WINNEMUCCA - The list of Endangered Species Act lawsuits against the federal government is long. Make that very long - and very costly.
Since the start of the 2009 fiscal year, the U.S. Department of Justice's running tally of related litigation has grown to 276 pages, with some of those cases reaching back to the administrations of Bill Clinton and the first President Bush.
States and local governments initiated a number of lawsuits against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other federal agencies; industry-affiliated organizations lodged others.
But a majority of the 573 cases have come from environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth (sic) Guardians and the Western Watersheds Project, to name a few.
In cases where those groups prevail, the Equal Access to Justice Act mandates that the federal government - and, in turn, American taxpayers - may be obligated to reimburse them for legal fees and court costs they incur.
So when the National Marine Fisheries Service lost a case involving threatened chinook salmon in the Columbia and Snake River systems, the federal government sent environmental attorney Todd True a check for $950,000. Years later, attorney Steve Mashuda received $940,000 for the same case, according to the Justice Department.
The Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity, which was involved in 117 active lawsuits between the 2009 and 2012 fiscal years, dismisses claims that environmental groups are profiting from the Endangered Species Act.
Bill Snape, the group's senior counsel, said the biggest benefits to come from the litigation are going to help plants and animals that face the threat of extinction.
In one major victory for the group, it reached an "agreement" that speeds up decisions on whether to list 757 of the country's most imperiled - but least protected - plants and animals.
The Center for Biological Diversity did receive a $128,158 check for attorneys' fees in that case. But according to Snape's calculations, that number works out to about $168.29 per species - a figure that he calls an "incredible bargain" for taxpayers.
"We go to court when the government fails to follow its own laws, meant to protect plants and animals from extinction," Snape said in a statement. "When we prevail - that is, when a judge agrees the government must be held accountable - we're eligible for attorney fees, at less than fair-market value."
House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings sees things differently.
The Washington state Republican points to the latest Justice Department data as further proof that the Endangered Species Act is driven by frivolous lawsuits that hinder economic activity and public needs. The litigation ultimately diminishes the trust of taxpayers who subsidize these attorneys' fees, he said.
"The original purpose of the ESA was to help recover endangered species and remove them from the list, not force taxpayers to reward an army of environmental lawyers to exploit vague definitions and deadlines that realistically cannot be met," Hastings said in a statement. "While a few environmental lawyers rake in the federal cash at hundreds of dollars per hour, the needs of truly endangered species suffer. More seriously, American jobs are lost and people are hurt."
To be fair, not all of the Equal Access to Justice money is going to environmental groups or their attorneys.
In fact, businesses and trade groups are far more inclined to file lawsuits against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), according to a 2011 report from the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO).
In cases where they prevail, their lawyers are entitled to seek the same amount of reimbursement that environmental groups' attorneys receive. And there are other instances when industries and trade associations have triumphed in Endangered Species Act lawsuits, as well.
For instance, Wyoming State Snowmobile Association attorney Beth Ginsberg collected a hefty $253,336.45, plus another $11,663.55 in court costs, in one such case that was settled last June.
In a separate case, attorney Norman D. James successfully argued an Endangered Species Act case on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders, and was awarded $225,000 for his effort. The government gave James an additional $21,315.07 in court costs.
Dollar for dollar, though, Hastings' office says that most of the $15-plus million in litigation-related fees has gone to attorneys for environmental groups, and the figures from the Justice Department corroborate that claim.
According to the department, the federal government paid Laurence J. "Laird" Lucas $790,985 on May 23, 2011, following his legal victory in a case involving the Rio Grande silvery minnow. That same day, the Boise attorney received an additional $31,018.74 in reimbursement.
In another case, the Justice Department says the government owes Advocates for the West $396,832; it didn't indicate if that payment has been made to date. Lucas, who serves as that group's executive director, is also owed another $135,000 in a case against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Aside from Lucas, other names pop up repeatedly throughout the Justice Department's lengthy document.
One of them belongs to Colorado attorney Geoff Hickcox, who received almost $539,218 for his work on just five Endangered Species Act lawsuits. On top of that amount, the two-person law firm of Kenna and Hickcox collected $153,784.87 for a handful of other cases where it prevailed.
Attorney Neil Levine also netted more than $889,894 based on his work in five cases for the Tucson Herpetological Society, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance and other groups, according to the Justice Department.
Neither last nor least, the Justice Department says the federal government paid attorney Kristen L. Boyles $500,000 after The Wilderness Society won a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service.
As for the Center for Biological Diversity itself, the Justice Department's recent numbers are in dispute.
The group claims that it received $552,897, which amounts to just 3.6 percent of the total ESA-related litigation fees that the federal government paid over the last few years.
To inflate those numbers any further, Snape said, "reeks of a cynical ploy to gin up another misleading talking point."
But according to Hastings' office, Snape's group received nearly $2.29 million, including almost $2.15 million in attorneys' fees.
The House Natural Resources Committee called attention to five payments listed in the Justice Department document that the Center for Biological Diversity failed to include in its estimates:
• On March 23, 2009, Hickcox received $165,000;
• On Aug. 13, 2009, Center for Biological Diversity Legal Director John T. Buse received $51,866;
• On April 23, 2010, Hickcox received another payment - this one for $95,000;
• On Nov. 22, 2010, the federal government paid $172,000 to CBD Staff Attorney Justin Augustine;
• On Feb. 9, 2012, attorney Melanie Kay got a check for $159,044.
Other examples lead Hastings to conclude that the group is "conveniently" failing to include the majority of taxpayer funds that went directly to its hired lawyers - nine of whom received payouts.
"One frequent collector of taxpayer dollars spent a week inventing a way to misconstrue and hide data to make it appear as though they haven't received millions in taxpayer dollars," he said.
To read the Justice Department's list in full, go to: http://naturalresources.house.gov/UploadedFiles/DOJESADefensiveCases04-26-12.pdf.
For more information about Hastings' inquiry, go to: http://naturalresources.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=300005.
To learn more about the Center for Biological Diversity's position on the issue, go to: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2012/settlement-fees-06-14-2012.html; or go to: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2012/endangered-species-cases-06-27-2012.html.
[[In-content Ad]]
