I have pasted below copies of pages 1, 2, 3, and 35 from the May 31, 2022, California Court of Appeal decision in Almond Alliance of California, Plaintiff and Respondents v. California Fish and Game Commission, Defendant and Appellant, with Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation as an Intervener and Appellant. I have also provided below a pdf of the complete 35-page decision.
The short version is that the Court of Appeal found that the bumble bee, a terrestrial invertebrate, or more specifically, four species of the bumble bee, including the Crotch bumble bee, the Franklin bumble bee, the Suckley cuckoo bumble bee and the Western bumble bee, are or can be protected as endangered or threatened species under the definition of fish under sections 2061 and 2067 (and also possibly under section 2068) of the California Endangered Species Act (California Fish and Game Code section 2050, et seq.).
Please note that this decision might be appealed, or not. But it is now the current law in California. The Court also stated that it was affirming and expanding on its decision in California Forestry Association v. California Fish and Game Commission (2007) 156 Cal. App. 4th 1535, 1552.
Perhaps more important from a long-term or broad perspective, the Court also stated at page 35 of 35 of its decision: “For the foregoing reasons, we agree with the [California] Department [of Fish and Game] and the [California Fish and Game] Commission that the Commission may list any invertebrate as an endangered or threatened species under [sections] 2062 and 2067, if the invertebrate meets the requirement of those statutes, and thus may also designate any invertebrate as a candidate species under section 2068, if the species or subspecies may otherwise qualify as an endangered or threatened species.” Thus, the decision in Almond Alliance of California most likely is and will become even more significant and expansive for additional species.
This topic and other similar topics also can go into any number of different directions including, for example, the effects upon the bees of broad-based temperature or climate change and drought or lack of water resources, the difficulty or perhaps impossibility of identifying causation for species disappearance, ESG (if ESG becomes a more important legal or duty-related item), aspects of entity sustainability and governance, each species tends to populate a particular geographic area but obviously there are no walls or fences within which a species must stay, entity reputation, branding and communications, and perhaps audit and auditing, in addition to other areas and issues.
I make one additional note or view: California has over 200 agencies, departments and commissions, including, for example agencies, departments and commissions for business and economic development, jobs, housing, and labor and employment. When one California agency, department or commission takes a position on a matter, there appears to be either no or very little evaluation of the positive or negative impacts of that position on the missions and purposes of other California agencies, departments and commissions – or, if the potential impacts are taken into consideration, those discussions and deliberations cannot be found or are very difficult to find. I would encourage a risk management approach that uses an evaluation-of-the-whole approach, including to minimize the possibility of unplanned or unanticipated significant impacts.
Below are pages 1, 2, 3 and 35 from the decision in Almond Alliance of California v. Fish and Game Commission, and also a full pdf copy of the decision. I expect that this decision will have very significant, and broad ramifications.
* * * * * * *
Best to you,
David Tate, Esq. (and inactive CPA)
- Litigation, Disputes and Trials – Business, Contract/Commercial, Owner, Founder, Shareholder and Investor; Trust, Estate, Probate, Elder/Dependent Abuse, Conservatorships, POA, Real Property, Health and Care, and Contentious Administrations, etc.
- Mediator and Dispute Resolution
- D&O, Governance, Workplace/Employment, Officers, Boards, Investigations, IP, Auditing and Internal Controls, Law, Legislation, Communications, Authority, Duties, Responsibilities, Rights and Liability, Risk and Success Management, and Dispute Resolution and Mediation, etc.
Remember, every case and situation is different. It is important to obtain and evaluate all of the evidence that is available, and to apply that evidence to the applicable standards and laws. You do need to consult with an attorney and other professionals about your particular situation. This post is not a solicitation for legal or other services inside of or outside of California, and, of course, this post only is a summary of information that changes from time to time, and does not apply to any particular situation or to your specific situation. So . . . you cannot rely on this post for your situation or as legal or other professional advice or representation.
Also note – sometimes I include links to or comments about materials from other organizations or people – if I do so, it is because I believe that the materials are worthwhile reading or viewing; however, that doesn’t mean that I don’t or might not have a different view about some or even all of the subject matter or materials, or that I necessarily agree with, or agree with everything about or relating to, that organization or person, or those materials or the subject matter.
Thank you for reading this post. I ask that you also pass it along to other people who would be interested as it is through collaboration that great things and success occur more quickly. And please also subscribe to this blog and my other blog (see below), and connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter.
My two blogs are:
Trust, estate, conservatorship, elder and elder abuse, etc. litigation and contentious administrations http://californiaestatetrust.com
David Tate, Esq. (and inactive California CPA) – practicing only as an attorney in California.