Subject: FW: SW BIODIVERSITY ALERT #97


Subject: SW BIODIVERSITY ALERT #97

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              SOUTHWEST BIODIVERSITY ALERT #97
                           10/21/97          

          SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
           silver city, tucson, phoenix, san diego
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. SUIT FILED TO LIST RARE WETLAND PLANT AS ENDANGERED
2. ENVIROS, HUNTERS OCCUPY REP. KOLBE'S OFFICE-
     DAILY STAR EDITORIALIZES AGAINST KOLBE RIDER
3. APPEALS COURT REJECTS TIMBER COMPANY BID TO INTERVENE IN SW
     LOGGING AND GRAZING INJUNCTION
4. WILDERNESS SOCIETY BOARD MEMBER FIGHTS LOGGING INJUNCTION
     SUPPORTS LOGGING OF OLD GROWTH

     *****     *****     *****     *****

SUIT FILED TO LIST RARE WETLAND PLANT AS ENDANGERED

The Southwest Center has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service for refusing to act on a petition to list the
Huachuca dock as an endangered species. The dock is an obligate of
high elevation cienegas (wetlands) on the Apache-Sitgreaves, Tonto,
and Coronado National Forest. It has declined dramatically in recent
years due to overgrazing, road construction, and inappropriate
campground placement.

The suit was filed in a federal court in Phoenix, AZ. The Center
is represented by Matt Kenna of Kenna & Associates (Durango).
     _____     _____     _____

ENVIROS, HUNTERS OCCUPY REP. KOLBE'S OFFICE-
DAILY STAR EDITORIALIZES AGAINST KOLBE RIDER

On October 4, 1997, 30 protesters from the Southwest Center, Sky Island
Watch and the Western Game Bird Alliance occupied the Tucson office of
Representative Jim Kolbe, in protest of his support for a rider by
Senators Kyl and Domenici, effectively overruling a Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals injunction on logging and grazing which violate
Forest Plan standards and guidelines.

On October 16, 1997, the Arizona Daily star blasted Kolbe and Kyl for
helping Republicans to "load a raft of anti-environmental riders onto
the basic Interior Department funding bill." Citing congressional
"perversion," "sleaze," and "malicious maneuvering," and a
"monstrosity of decadent lawmaking," the Star called on Clinton to
veto the bill.
     _____     _____    _____     _____

APPEALS COURT REJECTS TIMBER COMPANY BID TO INTERVENE IN SW LOGGING
AND GRAZING INJUNCTION

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a bid by Precision
Pine and Timber Inc. to intervene in the lawsuit by Forest Guardians
and the Southwest Center which has resulted in a temporary injunction
against logging and grazing in the Southwest. Precision Pine was
twice rebuffed by the U.S. Supreme court in similar motions.

The Southwest Center has asked the U.S. Attorney to file perjury
charges against Lewis Tenney, owner of Precision Pine, for declaring
that the injunction will drive him out of business when the company
actually has a year's supply of timber which it won't cut because of
market conditions. Three days after closing its Winslow, AZ mill,
Tenney was paid over $300,000 in timber sale cancellation fees.
None of it was shared with the worker's Tenney professes to care so
much about.

Forest Guardians and SW Center are represented in the case by
EarthLaw (Denver).
     _____     _____     _____

WILDERNESS SOCIETY BOARD MEMBER FIGHTS LOGGING INJUNCTION
SUPPORTS LOGGING OF OLD GROWTH

Wilderness Society board member and lawyer Charles Wilkinson, has
filed a brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf
of a timber corporation, opposing an injunction on logging
which violates National Forest plans in Arizona and New Mexico.
The brief specifically targets the La Manga timber sale in
northern New Mexico for release from the injunction. La Manga is
the worst active timber sale in the Southwest. It will cut enormous
trees in one of the few remaining intact old growth ponderosa pine
stands in the Southwest. Wilkinson believes that the trees should be
cut regardless of their beauty, ecological value, or rarity simply
because the timber company is a local Hispanic operation.

Even worse in the long run, Wilkinson makes a highly technical argument
that could deal a terrible blow to alliance and coalition building in
the environmental movement. He argues that if one member of a coalition
independently brings a lawsuit, then all members of the coalition
should be banned from bringing similar suits in the future. He is
trying to establish a legal precedent that all networked environmental
groups have exactly the same legal interests, a strategy, which if
successful, will keep many environmentalists from joining alliances.


_____________________________________________________________________________

Kieran Suckling                               ksuckling@sw-center.org
Executive Director                            520.623.5252 phone
Southwest Center for Biological Diversity     520.623.9797 fax
http://www.sw-center.org                      pob 710, tucson, az 85702-710