ELR Citation: 43 ELR 20050
No(s). 11-5219 (D.C. Cir. Mar 1, 2013)

The D.C. Circuit affirmed a lower court decision upholding FWS' listing of the polar bear as threatened under the ESA, in part due to the effects of global climate change. Below, a number of industry groups argued that the listing rule is arbitrary and capricious under the APA and that FWS' action should be reversed because of a series of deficiencies in the rulemaking process and the listing rule itself, but the lower court rejected their claims and granted summary judgment to FWS. On appeal, the groups have neither pointed to mistakes in the agency's reasoning nor adduced any data or studies that the agency overlooked. In addition, appellants challenge neither the agency's findings on climate science nor on polar bear biology. Rather, the principal claim advanced by appellants is that FWS misinterpreted and misapplied the record before it. But given the evident thoroughness and care of FWS' explanation for its decision, the court can only conclude, as did the lower court, that appellants' challenges "amount to nothing more than competing views about policy and science."