, by inserting language into the rule
that carves out an exception for those threats. It is not only
irrational, but it is illegal under the Endangered Species Act."
Once the most abundant and important reef-building corals in
Florida and the Caribbean, staghorn and elkhorn corals have declined by
more than 90% in many areas, mainly as a result of disease and
"bleaching," an often-fatal stress response to abnormally high water
temperatures in which corals expel the symbiotic algae that give them
color.
The rising temperature of the ocean as a result of global warming is
the single greatest threat to these two coral species, as well as coral
reefs more generally worldwide. A related threat, ocean acidification,
caused by the ocean’s absorption of carbon dioxide, impairs the ability
of corals to build their protective skeletons. Scientists have
predicted that most of the world’s coral reefs will disappear by
midcentury due to global warming and ocean acidification under a
business-as-usual emissions scenario.
"Critical habitat protection can be an important factor leading
to the recovery of our coral reefs, because changes to the ocean
habitat are some of the primary threats to the corals," Sakashita said.
"This rule, however, misses the mark by ignoring the simple fact that
carbon dioxide pollution is degrading coral habitat and killing coral
reefs."
Once an area is designated as critical habitat, the Endangered
Species Act requires federal agencies to ensure that any activities
they authorize do not destroy or adversely modify that habitat. The
Center For Biogolgical Diversity says federal authorizations resulting
in substantial greenhouse gas emissions should be subject to this
prohibition.
"While today’s critical habitat rule properly identifies important
coral areas off Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands for
increased legal protection, the rule bizarrely and illegally states
that elevated water temperatures will not be analyzed as a factor
impacting critical habitat," the non-profit environmental advocacy
group said in a release.
Loading...