Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Chilton emphasized that this case demonstrates the need to strengthen the Endangered Species Act to close loopholes that have allowed groups like the Center for Biological Diversity to make money by suing the federal government. It was revealed at trial that the Center collected over $990,000 in 2003 from lawsuits it filed, mostly against the government.
1 posted on 03/04/2005 7:03:39 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: madfly
(Tucson) Judge Richard Fields entered formal judgment on March 2, 2005 against the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental activist corporation, and found that they must pay $600,000 in actual and punitive damages to Arizona rancher Jim Chilton and the Chilton Ranch and Cattle Company.

YES! I hope this catches on.

The environmentalist have been given too much power and they're way out of hand. I think that if they want to stop a miner from working in the middle of nowhere to save some salmon, they should have to compensate him. If they're so damned worried about the salmon they can buy them.
2 posted on 03/04/2005 7:08:12 AM PST by Jaysun (Ask me for a free "Insomnia for Beginners" guide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

The lies of the Green extremists need to be more broadly exposed.


3 posted on 03/04/2005 7:08:31 AM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: farmfriend; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp; Libertarianize the GOP
WIN! ping

I have a 3 page .pdf Judgement and Declaratory Judgement sent to me by the Attorney, if anyone wants a copy.

4 posted on 03/04/2005 7:08:38 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

Halleluja! Amen! Sanity at last in the legal system. I hope this result is NOT reversed on the inevitable appeal and serves to keep the whacko tree huggers at bay.

Would be nice if, instead of issuing the judgement aganst the "Center for whatever cr@ap" it was called, the judgements were entered against the INDIVIDUALS who called the shots. The Center can be folded up and the whackos can re-establish it with a new label otherwise.


5 posted on 03/04/2005 7:08:54 AM PST by henkster (When democrats talk of "the rich," they are referring to anyone with a private sector job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
Chilton emphasized that this case demonstrates the need to strengthen the Endangered Species Act...

With all due respect to the judge, the Endangered Species Act needs to be ABOLISHED - or limited to Bald Eagles.

6 posted on 03/04/2005 7:09:42 AM PST by Condor51 (May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't. - Gen G Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

Thanks for posting this.


7 posted on 03/04/2005 7:12:53 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan kidnapped because she knew the Oil for Food program failed to aid Iraqis?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

Great article. Thanks for posting it.


10 posted on 03/04/2005 7:27:21 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

Yes, Dorothy, there is a Santa Claus!!!! Praise the Lord!! A Judge who has rational thought processes!!!


11 posted on 03/04/2005 7:28:57 AM PST by Virginia Queen (Virginia Queen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly
To demonstrate how the Center for Biological Diversity has grown, it was once called the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity. They've gotten most of their funds by suing Federal and State agencies then inflating their costs when they inevitably win against overworked government lawyers. I've seen haggard Interior Department lawyers mumble as they walk into a meeting room, "Now which lawsuit is this about?" This ruling couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of road bandits.

Muleteam1

15 posted on 03/04/2005 7:38:53 AM PST by Muleteam1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: forester; sasquatch; B4Ranch; hedgetrimmer; knews_hound; paulat; abbi_normal_2; Ace2U; adam_az; ...

ping


16 posted on 03/04/2005 7:56:23 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Calpernia; Velveeta; TexasCowboy

Ping


19 posted on 03/04/2005 8:00:55 AM PST by nw_arizona_granny (The enemy within, will be found in the "Communist Manifesto 1963", you are living it today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

time to sue Meryl Strep and a few other SPOKESMEN for false claims like Alar and apples or electric wires cause cancer.


21 posted on 03/04/2005 8:06:14 AM PST by q_an_a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
http://www.newfarm.org/news/2005/0205/021005/chilton.shtml

Arizona rancher wins libel suit against environmental watch dog group

February 16, 2005: In an unusual episode in the longstanding 'ranchers vs. environmentalists' drama, a jury awarded Arizona rancher and investment banker Jim Chilton $600,000 in actual and punitive damages to be paid by the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity.

The non-profit environmental group, which since its founding in 1989 has made its reputation by filing lawsuits on behalf of endangered species, in July 2002 posted photos on its website allegedly depicting environmental damage caused by Chilton's cattle on a 21,5000-acre Forest Service allotment northwest of Nogales, Arizona. The center posted the photos as part of a campaign to bar renewal of Chilton's Forest Service grazing permit.

Chilton, a fifth generation rancher, sued the group for libel, charging that photos and captions willfully misrepresented his ranching practices.

The center's lawyer argued that the photos and other material represented the environmental group's opinions, and thus that they should be protected by the First Amendment right to free speech. Kieran Suckling, the center's director, was quoted as saying, "We did things with the best of intentions. If there were some mistakes, they were honest mistakes."

After two-weeks of testimony, 21 witnesses and more than 100 exhibits the jury, in a 9-1 decision, ruled the claims made about Chilton were indeed, “false, unfair, libelous and defamatory.” Chilton promised that after paying for his legal expenses and reimbursing himself for costs he would donate the remainder of the award to the Arizona Cattle Growers' Association.

Read the full story at: http://mobile.azstarnet.com/sn/pda/58068.html


22 posted on 03/04/2005 8:09:17 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

Best news of the day.

Whatever this rancher did to sue these a-holes should be copied a thousand times until these eco-fascists are broke and wearing signs that say "Will whine for a sandwich."


25 posted on 03/04/2005 8:43:25 AM PST by sergeantdave (Smart growth is Marxist insects agitating for a collective hive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly; abbi_normal_2; Ace2U; adam_az; Alamo-Girl; Alas; alfons; alphadog; AMDG&BVMH; amom; ...
Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.
29 posted on 03/04/2005 6:13:37 PM PST by farmfriend ( Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?!?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

If he is going to give the money to charity, then donate it to a fund to help poorer ranchers sue the envirowackos like he did and bankrupt them.


30 posted on 03/04/2005 6:27:33 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

There is a federal law that allows such groups to sue the government and then whether they win or lose, be reimbursed by the government. If we could get Congress to repeal that law, it would destroy most of the liberal groups that use the courts to make defacto laws.


31 posted on 03/04/2005 6:29:28 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: madfly

One of the worst decisions was to grant these groups standing to sue on the basis that they represented the interests of the plants and animals or the public interest. How altruistic of them.

There is a coffee table book that was circulating in the early 1990s. I believe it was put together, in part, by the Sierra Club. It gave pictures of burned areas on Mt. Shasta and called them clear cuts. It also had a picture of serpentine soils with sparse trees (which is natural) and called it a clear cut.

It is the same as a recent story on the poor fishermen allocating chinook for next year and blaming it on the old fish die off. Heck, they way over-fished last year and they didn't come close to the minimum Magnusson Stevens Act threshold return numbers for the Klamath chinook. How the heck are we supposed to produce them if they never get here to spawn? But it is the irrigators fault.

Likewise, it has been determined that a huge number of juvenile salmon being produced in the Klamath tributaries are dying from disease (C-Shasta, columnaris and parvacapsula) when they hit the Klamath mainstem. But, no, it is the irrigators fault. -----phooey


33 posted on 03/04/2005 8:23:24 PM PST by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: jveritas; MEG33; SandRat; Marine Inspector; Texas_Jarhead; Don Corleone; digger48; ...

good news ping


36 posted on 03/05/2005 7:19:44 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson