2008 delisting decision. The resulting 2009 wolf delisting rule, like itspredecessor, is fraught with legal infirmities. While repeating many of the errorsof the 2008 rule, the 2009 Delisting Rule creates entirely new violations. Amongother things, the 2009 Delisting Rule unlawfully delisted a portion of the northernRockies wolf population while retaining endangered status for wolves inWyoming, failed to ensure that the northern Rockies wolf population exhibitsgenetic connectivity essential to its survival, and will allow the wolf population inIdaho and Montana to decline dramatically on the basis of outdated and inadequatewolf population recovery targets. As a result, the delisted northern Rockies wolf population will never achieve true recovery as envisioned by Congress when itenacted the ESA.4.
In light of these deficiencies, this Court should set aside the DelistingRule and order that wolves in the northern Rockies be returned to the federal list of threatened and endangered species until their long-term viability is assured.
JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to the ESA citizen-suit provision,16 U.S.C. § 1540(g), which waives defendants’ sovereign immunity, and theAdministrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question)and may issue a declaratory judgment and further relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§2
Case 9:09-cv-00077-DWM Document 1 Filed 06/02/2009 Page 3 of 42