text:
Make a tax-deductible donation to the center here: Donate
Case Details
The navigation select boxes below will direct you to the selected page when you hit enter.
Cross motions for summary judgment on Plaintiffs� claim against Defendants, the Secretary of the Interior (the �Secretary�) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, alleging that the Secretary�s failure to designate critical habitat and prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar was unlawful under the Endangered Species Act (�ESA�). The United States District Court, D. Arizona granted Plaintiffs� motion in part and denied Plaintiffs� motion in part, finding that Defendants� determination that designation of a critical habitat would not be prudent must be set aside because it did not appear to be based on the best scientific evidence available as required by the ESA, and that Defendants� determination not to prepare a recovery plan must also be set aside and remanded for further consideration because the determination was inconsistent with Defendants� own policy guidance and long-standing practice concerning the distinction between foreign and domestic species. The Court denied Defendants� cross motion for summary judgment and remanded the case to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for consideration consistent with the Court�s decision as to whether to designate critical habitat and prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar.
*1 Pending before the Court in this consolidated matter are competing motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs Defenders of Wildlife (�DOW�) and Center for Biological Diversity (�CBD�) filed their motions for summary judgment on August 14, 2008 (Doc. Nos. 44 & 45). Defendants filed their cross-motion for summary judgment on October 6, 2008 (Doc. No. 53). All parties filed their respective responses and replies, and oral argument was heard on March 23, 2009.
Plaintiffs claim that the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544 (�ESA�), mandates that the Secretary of the Interior (�Secretary�) designate critical habitat and prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar ( Panthera onca ); they contend that the Secretary's failure to do either is unlawful. Defendants, to the contrary, maintain that, based upon the administrative record, their scientific expertise, and the relevant statutory and regulatory standards, they reasonably declined to designate critical habitat and develop a recovery plan for the jaguar. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs' Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. 44 & 45) are GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART, and Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 53) is DENIED. This matter is remanded for further consideration of available scientific research and reports.
Factual and Procedural Background FN1
The jaguar ( Panthera onca ) is the largest species of cat native to the Western hemisphere. 62 Fed. Reg. 39147 (July 22, 1997). Jaguars are generally buff-colored with distinctive black rosettes and can grow as large as 2.5 meters when standing on all fours; they have massive heads, wide chests, and heavy-set bodies with powerful limbs. SAR 143.FN2 The range of the species stretches from southernmost Arizona and New Mexico south throughout North, Central, and South America. 62 Fed. Reg. 39147; 71 Fed. Reg. 39335 (July 12, 2006); SAR 1146-1149, 1195. Jaguars are top predators in the ecosystems they inhabit and provide important services for these ecosystems in their predation of various ungulates and rodents. 62 Fed. Reg. 39150. They are habitat generalists and utilize a wide range of habitat types. CAR 7. Habitat suitable for jaguar breeding is not readily distinguishable from habitat suitable for other jaguar behavior, CAR 7; RAR 506, and while habitat preferences of female jaguars are narrower than those of their male counterparts, they are otherwise similar. RAR 5028.
Jaguars in the United States historically occupied portions of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and possibly Louisiana. 71 Fed. Reg. at 39335; SAR 1148. The last jaguar sightings in California and Louisiana were documented in the late 1800s or early 1900s, 71 Fed. Reg. 39335; SAR 1148, and the last record of a jaguar in Texas was in Kleberg County in 1948. RAR 414, 497. Jaguars were known to southwestern Indians and were widely reported in historical frontier accounts, and frontier hunters and biologists considered jaguars to be �thinly scattered but widespread residents� of Arizona well into the 20th Century. CAR 750. Studies recording jaguar kills in Arizona are consistent with the overexploitation of a resident jaguar population, rather than the exploitation of a transient population. CAR 749-750. The range and numbers of jaguars in the United States has declined due to habitat loss and fragmentation, direct persecution (including through predator control), destruction of riparian corridors and other areas used as movement corridors, and the introduction of livestock in historic jaguar range. 62 Fed. Reg. 39154-55; RAR 506, 4906 (jaguar decline in United States attributed to indiscriminate killing by federal, state, and private predator control programs).
*2 While jaguars have been documented as far north as the Grand Canyon, FN3 sightings in the late 20th century to the present have occurred mainly along the international boundary of the United States and Mexico. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335; SAR 1148. From 1996 to 2007, four male jaguars were documented in the United States. Of those four, in 1996, two male jaguars were photographed in the United States: one on March 7, in the Peloncillo Mountains, located along the Arizona-New Mexico border, and another on August 31, in the Baboquivari Mountains in southern Arizona. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335; SAR 1154. In February 2006, a jaguar was observed and photographed in Hidalgo County, New Mexico. SAR 1154. Using remote trail cameras, jaguars were photographed in the United States near the Arizona-Mexico border beginning in 2001, and as recently as July 2007. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335; SAR 471. Researchers obtained 69 photographs of jaguars, 5 video clips, and 28 sets of jaguar tracks during this time period, leading them to conclude that the jaguars were part of a resident and not a dispersing or transient population. SAR 792-800. The sightings indicate that some male jaguars may reside permanently in the United States. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335-36. The four or five jaguars periodically spotted in the United States since 1996 are part of a larger population, or populations, that are found predominantly in Mexico. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335; SAR 1148, 1152. Males in the Mexican jaguar population tend to be more broadly distributed than females due to dispersing or non-territorial males in search of areas without male competitors. SAR 107. Only three female jaguars with kittens have been documented in the United States, the last in 1910. 71 Fed. Reg. 39335. No females have been confirmed in the United States since 1963. Id. There has been no recent evidence of breeding, or even presence of female jaguars in the U.S. since the current sightings began in 1996, SAR 57, although the absence of confirmed observations of female jaguars is not unusual. RAR 2935 (camera projects even in high occupancy jaguar areas in the tropics rarely observe females).
ESA Listing
The Service originally listed the jaguar as an endangered foreign species (one not occurring in the United States) in 1972 under the ESA's predecessor, the Endangered Species Conservation Act, Pub.L. No. 91-135, 83 Stat. 275 (Dec. 5, 1969), and later proposed the jaguar for listing in 1979 and 1994. 59 Fed. Reg. 35674 (July 13, 1994). In September 1996, Plaintiff Center for Biological Diversity filed suit to compel the Secretary to make a final listing decision for the jaguar. The Service listed the jaguar as an endangered species in U.S. territory on July 22, 1997. Final Rule to Extend Endangered Listing Status for the Jaguar in the United States, 62 Fed. Reg. 39147 (July 22, 1997). In determining that jaguars within the U.S. should be listed as an endangered species, the FWS found that the species met four of the five statutory factors contained at section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1): (1) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (3) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (4) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. 62 Fed. Reg. 39154.FN4 The FWS placed particular emphasis on the maintenance of cross-border wildlife corridors along the U.S.-Mexico border as a critical element in ensuring the species' recovery within the U.S. Id. (�Clearing of habitat, destruction of riparian areas, and fragmentation or blocking of corridors may prevent jaguars from recolonizing previously inhabited areas ... [although] there is currently no known resident population of jaguars in the United States, wanderers from Mexico may cross the border and take up residency in available habitat.�). Additionally, the FWS noted at that time that illegal shooting was a primary threat to the jaguar as a species. 62 Fed. Reg. 39147.
Critical Habitat Designation
*3 The FWS found in its 1997 Final Listing Rule that critical habitat for the jaguar was �not prudent,� based on the fact that the main threat to the jaguar in the United States was from taking. The FWS concluded that �[p]ublication of detailed critical habitat maps and descriptions in the Federal Register would likely make the species more vulnerable� to taking. 62 Fed. Reg. at 39155. Additionally, the FWS justified its decision not to designate critical habitat by committing to address the identification of species' habitat preferences �through the recovery process.� Id. In 2003, the Center for Biological Diversity challenged the Secretary's �not prudent� determination for jaguar critical habitat designation. As part of a settlement agreement in the suit, the Secretary agreed to revisit the jaguar critical habitat designation at a later date. CAR 1. The FWS later reviewed the rationale for the original �not prudent� finding and determined it was no longer valid because the Arizona Game and Fish Department (�AGFD�) and other parties had begun publishing �specific and general locations of jaguars through web sites, public notifications, reports, books, and meeting notes.� Determination that Designation of Critical Habitat is Not Prudent for the Jaguar, 71 Fed. Reg. 39335-36. Nevertheless, on July 12, 2006, the FWS reaffirmed its decision not to designate critical habitat, citing several reasons: 1) only four or (at most) five males were documented in the United States from 1996 to 2006, and these individual jaguars are likely using areas within the United States sporadically for foraging, not for permanent habitat; 2) �no breeding has been confirmed in the United States since 1910, and only three females with young have ever been documented,� the last in 1963; 3) the �area in the United States that is sporadically used by jaguars is only a small part of the range of the northernmost population(s), which are based in Mexico, and appears to be less than one percent of the current range of the species�; 4) the best available scientific information suggests no area within the United States that is critical for the survival of the species; 5) the range of the jaguar in the United States is not enough area to provide for the conservation (i.e., recovery) of the jaguar or even make a significant contribution to the conservation of the jaguar, and cannot be defined as essential to the conservation of the species; and 6) �any conservation actions for the jaguar that may bring the species to the point that the measures of the Act are no longer necessary will need to be implemented in Mexico and Central and South America.� 71 Fed. Reg. 39337. Based upon the foregoing, the FWS concluded that there are no habitats within the jurisdiction of the United States that meet the definition of critical habitat. Id.
Recovery Planning
The FWS has yet to develop or implement a recovery plan for the jaguar. The FWS has assigned the jaguar a recovery priority of 5c under its �Recovery Priority Guidelines.� RAR 3085; 48 Fed. Reg. 43098 (Sept. 21, 1983). These guidelines require a three-part analysis based on degree of threat, recovery potential, and taxonomy. 48 Fed. Reg. 43103. After Congress amended the ESA in 1982 to add section 4(f)(1)(A), the FWS accordingly amended the recovery planning guidelines to include a �conflict criterion� as a fourth factor �which, if applicable, elevates the species in priority for development of a recovery plan.� Id. at 43104. Under the recovery priority guidelines, the �5� means the jaguar faces a high degree of threat, and the �c� means its conservation may be in conflict with proposed development projects. In 2007, the FWS determined that the jaguar met the conflict criterion under its own guidance and section 4(f) of the ESA, noting that �[c]onstruction of fences (both pedestrian and vehicle barriers) along the Arizona-Sonora border may impede movement of jaguars between the U.S. and Mexico.� RAR 3084. The identification of this conflict further �elevated the species in priority.� Id.
*4 Notwithstanding the FWS classification, the agency determined on December 21, 2007 that the �development of a formal recovery plan ... would not promote the conservation of the jaguar.� Recovery Plan Decision (4(f) letter), SAR 572-575. The FWS noted that the ESA requires recovery plans to include objective and measurable delisting criteria and an implementation schedule with estimated costs and responsible parties which, when fully met and implemented, would lead to the removal of the species from the endangered list, indicative of recovery. SAR 573. The FWS determined that because the area within the U.S. occupied by jaguars represents less than one percent of the jaguar's range, and because the U.S. has little authority to implement actions needed to recover the species abroad, any conceivable recovery actions �taken within the United States are likely to benefit a small number of individual jaguars peripheral to the species, with little potential to effect recovery [i.e., promote the conservation] of the species as a whole.� SAR 572. The FWS further concluded that �[d]evelopment of a recovery plan under the limited authority of the United States would not add measurable value� to jaguar conservation efforts in other countries, including Costa Rica, Mexico, and Brazil. SAR 574.
The FWS determination relied on the 2004 draft �Endangered and Threatened Species Recovery Handbook� (�draft guidance� or �Recovery Handbook�) developed by the FWS in conjunction with the National Marine Fisheries Service (�NMFS�). SAR 572-575. The draft guidance provides that acceptable justifications for an exemption from having a recovery plan include the following situations: (1) delisting is anticipated due to extinction or listing error; (2) �the species' current and historic ranges occur entirely under the jurisdiction of other countries, i.e. it is a foreign species�; or (3) �other circumstances that are not easily foreseen, but in which the species would not benefit from a recovery plan.� SAR 1040. The January 7, 2008 4(f) letter declining to prepare a recovery plan expressly relies on the second and third rationales. In that letter, the FWS stated that although the jaguar is not an exclusively foreign species, it qualified as such with respect to formal recovery planning, because a �recovery plan for this largely international species will not promote its conservation.� SAR 573. Furthermore, although its own draft guidance defines species occurring in both the U.S. and foreign countries as transnational and contemplates such a category as deserving of special treatment with respect to recovery preplanning considerations, SAR 1040-1041, the FWS concluded that the �other circumstances� exemption applied to jaguars, because any �conservation actions for the jaguar that may bring the species to the point that the measures of the Act are no longer necessary will need to be implemented throughout Mexico and Central and South America,� as the �area represented in the United States and Mexico is not large enough to provide for the conservation and recovery of the species.� SAR 574.
Standard of Review
*5 Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue regarding any material fact and if the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). The moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law if the nonmoving party fails to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of its case with respect to which it has the burden of proof. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). In this case the facts are undisputed and contained in the administrative record filed by the federal defendants, including the original recovery plan administrative record (�RAR�), the critical habitat administrative record (�CAR�), and the supplemental recovery plan administrative record (�SAR�). Only legal issues remain and summary judgment is appropriate. Northwest Motorcycle Assoc. v. U.S. Dept. Of Agriculture, 18 F.3d 1468, 1472 (9th Cir.1994).
Because the ESA does not prescribe its own standard of review, courts have adopted the �arbitrary and capricious� standard set out by the Administrative Procedure Act (�APA�), 5 U.S.C. § 706. Aluminum Co. of America v. Bonneville Power Admin., 175 F.3d 1156, 1160 (9th Cir.1999). Under this standard, a court shall �hold unlawful and set aside agency action ... found to be ... arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.� 5 U.S.C. 706(2)(A); see also Center for Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne, 466 F.3d 1098, 1103 (9th Cir.2006). An agency decision will be found to be arbitrary or capricious if the agency
has relied on factors which Congress had not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise.
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43, 103 S.Ct. 2856, 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983); see also Mendenhall v. Nat'l Trans. Safety Bd., 92 F.3d 871, 874 (9th Cir.1996) (abuse of discretion exists when an agency's decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of law or when record contains no evidence on which agency could have rationally based its decision). A court �must determine whether the agency articulated a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made,� and because the APA scope of review is a narrow one, it may not merely substitute its own judgment for that of the agency. Arizona Cattle Growers' Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife, 273 F.3d 1229, 1236 (9th Cir.2001). The standard presumes agency action to be valid and a court should affirm agency action �if a reasonable basis exists� for the agency's decision. Independent Acceptance Company v. State of California, 204 F.3d 1247, 1251 (9th Cir.2000) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); see also Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981, 993-994 (9th Cir.2008) (improper for a court to act as an independent panel of scientists when conducting APA review of agency decisions; a court is to be most deferential to agency decisions which involve a high level of technical expertise, especially those calling for predictions at the frontiers of science).
*6 Nevertheless, a court �must not rubber stamp ... administrative decisions that [it deems] inconsistent with a statutory mandate or that frustrate the congressional policy underlying a statute.� Ocean Advocates v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 402 F.3d 846, 859 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Although an agency's factual findings are entitled to substantial deference, courts are the final authorities regarding statutory interpretation, and issues of statutory construction are reviewed de novo. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) ( �The judiciary is the final authority on issues of statutory construction and must reject administrative constructions which are contrary to clear congressional intent.�); see also Blackfeet Tribe v. U.S. Department of Labor, 808 F.2d 1355, 1357 (9th Cir.1987). A court must refrain from supplying a �reasoned basis for the agency's action that the agency itself has not given.� Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n, 463 U.S. at 43, 103 S.Ct. 2856 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Rather, a court must �engage in a careful, searching review to ensure that the agency has made a rational analysis and decision on the record before it.� Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 524 F.3d 917, 927 (9th Cir.2008).
Legal Standard
Endangered Species Act
Congress enacted the ESA to protect and conserve endangered and threatened species. 16 U.S.C. § 1531(b). The ESA is �the most comprehensive legislation for the preservation of endangered species ever enacted by any nation.� Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153, 180, 98 S.Ct. 2279, 57 L.Ed.2d 117 (1978). The Supreme Court has stated that �beyond doubt ... Congress intended endangered species to be afforded the highest of priorities,� and the �plain intent of Congress in enacting [the] statute was to halt and reverse the trend toward species extinction, whatever the cost.� Id. at 174, 184, 98 S.Ct. 2279.FN5
Conservation under the ESA is broadly defined as �the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring any endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary.� 50 C.F.R. § 424.02(c); 16 U.S.C. § 1532(3). To that end, as a necessary first step in halting species' extinction, Congress directed the Secretaries of Commerce and the Interior to list threatened and endangered species. A �threatened species� is one that �is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.� 16 U.S.C. § 1532(20). An �endangered species� is one that �is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.� 16 U.S.C. § 1532(6). The ESA requires the issuance of regulations listing species as endangered or threatened based upon the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range; overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; disease or predation; the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or other natural or manmade factors affecting the species' continued existence. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1). Once a species is listed under ESA Section 4, it is afforded a number of protections, including the Section 7 consultation requirement and the Section 9 takings prohibition. In addition to these protections, the Secretary is required, absent certain limited exceptions, to designate critical habitat and prepare a recovery plan for the species in question.
Critical Habitat
*7 The ESA requires the Secretary, concurrently with listing a species as endangered or threatened, to designate �critical habitat� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3). Such designation �triggers mandatory consultation requirements for federal agency actions involving critical habitat.� Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 113 F.3d 1121, 1127 (9th Cir.1997). The designation of critical habitat is �the principal means for conserving an endangered species, by protecting not simply the species, but also the ecosystem upon which the species depends.� Center for Biological Diversity v. Norton, 240 F.Supp.2d 1090, 1101 (D.Ariz.2003) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In fashioning the ESA, it was Congress' understanding that �the preservation of species' habitat is essential to the preservation of the species itself.� Id. at 1098.
�Critical habitat� is defined as:
(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and
(ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
16 U.S.C. § 1532(5)(A). In determining critical habitat areas, ESA regulations provide that the Secretary shall considerthose physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of a given species and that may require special management considerations or protection. Such requirements include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Space for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior; (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements; (3) Cover or shelter; (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, rearing of offspring, germination, or seed dispersal; and generally, (5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of a species. When considering the designation of critical habitat, the Secretary shall focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements within the defined area that are essential to the conservation of the species. Known primary constituent elements shall be listed with the critical habitat description. Primary constituent elements may include, but are not limited to, the following: roost sites, nesting grounds, spawning sites, feeding sites, seasonal wetland or dryland, water quality or quantity, host species or plant pollinator, geological formation, vegetation type, tide, and specific soil types.
(1) Space for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, rearing of offspring, germination, or seed dispersal; and generally,
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of a species.
When considering the designation of critical habitat, the Secretary shall focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements within the defined area that are essential to the conservation of the species. Known primary constituent elements shall be listed with the critical habitat description. Primary constituent elements may include, but are not limited to, the following: roost sites, nesting grounds, spawning sites, feeding sites, seasonal wetland or dryland, water quality or quantity, host species or plant pollinator, geological formation, vegetation type, tide, and specific soil types.
*8 50 C.F.R. § 424.12(b). Critical habitat designations and amendments are to be based on �the best scientific data available,� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2), and the Secretary is to make critical habitat designations to the �maximum extent prudent and determinable.� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3)(A). Critical habitat is deemed �not prudent� if the �species is threatened by taking or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the degree of such threat to the species,� or if designation �would not be beneficial to the species.� 50 C.F.R. § 424.12(a)(1)(i-ii). The Ninth Circuit has determined that Congress intended the imprudence exception to be a narrow one, invoked only in rare circumstances. See Natural Resources, 113 F.3d at 1126 (�The fact that Congress intended the imprudence exception to be a narrow one is clear from the legislative history ...�).FN6
Recovery Plan
Pursuant to Section 4(f)(1) of the ESA, the Secretary is required to �develop and implement plans ... for the conservation and survival of endangered species ... unless he finds that such a plan will not promote the conservation of the species.� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(f)(1). In crafting recovery plans the Secretary is directed, to �the maximum extent practicable,� to �give priority to those endangered species or threatened species, without regard to taxonomic classification, that are most likely to benefit from such plans, particularly those species that are, or may be, in conflict with construction or other development projects or other forms of economic activity.� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(f)(1)(A). A recovery plan must contain three essential elements: (1) a description of site specific management actions that may be necessary to recover the species; (2) objective and measurable criteria which, when met, would result in a determination that the species be removed from the list; and (3) estimates of the time and cost required to carry out those measures needed to recover the species and to achieve intermediate steps towards that goal. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(f)(1)(B)(i)-(iii).
The Ninth Circuit has affirmed that Congress did not intend the ESA �merely to forestall the extinction of species (i.e. promote a species survival), but to allow a species to recover to the point where it may be delisted.� Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 378 F.3d 1059, 1070 (9th Cir.2004). The recovery plan, once prepared, provides this �basic road map to recovery, i.e., the process that stops or reverses the decline of a species and neutralizes threats to its existence.� Defenders of Wildlife v. Babbitt, 130 F.Supp.2d 121, 131 (D.D.C.2001) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); see also S.W. Center for Biological Diversity v. Bartel, 470 F.Supp.2d 1118, 1136 (S.D.Cal.2006) (�The statutory scheme contemplates orderly and timely progression of action to list the species; designate its critical habitat; and create a recovery plan.�). The Recovery Handbook prepared by the FWS and NMFS states that there �are very few acceptable justifications� for a recovery plan exemption, and provides that �a determination that an exemption is warranted should be well documented in the administrative record.� SAR 1040.
Legal Analysis
*9 Plaintiff CBD challenges Defendant's determination that the designation of critical habitat for the jaguar would not be prudent. CBD asserts that (1) the decision is inconsistent with the requirements of the ESA, (2) Defendants did not use the best scientific information available regarding jaguars, and (3) Defendants did not properly consider the benefits of critical habitat designation in reaching its decision. Defendants contend that their �not prudent� determination is supported by the ESA, the regulations, and the administrative record, and assert that the designation of critical habitat would not benefit the species as a whole.
In its July 22, 1997 Final Listing Rule extending endangered status to the jaguar in the United States, the FWS determined that the designation of critical habitat for the jaguar would not be prudent because the primary threat to the jaguar at that time was from taking, and thus the designation of critical habitat could actually have made the species more vulnerable, a situation clearly at odds with the purpose of the ESA. 62 Fed. Reg. 39155. The Final Listing Rule also stated that the �[a]ppropriate parties and landowners have been notified of the location and importance of protecting this species' habitat,� and further indicated that �[i]dentification of this species' habitat preferences will be addressed through the recovery process.� Id. Between that time and the publishing of the FWS' July 12, 2006 Prudency Determination, however, the research efforts of various entities, including the Jaguar Conservation Team and the Arizona Game and Fish Department, led to the widespread publication of the general and specific locations of apparently resident jaguars in the United States, nullifying the original FWS justification for declining to designate critical habitat. Accordingly, in its 2006 Prudency Determination, the FWS stated that the takings concern was �no longer valid.� 71 Fed. Reg. 39336. In lieu of a takings justification, the FWS concluded that critical habitat designation would not be beneficial to the species as a whole, as the FWS could not find any areas or features essential to the conservation of the jaguar in the United States that met the statutory definition of critical habitat. This was a departure from FWS' rationale ten years earlier. Based upon a comprehensive review of the administrative record, however, and as discussed below, because the FWS determination does not appear to be based upon the best scientific evidence available, and because it is inconsistent with the statutory mandate of the ESA, its own regulations, and relevant case law, it must be set aside.
The FWS Did Not Base Its Determination on the Best Scientific Evidence Available
The FWS proffered a host of reasons in its Prudency Determination for declining to designate critical habitat for the jaguar, all supporting its overall conclusion that critical habitat could not be identified for the jaguar in the United States, and all based upon its review of the best available science. The FWS stated that �only five transient males have been documented in the United States� and that these jaguars are �likely using areas within the United States sporadically for foraging�; researchers have confirmed no breeding activity in the United States since 1910, and only three female cubs have ever been documented here; the areas in the United States where jaguars have been observed are at the extreme northern limit of the species' range; the best available scientific evidence suggests that no area in the United States is critical for the species as a whole; and the jaguar's range throughout the United States represents less than one percent of its overall range throughout the Western Hemisphere, and is therefore too small to be considered critical. Based upon these factors, the FWS further concluded that the �recovery of the species as a whole depends on conservation efforts in Mexico and Central and South America,� and not on any such efforts taken here in the United States. 71 Fed. Reg. 39337. As described below, a review of the record compels the conclusion that the determination not to designate critical habitat for the jaguar was not based upon the best scientific information available.
*10 Defendant relied heavily on a 1997 article by jaguar expert Alan Rabinowitz, the Director of Science at the Wildlife Conservation Society based at the Bronx Zoo. In that article, entitled �The Status of Jaguars ( Panthera onca ) in the United States: Trip Report,� Dr. Rabinowitz stated that �the southwestern United States has, at least in recent times, never [sic] more than marginal habitat at the extreme northern limit of the jaguar's range.� CAR 809. In that same article Dr. Rabinowitz opined that the jaguar should immediately be classified as federally endangered in the United States (as it was shortly thereafter), but he cautioned against designating critical habitat at that time. While Dr. Rabinowitz based this last recommendation primarily upon practical and social considerations, he did conclude that �[a]vailable data and examination of the habitat in the borderlands region also suggest that there is no area in the United States that is critical for the survival of the jaguar.� CAR 811 (emphasis added). These statements by Dr. Rabinowitz, however, are not dispositive. First, as acknowledged by FWS biologist Mark Crites, Dr. Rabinowitz based his �marginal habitat� remarks not upon habitat characteristics, as would be required by the ESA in determining whether to designate critical habitat, but rather upon �other information.� CAR 273. Second, when Dr. Rabinowitz concluded that there is no area in the United States that is critical for the survival of the jaguar, he referred only to survival. The designation of critical habitat is intended to promote not only the survival but also the recovery of species. See Gifford Pinchot Task Force, 378 F.3d at 1069 (it �is logical and inevitable that a species requires more critical habitat for recovery than is necessary for species survival�). Third, at the time the statements were made by Dr. Rabinowitz, he was not considering the effect of designating critical habitat in the United States on the recovery of the species, as required by the ESA. Heavy reliance by the FWS on his conclusion that no area in the United States was critical for the survival of the jaguar is indicative that it unduly limited its consideration of the recovery goal of the ESA in making its determination, while focusing on the survival goal. Finally, the record reflects that later comments made by Dr. Rabinowitz suggest a departure from these earlier statements.
In November 2000, for instance, Dr. Rabinowitz, along with scientists Brian Miller and Carlos Lopez, in responding to questions posed by the Jaguar Scientific Advisory Group, stated that �individuals on the fringe of the range can contribute to the metapopulation and of a species ... all individuals of an endangered or threatened species are important whether they exist on the fringe or in the core of the historic range. The important issue is to restore connectivity throughout the range to allow movement between, and survival of, the now isolated individuals.� RAR 1990-1991. The three scientists went on to state that a �viable population should not be measured as the number of animals living north of the U.S./Mexico border,� and that while it cannot be predicted �whether any animals that live in, or pass through, the United States will be important or unimportant to long-term conservation of jaguars,� �each animal should be considered important regardless of physical location,� because it �is possible that populations from the fringe of the range may produce the last jaguars.� RAR 1992. Finally, they concluded that �[o]utlining habitat that could be occupied by jaguars, and protecting that habitat through a combination of formal (legal) and informal (acceptance by people) means, would be an important step. It is critical that these habitats have connections that allow jaguars to move freely between patches, and to allow jaguars the potential to recolonize the southwestern U.S.� RAR 1994-95. These last comments suggest that there may be habitat in the United States that is indeed essential to the conservation of the species, a conclusion drawn by other jaguar researchers as well.
*11 As to transience, for instance, scientific evidence exists that the jaguar has been a permanent resident of the United States.FN7 A 1989 study by David Brown entitled �Cat Fever� indicated that there is strong evidence to suggest that the jaguar was historically a permanent resident of the United States: �Plotted at ten-year intervals, the numbers of jaguars reported killed in Arizona show a decay curve characteristic of an over-exploited resident population. If Arizona jaguars were the sole result of incursions from Mexico, the pattern of kills would always have been erratic and irregular.� FN8 CAR 749-50. As to lack of breeding activity as a rationale for declining to designate critical habitat, the FWS has admitted that this situation could �change at any time.� FN9 CAR 289. As to the importance of fringe populations, a 2005 journal article published by Erin Boydston and Carlos Lopez-Gonzalez concluded that �[r]ange expansion could help prevent genetic isolation and extinction of the northern jaguars and also increase chances for long-term survival of this species in the face of global anthropogenic change.� RAR 5028. The same authors concluded that habitat exists in the United States to support both male and female jaguars, and therefore presumably jaguar reproduction. RAR 5026.
The FWS was required to make its determination based upon �the best scientific data available.� 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2).FN10 To this end the FWS relies upon two later studies, the 2002 �Planning to Save a Species: the Jaguar as a Model,� and the 2005 �Jaguars in the New Millenium Dataset Update: The State of the Jaguar in 2005,� to support its conclusion that no critical habitat for the jaguar exists in the United States. The former stated that �[s]aving jaguars requires international, range-wide planning� and identified fifty-one important areas for jaguar survival, called jaguar conservation units, none of which included portions of the southwestern United States. SAR 995-1010. The latter identified areas most threatened throughout the jaguar's range as being in northwest Argentina, central and east central Brazil, areas of Bolivia, and central Guatemala; this study also failed to name any area in the United States as a high-priority conservation territory for the jaguar. SAR 723-784. In reaching these conclusions, however, these scientific advisory groups were not applying ESA standards regarding whether critical habitat exists for the jaguar in the United States.
The FWS may not base a determination on �speculation or surmise or disregard superior data.� Building Industry Ass'n of Superior California v. Norton, 247 F.3d 1241, 1247 (D.C.Cir.2001). Scientific documents exist in the administrative record to suggest that the designation of critical habitat may be appropriate for the jaguar, and more recent scholarship only seems to strengthen that conclusion. It appears that the FWS overlooked probative scientific evidence regarding its �not prudent� determination.
*12 Congress intended the imprudence exception to be invoked rarely and only under extraordinary circumstances. See Natural Resources, 113 F.3d at 1126-27. It is not apparent that these circumstances are present here. The Ninth Circuit has rejected the notion that �designation is only necessary where it would protect the majority of species habitat.� Id. at 1126. Because the FWS has failed to articulate a rational basis for invoking the exceedingly rare imprudence exception, its critical habitat determination must be set aside. FN11
Plaintiffs DOW and CBD challenge Defendant's decision not to prepare a jaguar recovery plan. Plaintiffs assert that Defendant's decision runs counter to the plain language of its own policy (contained in the draft Recovery Handbook), conflicts with its long-standing, bright-line distinction between foreign and domestic species in recovery planning, and is inconsistent with the ESA and its purposes. Defendants contend that, in determining that a recovery plan would not benefit the species as a whole, they reasonably relied on the draft guidance and made a decision that was consistent with prior practice. Defendants further assert that their determination was compliant with the dictates of the ESA and was well within their ample discretion.
In its July 22, 1997 Final Listing Rule extending endangered status to the jaguar in the United States, the FWS explicitly rejected various challenges raised by entities opposed to the listing, challenges which included assertions that the �United States was merely peripheral to the [jaguar's] historic range,� the �species was never more than wandering individuals that occasionally crossed the border into the United States,� and �[n]o breeding population of the jaguar exists in the United States.� 62 Fed. Reg. 39150. The FWS responded to these objections by stating that it believed the jaguar to be �native to the United States,� with evidence strongly indicating �that the historical range of the jaguar included portions of the southwestern United States.� Id. The FWS further responded by noting that the �issue of whether a breeding population is wholly supported within the United States is not relevant,� concluding that the mere �fact that individuals occur in the United States warrants their consideration for listing, evaluation of relevant threats, and development of appropriate conservation considerations.� Id. The FWS at that time concluded that the ESA required the protection of domestic jaguars, and explained its decision in detail:
The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by this species in determining to make this rule final.... A decision to take no action would exclude the jaguar in the United States from needed protection pursuant to the Act. A decision to extend only threatened status would not adequately express the drastic distributional decline of the species and the continued jeopardy of any individuals in the United States. Therefore, no action or listing as threatened would be contrary to the intent of the Act.
*13 Id. at 39155.
In its December 21, 2007, 4(f)(1) Determination Regarding Recovery Planning for the Jaguar ( Panthera onca ), the FWS concluded that a recovery plan for the jaguar was not warranted, because �actions taken within the United States are likely to benefit a small number of individual jaguars peripheral to the species, with little potential to effect recovery of the species as a whole.� SAR 572. The FWS concluded that �[a]lthough the jaguar is not an exclusively foreign species, for the purposes of formal recovery planning, it qualifies as such.� SAR 573. The FWS noted that because the �jaguar's range extends through the jurisdictions of approximately 20 countries from the United States border through Mexico, Central and South America� and because �the area represented in the United States and northern Mexico is not large enough to independently provide for the conservation and recovery of the species,� a recovery plan would not promote the conservation of the species, as �[a]ny conservation actions for the jaguar that may bring the species to the point that the measures of the Act are no longer necessary will need to be implemented throughout Mexico and Central and South America.� SAR 573-574.
Based upon the record in this matter, the FWS determination not to prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar must be vacated and this matter remanded for further consideration.
The FWS Determination Not to Prepare a Recovery Plan is Inconsistent With its Own Policy Guidance and its Long-standing Practice Regarding the Distinction Between Foreign and Domestic Species
Drawing upon its draft guidance, the FWS relies upon the foreign species exemption to justify not preparing a recovery plan for the jaguar. The exemption applies to a species if its �current and historic ranges occur entirely under the jurisdiction of other countries, i.e., it is a foreign species.� SAR 1040 (emphasis added). While an agency's interpretation of its own regulations will generally be afforded deference by a court, such deference is not absolute. Regents of University of California v. Shalala, 82 F.3d 291, 294 (9th Cir.1996). The Ninth Circuit conducts a two-pronged analysis to determine whether an agency interpretation is lawful: first, a court will look to the plain language of the regulation, which must be �reasonably susceptible to the construction placed upon them by the Secretary, both on their face and in light of their prior interpretation and application�; second, a court will insure that the agency's construction is �consistent with and in furtherance of the purposes and policies embodied in the Congressional statute which authorize them.� Id. (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In this case, the FWS interpretation is erroneous.FN12
In reaching its decision, the FWS overlooks the word �entirely,� arguing in its brief that its interpretation of the exemption is reasonable because �the jaguar is the functional equivalent of a foreign species.� Def's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment at 27. As a matter of plain meaning, however, the jaguar is clearly not a foreign species, and thus the foreign species exemption does not apply. Moreover, as to prior application, it would appear that while the FWS has never prepared a recovery plan for a foreign species, it has exempted only 11 domestic species from recovery plan requirements since the ESA was promulgated. See SAR 571. Furthermore, it appears that the FWS has yet to exempt a species from recovery planning on the basis that its domestic range is limited or is largely international.FN13 Past practice suggests that the FWS has consistently extended recovery plan protections to other transnational species, even those with limited domestic ranges.FN14
*14 The FWS also argues that the �other circumstances� exemption applies because the jaguar's situation is unique and not easily foreseen, as the resident U.S. jaguar population is so small, the jaguar range traverses so many foreign jurisdictions, and the U.S. portion of the jaguar range is so minimal. This exemption, however, much like the foreign species exemption, is inapplicable here based upon plain meaning and prior practice, as the FWS explicitly anticipated such situations in its Recovery Handbook, providing guidance in the �Special Considerations� section as to how to implement recovery plans when multiple nations are involved.
In promulgating the ESA, Congress found that �various species of fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct as a consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation.� 16 U.S.C. § 1531(a)(1) (emphasis added). The Act was designed to �better safeguard[ ], for the benefit of all citizens, the Nation's heritage in fish, wildlife, and plants.� 16 U.S.C. § 1531(a)(5). In Defenders of Wildlife v. Babbitt, 958 F.Supp. 670, 684-85 (D.D.C.1997) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted), the FWS sought to justify not listing the Canada lynx as threatened or endangered on the basis that the species remained �plentiful in Canada and Alaska and it is not threatened with the possibility of extinction� in those areas. The court rejected this argument, noting that �the FWS cannot be allowed to dismiss the contiguous United States population of a species merely because it is plentiful elsewhere.� Id. at 685. When the FWS argued that the lynx did not deserve protection because it was a mere remnant population, the court noted that this argument was inconsistent with prior FWS practice, which had seen the listing of the grizzly bear, the eastern timber wolf, and the woodland caribou under the ESA, even though these species also exhibited remnant U.S. populations. The FWS recognized in those instances that the remnant nature of the species' population argued for, rather than against listing, to protect �the species from further depletion.� Id. Although the lynx case involved a listing decision, the same logic applies here. See also Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 258 F.3d 1136, 1145 n. 10 (9th Cir.2001).
The reliance by the FWS on both the �foreign species� exemption and the �other circumstances� exemption to justify its refusal to prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar is not supported by the record and, as the determination represents a failure to articulate a rational basis between the facts found and the choice made, it must be set aside.FN15
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. 44 & 45) are GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART. The FWS determinations to not designate critical habitat or prepare a recovery plan are set aside, and this case is remanded to the FWS so that it may, consistent with this opinion, consider whether to designate critical habitat and prepare a recovery plan for the jaguar. The FWS shall make a determination as to critical habitat and recovery planning by January 8, 2010.
*15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Federal Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 53) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court issue judgment accordingly and close the case.
FN1. The scope of review is limited to the administrative record in this matter. As there are no genuine issues of material fact as such, the Court hereby adopts and summarizes the statements of facts submitted by the parties.
FN2. References to the administrative record in this order are to the RAR (Original Recovery Plan Administrative Record), the CAR (Original Critical Habitat Administrative Record), and the SAR (Supplemental Administrative Record).
FN3. A jaguar was observed in 1990 by two scientists in the northern portion of the Gila National Forest, RAR 1127, and a 1997 Fish and Wildlife Service (�FWS�) report cited �reasonably reliable reports� of jaguars in mountain ranges in Graham and Gila counties in central Arizona. These separate sightings are both distant from the borderland area. RAR 505.
FN4. The fifth factor not relied upon by FWS was �disease or predation.�
FN5. �The pointed omission of the type of qualifying language previously included in endangered species legislation reveals a conscious decision by Congress to give endangered species priority over the �primary missions' of federal agencies.� Tennessee Valley Authority, 437 U.S. at 185, 98 S.Ct. 2279.
FN6. See H.R.Rep. No. 95-1625 at 17 (1978), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1978, pp. 9453, 9467 (�The committee intends that in most situations the Secretary will ... designate critical habitat at the same time that a species is listed as either endangered or threatened. It is only in rare circumstances where the specification of critical habitat concurrently with the listing would not be beneficial to the species.�); Enos v. Marsh, 769 F.2d 1363, 1371 (9th Cir.1985) (holding that the Secretary �may only fail to designate a critical habitat under rare circumstances�); Northern Spotted Owl v. Lujan, 758 F.Supp. 621, 626 (W.D.Wash.1991) (�This legislative history leaves little room for doubt regarding the intent of Congress: The designation of critical habitat is to coincide with the final listing decision absent extraordinary circumstances.�).
FN7. In its opening brief the FWS acknowledged that �some male jaguars may reside permanently in ... the United States.� Def's Cross-Motion at 12.
FN8. The assumption that the jaguars observed recently in the United States were mere transients was obviously crucial to the FWS conclusion that �[l]oss of or threats to features in the United States that may support these sporadic foraging events is not limiting the recovery of the species.�
FN9. 50 C.F.R. § 424.12(b) provides that the Secretary �shall focus on the principal biological constituent elements within the defined area that are essential to the conservation of the species,� not merely specific and limited behavioral characteristics of the species in question. Quite apart from breeding sites, critical habitat considerations include �(1) Space for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior; (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements; (3) Cover or shelter ... [and] ... (5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of a species.� Even without observed breeding activity, critical habitat would provide significant conservation value, especially in light of the fact that, as the FWS admits, breeding could occur at any time in the near or long-term.
FN10. The FWS in its briefs seeks to bar what it views as post-decisional scientific evidence. Even if this evidence is precluded, it does not appear that the FWS based its determination on the best available science.
FN11. The additional justification provided by FWS for declining to designate critical habitat is that it is currently providing significant protection for the jaguar in other respects. The Ninth Circuit has made clear that �[n]either the Act nor the implementing regulations sanctions nondesignation of habitat when designation would be merely less beneficial to the species than another type of protection.� Natural Resources, 113 F.3d at 1127.
FN12. The FWS contends in its Reply that Shalala does not provide the correct standard of review, and that the �plainly erroneous� standard should be applied here. See Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158, 127 S.Ct. 2339, 2349, 168 L.Ed.2d 54 (2007). Even if this standard were to be applied, however, the result would remain unchanged-the FWS interpretation of its own draft guidance is contrary to the clear meaning expressed therein and is plainly erroneous.
FN13. In circulating a draft memorandum for exempting the jaguar from recovery planning, an FWS Endangered Species Coordinator acknowledged that she could not �come up with any pre-existing examples to follow for any of the currently exempted species, so we are on our own.� SAR 516.
FN14. The FWS has prepared or is preparing recovery plans for species such as the grizzly bear, the gray wolf, and the Canada lynx, which are present in both the U.S. and a neighboring nation, but listed as threatened or endangered only in the U.S., despite the fact that all these species have extensive ranges in foreign nations and often exhibit limited domestic ranges. See S.W. Ctr. For Biological Diversity v. Norton, 2002 WL 1733618, at *13-14, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13661, at *40 (D.D.C. July 29, 2002). The FWS has also prepared recovery plans for transnational species that are listed in both the United States and one or more foreign countries, despite the fact that many of these species also exhibit limited domestic ranges; the FWS has, for instance, prepared recovery plans for species such as the Mexican gray wolf, the Mexican spotted owl, the ocelot, and the Sonoran pronghorn. See Declaration of Andrew Hawley, Pl.'s Ex. 5 (including attachments A-G, also available at U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Program, http:// www.fws.gov/endangered/recovery/index.html).
FN15. The Court expresses no opinion or conclusion in this matter regarding the construction of vehicle or pedestrian impediments along the international border.


text:
Read user comments about the side effects, benefits, and effectiveness of piroxicam oral.
Overall User Ratings
105 Total User Reviews
User Reviews
Learn about
User Reviews
Reviewer: 55-64 Male on Treatment for less than 1 month (Patient)
Ease of Use
Blood preasure is up.....Burning Stomach....still have joint pain
found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Reviewer: Ken, 65-74 Male on Treatment for 1 to 6 months (Patient)
Ease of Use
I have been taking this drug for several months following back surgery, a torn rotator cuff and a broken ankle. NSAIDS usually cause stomach pain and reflux for me, but not with Piroxicam unless I drink an alcoholic beverage. My doctor says it is time released therfore reducing stomach irritation. My back pain is much improved as is the torn rotator cuff. The broken ankle is somewhat recent so
Show Full Comment
found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Reviewer: harmonyhollow, 55-64 Female on Treatment for 10 years or more (Patient)
Ease of Use
Have been taking this drug (20 mg/day) for more than 10 years...didn't think it was doing much till I stopped taking it for several days and was nearly unable to walk. Has caused no stomach or bleeding problems even though I take aspirin for break-through pain. It is inexpensive. I would gladly pay for it out-of-pocket if it weren't covered by my insurance.
found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Reviewer: oldguy, 65-74 Male on Treatment for 10 years or more (Patient)
Ease of Use
Injuries from military service in my late teens early 20s caused early onset of osteoarthritis in my back and knees. I am 67 now and started taking this drug in 1981 while still in the military. It has been great at relieving pain and stiffness in my joints and for me without any side effects or interactions. I've taken it for so long now that I don't realize how good it is until I stop
Show Full Comment
found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Reviewer: Cheryl Davis, 45-54 Female on Treatment for less than 1 month (Patient)
Ease of Use
WARNING IF YOU ARE BIPOLAR DO NOT TAKE THIS DRUG!I took 1 10mg pill.And in about an hour I had stomach cramps so bad i could hardly stand up.I was crying off and on and could not stop.I have been dealing with it for more than 20 years.And I am very stable. Untill I took just one 10mg pill!!I could not believe what was hapening.Please be careful taking this drug. Did NOTHING for pain!!
found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes | No
FDA Protect Your Health
Benzocaine and Babies: Not a Good Mix
Database Is One-Stop Resource on Kids' Medications
Explore our expanded FDA Center on WebMD.
Ask the pharmacist
Questions about medications? Get expert answers by video or live chat about allergies, pregnancy, sleep, and more.
See the Ask the Pharmacist event schedule.
Health Insurance in Your State
Learn about plans, benefits, and costs in your state's Marketplace.
WebMD the app
Get trusted health information. Whenever. Wherever... with your iPhone, iPad or Android.
Find Out MoreIMPORTANT: About This Section and Other User-Generated Content on WebMD
The opinions expressed in WebMD User-generated content areas like communities, reviews, ratings, or blogs are solely those of the User, who may or may not have medical or scientific training. These opinions do not represent the opinions of WebMD. User-generated content areas are not reviewed by a WebMD physician or any member of the WebMD editorial staff for accuracy, balance, objectivity, or any other reason except for compliance with our Terms and Conditions. Some of these opinions may contain information about treatment or uses of drug products that have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. WebMD does not endorse any specific product, service, or treatment.
Do not consider WebMD User-generated content as medical advice. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your doctor or other qualified healthcare provider because of something you have read on WebMD. You should always speak with your doctor before you start, stop, or change any prescribed part of your care plan or treatment. WebMD understands that reading individual, real-life experiences can be a helpful resource but it is never a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment from a qualified health care provider. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or dial 911 immediately.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
NHL and NHLPA agree on downsizing goalie pads. Who will be #2? Putts and Punches for Parkinsons TODAY. Bruins defense youth movement. A look at Fraser, Morrow, and Smith, the OTHER acquisitions from Dallas. NOHA Develoment weekend. WJC Camp news.
The end of the NHL lockout is nigh and so David Sarch, John Fischer, and E.J. Fagan spend this week's episode of Talking Red discussing the new CBA, Jeff Vanderbeek owning the Devils, and the WJCs. We also answer listener questions about the Devils.
Team USA beats defending champions Sweden for their second gold medal in four years.
Game thread for the IHHF U-20 Gold Medal Game between Team USA and Team Sweden.
This post serves as a place where readers can discuss the 2013 WJC Gold Medal Game between Sweden and the United States, which will have New Jersey Devils prospect Blake Pietila on the third line.
How did Lightning prospects perform this morning in Ufa, Russia?
Up early enough to watch the big rematch? Watching on humane hour tape delay? Living in Europe, so no sweat on the whole time zone thing? Here is your game thread.
Raw Charge wraps up Lightning prospects' performance in the preliminary round of the 2013 IIHF WJC.
Daily Washington Capitals news and notes: Riley Barber makes his nation proud.
We'll email you a reset link.
If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.
You must be a member of Five For Howling to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Five For Howling. You should read them.
You must be a member of Five For Howling to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Five For Howling. You should read them.
Choose an available username to complete sign up.
In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.


text:
Get that beach vacation feeling with this tropical treasure! It features a bright orange sandal adorned with a sparkling flower in Light Peach and Indian Siam crystal Pointiage®. Add other exotic motifs for a hot summer look.
Article no.: 1185921
Approximate size: 3.45 x 0.88 cm
Swarovski regrets that this product is currently not available online.
To the Boutique Finder


text:
LORETTO - The St. Francis University computer science department will host a Cyberbullying Intervention and Prevention seminar at 4 p.m. Friday on campus in the DiSepio Health and Wellness Center, Room 213.
The seminar will feature guest speaker Tina Meier, executive director for Megan Meier Foundation, who will address the audience via Skype. Jim Lantzy, an established professional in computer security who is also a DiSepio professor of the practice in the St. Francis computer science department, will moderate the event.
On Oct. 16, 2006, Meier's life took a devastating turn when her 13-year-old daughter, Megan Taylor Meier, took her own life after being cyberbullied by her adult neighbor. In December 2007, Meier founded the non-profit Megan Meier Foundation. Her efforts have changed the landscape of cyber bullying by introducing legislation, awareness, and positive change to communities.
K-12 teachers, students, parents and guardians of all ages are encouraged to attend. The event is free and open to the public.


text:
Unisex Organic Tee (More Styles...)
American Apparel certified organic 100% combed cotton t-shirt has a fitted / vintage fit & medium-lightweight jersey fabric. Sizes: SM-3XL
Mens & Unisex Jump to: Tees Long Sleeve Tanks Sweatshirts Juniors / Women's Fitted Kids & Babies Accessories Description: The Patriot Act, authorizing unconstitutional surveillance against innocent Americans without 4th Amendment warrants, is a fig leaf to cover the no-longer private parts of people who are pretending to be patriots while stripping away what makes America America. Real Patriots don't need an Act. Support repeal of the Patriot Act -- now -- with this t-shirt, made in the USA by American Apparel. Search: patriot act, patriots, patriotism, congress, repeal
More designs in Irregular Apparel


text:
Show off your active style in this Sun Downer Tee, the perfect shirt for a hot day.
LATEST: Keri-Anne Payne Life in Open Water Gold Medal Minute Video
LATEST: Mellouli Explains Climb to Olympic Pool and Open Water Podium: GMM presented by SwimOutlet.com
Peter Vanderkaay with how to use your kicks as a weapon.
Adam Brown demonstrates a dry land reaction drill


text:
SKU: 42213 Weight: 0.03
In stock
List Price:$14.49 Your Price:$10.18 You Save: $4.31 (30%) International customers, please view our shipping page for information on additional shipping fees. CLICK HERE
MAGNOLIA-Hoppy Easter Cling Stamp. Magnolia is one of a kind rubber stamps taking landscaping stamps to the next level. By mixing and matching you can create your own special artwork. This 3-3/4x5-1/2 inch package contains one foam mounted cling stamp. Design: Broom Tilda. Imported.


text:
CCI-779 in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Recurrent Endometrial Cancer
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as CCI-779, use different ways to stop tumor cells from dividing so they stop growing or die.
PURPOSE: This phase II trial is studying how well CCI-779 works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced recurrent endometrial cancer.
Condition | Intervention | Phase |
Endometrial Cancer |
Drug: temsirolimus |
Phase 2 |
Study Type: | Interventional |
Study Design: | Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment Masking: Open Label Primary Purpose: Treatment |
Official Title: | A Phase II Study of CCI-779 in Patients With Metastatic and/or Locally Advanced Recurrent Endometrial Cancer |
- Objective response measured by RECIST criteria after accrual of 30 evaluable patients in stratum I and 25 evaluable patients in stratum II [ Time Frame: 5 years ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]Final analysis performed 2009May27
- Toxicity assessed by CTCAE v3.0 criteria [ Time Frame: 5 years ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]Final analysis 2009May27
- Correlative studies on archival tissue [ Time Frame: 7 years ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]JCO publication accepted 2011Apr20
Enrollment: | 62 |
Study Start Date: | March 2004 |
Study Completion Date: | August 2009 |
Primary Completion Date: | May 2009 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) |
Arms | Assigned Interventions |
Experimental: Temsirolimus |
Drug: temsirolimus
25 mg of CCI-779 administered over 30 minutes IV weekly continuously
Detailed Description:
- Determine the efficacy of CCI-779, in terms of response rate and duration of stable disease, in patients with metastatic or locally advanced recurrent endometrial cancer.
- Determine the adverse events, time to progression, and response duration in patients treated with this drug.
- Correlate objective tumor response with PTEN expression and other molecular measures in the tumor tissue of these patients obtained at diagnosis (primary tumor).
OUTLINE: This is a nonrandomized, multicenter study. Patients are stratified according to prior chemotherapy (no [stratum I] vs yes [stratum II]).
Patients receive CCI-779 IV over 30 minutes on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 6 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients with stable disease may receive additional courses of treatment at the discretion of the investigator.
After completion of study treatment, patients are followed at 4 weeks.
PROJECTED ACCRUAL: A total of 55 patients will be accrued for this study.
Ages Eligible for Study: | 18 Years and older |
Genders Eligible for Study: | Female |
Accepts Healthy Volunteers: | No |
Histologically confirmed metastatic or locally advanced recurrent endometrial carcinoma, including 1 of the following types:
- Papillary serous
- Papillary
- Villoglandular
- Mucinous
- Clear cell
- Endometrioid
- Adenosquamous
At least 1 unidimensionally measurable site of disease* meeting at least 1 of the following criteria:
- At least 20 mm by x-ray or physical exam
- At least 10 mm by spiral CT scan
- At least 20 mm by non-spiral CT scan NOTE: *Bone metastases are considered nonmeasurable
- Not curable by standard therapy
- Available tissue from the primary tumor
- No uterine sarcomas (leiomyosarcoma), mixed mullerian tumors, or adenosarcomas
- No known brain metastases
- 18 and over
Performance status
Life expectancy
- At least 12 weeks
- Granulocyte count at least 1,500/mm^3
- Platelet count at least 100,000/mm^3
- Bilirubin no greater than upper limit of normal (ULN)
- AST and ALT no greater than 2.5 times ULN
- Creatinine no greater than 1.5 times ULN OR
- Creatinine clearance at least 50 mL/min
- No myocardial infarction within the past 6 months
- No serious cardiovascular illness
- No congestive heart failure
- No unstable angina
- No active cardiomyopathy
- No unstable ventricular arrhythmia
- No uncontrolled hypertension
- Not pregnant or nursing
- Negative pregnancy test
- Fertile patients must use effective contraception
- Fasting cholesterol no greater than 9.0 mmol/L
- Fasting triglycerides no greater than 4.56 mmol/L
- No other prior or concurrent malignancy except adequately treated nonmelanoma skin cancer, curatively treated carcinoma in situ of the cervix, or other curatively treated solid tumors with no evidence of disease for at least 5 years
- No history of allergic reactions attributed to compounds of similar chemical or biological composition to CCI-779
- No history of significant neurologic or psychiatric disorder that would preclude the ability to give consent or limit compliance with study requirements
- No serious illness or medical condition that would preclude management of the patient according to study guidelines
- No active uncontrolled infection
- No active peptic ulcer disease
- No medical condition that would be aggravated by study treatment
Biologic therapy
- No concurrent prophylactic hematopoietic colony-stimulating factor therapy
- No prior chemotherapy (for patients in stratum I)
Must have had one prior chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease (for patients in stratum II)
- At least 4 weeks since prior chemotherapy
- No prior treatment with mTOR inhibitors
Endocrine therapy
- At least 1 week since prior hormonal therapy
- No more than 1 prior hormonal treatment (progestational or aromatase inhibitor) as either adjuvant therapy or for treatment of metastatic disease (for patients in stratum I)
- At least 28 days since prior radiotherapy and recovered
- No concurrent radiotherapy to the sole site of measurable disease before assessment of response
- At least 21 days since prior major surgery and recovered
- No other concurrent investigational therapy
- No other concurrent anticancer therapy
Canada, Alberta | |
Tom Baker Cancer Centre | |
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2N 4N2 | |
Cross Cancer Institute | |
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 1Z2 | |
Canada, British Columbia | |
BCCA - Vancouver Cancer Centre | |
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V5Z 4E6 | |
Canada, Nova Scotia | |
QEII Health Sciences Center | |
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, B3H 1V7 | |
Canada, Ontario | |
Juravinski Cancer Centre at Hamilton Health Sciences | |
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8V 5C2 | |
Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario at Kingston | |
Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 5P9 | |
Univ. Health Network-Princess Margaret Hospital | |
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5G 2M9 | |
Canada, Quebec | |
McGill University - Dept. Oncology | |
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2W 1S6 | |
CHUM - Hopital Notre-Dame | |
Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2L 4M1 | |
CHUQ-Pavillon Hotel-Dieu de Quebec | |
Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, G1R 2J6 |
Study Chair: | Amit M. Oza, MD | Princess Margaret Hospital, Canada | |
Study Chair: | Laurie Elit, MD | Margaret and Charles Juravinski Cancer Centre |
Additional Information:
Responsible Party: | National Cancer Institute (NCI) |
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: | NCT00072176 History of Changes |
Other Study ID Numbers: | I160, CAN-NCIC-IND160, CDR0000335543 |
Study First Received: | November 4, 2003 |
Last Updated: | January 24, 2014 |
Health Authority: | United States: Food and Drug Administration Canada: Health Canada |
Keywords provided by National Cancer Institute (NCI):
recurrent endometrial carcinoma endometrial papillary carcinoma endometrial clear cell carcinoma endometrial adenosquamous cell carcinoma |
endometrial adenocarcinoma stage III endometrial carcinoma stage IV endometrial carcinoma |
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Endometrial Neoplasms Sarcoma, Endometrial Stromal Uterine Neoplasms Genital Neoplasms, Female Urogenital Neoplasms Neoplasms by Site Neoplasms Neoplasms, Complex and Mixed Neoplasms by Histologic Type Neoplasms, Connective and Soft Tissue Endometrial Stromal Tumors Uterine Diseases Genital Diseases, Female |
Sarcoma Sirolimus Everolimus Antibiotics, Antineoplastic Antineoplastic Agents Therapeutic Uses Pharmacologic Actions Antifungal Agents Anti-Infective Agents Immunosuppressive Agents Immunologic Factors Physiological Effects of Drugs Anti-Bacterial Agents |
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on March 11, 2014


text:
Purcell -Third Thursday Book Discussion | |
Event Type: Book Discussion Age Group(s): Adult Date: 12/19/2013 Start Time: 12:00 PM End Time: 1:30 PM Description: Adult book discussion group meets to discuss latest reads and chosen book for the month. Books available at desk. Brown bag it or a light refreshment will be served.
Library: Purcell
Driving Directions
Location: Meeting Room Contact: Karen Fielder Contact Number: 527-5546 Presenter: Karen Fielder |


text:
Rated 4 out of 5 by 329
Rated 4 out of 5 by KCA2013 Sheraton Tribeca
I have been staying at this hotel the last few years. Don't let the Canal Street address steer you away. It is as quiet as other city hotels and the location is fantastic. Easy to walk to many neighborhoods and several metro lines are literally just outside the door. The staff is very friendly and will assist you in any way they can. Very simple to take the subway from Penn Station as the stop is 1/2 a short block from the hotel.
March 11, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5 by TLSweet Great staff!
Staff is always superb! Friendly, helpful.
March 5, 2014
Rated 1 out of 5 by PlatinumBlonde Very Disappointing!!!
I am a loyal SPG Platinum and I never chose to write negative reviews, however I feel it necessary to write this review as a forwarning to others looking to stay here. I had a scheduled trip into the city and due to a family emergency could not make the trip.
Rather than being understanding, the hotel instead chose to charge me for the room - their excuse was that they could not sell the room - however one of the front desk people confimed that they were sold out.
So like a previous reviewer - I was dinged for a room I did not take and they received double compensation for the room
This is a terrible way to treat Platinums. I am personally very dissappointed in this customer service and DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS HOTEL
May 24, 2012
Rated 5 out of 5 by Moonsafari TriBeCa - So much to offer
Great location with proximity to everything. Want to see Times Square? Subway station on the corner will get you there in 5-10minutes. TriBeCa is a great location with so many great restaurants within walking distance.
February 25, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5 by Jana424 Frequent Business Stays
I stay here often for business and find it very comfortable. The staff is always helpful and the hotel has what you need, with the added convenience of Soho and Tribeca within blocks.
February 25, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5 by Amanda7133 great stay
Room was very clean and comfortable. NO bedbugs! Staff was very friendly and very helpful and always pleasant!
February 24, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5 by Jack2000 An excellent option to enjoy Manhattan
The hotel is modern, staff are courteous and efficient, rooms are clean and great. The Canal St area may not be the ideal place to be with children, but for business travellers or adults is an excellent option. Its location is very good, close to the Soho and to the subway, although do not expect fancy shops or services in Canal St. I would highly recommend the hotel for everyone.
February 20, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5 by David527 Service Exceeded Expectations
To be honest, we were concerned about staying here based of some of the reviews. However we found EVERYONE we came in contact with to not only be professional and helpful but the staff was perhaps the best part of our trip! We are pretty easy going and there was never a hint of pretension or an unwillingness to go beyond the call. The Management should be proud. We would definitely stay here again. The amenities were adequate and our upgraded room (thank you) was plenty spacious for Manhattan. For what we needed this was the right choice.
May 28, 2013


text:
AKC Siberian Husky Puppy (ready now)
Roxy is now available. She is 12 weeks old and the daughter of Diesel and Laika. Many more photos can be seen on our facebook pagewww.facebook.com/skyspiritsiberians0 . She has been raised with a 2yr old child and was taught not to nip fingers, she is doing excellent at house training. She is on blue wilderness and her food will go with her as well as leash, harness and collar. full AKC is an option or as a pet for $700. We are located in Southwest Wisconsin on the boarder of IA and IL. Please feel ...
German Shepherd Dog
German Shepherd 8 weeks old puppies. Vegas Du Haut Mansard grandchildren. Excellent pedigree and character. All puppies are AKC registered. Parents with perfect X ray of hips and elbows. The male is SG rated - Cygan vom Haus Gregor. Please contact Anette 312 520 7818
German Shepherd puppies-AKC-Working Lines/Imported Parents-2 left!
German Shepherd Puppies from German Import Father. Our puppies are born inside our home- NOT in a kennel. Extremely well socialized, intelligent, confident, great temperament, healthy, and loyal protective guardian of his/her family, home, and property. All puppies are vet checked, given first set of shots by vet and dewormed, prior to going to their new homes. These puppies have the ability to be anything from: loyal family companion, to a working dog- such as therapy or service. Both parents are ...
VALENTINE PUPPY LOVE! AKC Chocolate & Black English Lab Puppies
Trying to make Valentines Day Special???? - and - Thinking about Spring Coming Up??? ---------------------------------------------------- ENGLISH SHOW TYPE BLOCKY HEADED CHOCOLATE & BLACK LABRADOR PUPPIES Available for sale to Loving and Responsible Homes. Born January 27th Will be ready at 8 weeks on March 24th Just when Spring has arrived 1 CHOC MALE & 1 CHOC FEMALE AND 2 BLACK FEMALES ARE AVAILABLE $1,500 each Now Accepting $500 Non Refundable Deposit to Hold and $1,000 Remainder Due at time ...
****REDUCED***** BLUE NOSE BULLY PIT BULL PUPS with ears cropped
Hi, I have two bully blue nose pit bull pups for sale. They are 7 weeks old with huge chest and block heads. They come with their first set of shots and deworming only. These are MUST SEE PUPS. THEY ARE GONNA BE PURE MUSCLE. IM ASKIN 1200 OBO FOR THE BIGGER BOY AND 1000 OBO FOR THE OTHER BOY. Prices are negotiable so make a offer. Ask for nick 3124346985
Terrier mix
Female , 1 yr old, has shots, good with kids.
French Bulldog Frenchie Puppies Female AKC
We have two AKC Frenchies available for their forever homes. Two females - one brindle, and one white (fawn Male is sold). Puppies are 8 weeks this week. Puppies are raised in our home so they are well-socialized with family. We are experienced family owned breeders who pride ourselves on healthy, beautiful, well-loved French Bulldog pups. Mom is the adult brindle female pictured and the Dad is the white male pictured. We are located 30 minutes west of Chicago. All puppies are vet checked, and have ...
German Shepherd Puppies
I have one beautiful German Shepherds for sale. One forgeous female for sale. The puppy is full-bred German Shepherds with parents on site. The puppy has had constant contact with children and is two months of age. For inquiries, please contact Raul at (773) 668-6383
olde english bulldogge 11 weeks old
boy is blue fawn brindle girl is blue fawn black nose they have all shots they are hermes and creepy bully bloodline 3yrs heriditary guarantee they are crated trained pedigree paper boy will be over 90lbs at maturity please respond to ad by phone only dont text 773 441 9158
Champions show line German Shepherd puppies - 4 weeks old
We have champions show line black and tan colored German Shepherd puppies. Available is one male $1200, one female $1500.P Parents is AKC Register. Of puppies pedigree: http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/breeding.result?father=1963002&mother=1829841
Super-sweet AKC Registered Yellow Lab Puppies
Cute, Cuddly, Super-sweet AKC Registered Yellow Lab Puppies Mother and Father both have quiet temperaments. Father is a service dog and has produced many service dogs Mother has brothers that have become service dogs. this is just mentioned to show the level of training they enjoy. they all have become great companions and great family pets parents have hips and eyes checked as well as father has DNA on file with AKC Mother recieved a clear to breed prior to breeding and has been to the Vet for ...
Fawn Boxer Puppies
We have an Upcoming Fawn Litter Due at the end of March!! Our Upcoming March Litter ** Parents To Be ** Kongo & Gigi Our Puppies will come to you vet checked, tail docked, Dew clawed, shots are up to date & Their AKC Reistration papers. **They will be almost fully potty trained. As soon as our puppies turn 4-5 weeks we introduce them to puppy food. We let them go outside along with Mommy (monkey see monkey do) They catch on so quickly! Colors (Fawns) $800 (Cash Only Please) we are taking ...
AKC Fawn Boxer Puppies due in March
Siberian husky 8 weeks old! best offer
Beautiful husky pup. She is adorable and sweet. Has black grey and white fur with light blue eyes, looking for her forever home.
3/4 vizsla 1/4 beagle puppies have ARRIVED
Beautiful Vizsla Beagle puppies have arrive 3-11-12! We have 11 beautiful puppies looking for there forever homes! The will not leave mom until 8 weeks old (May 7th)! They come with first round of shots,dewormed 3x and a complete health physical by vet including-ears,eyes,hips,lungs & heart! Each puppy will have it's own personal vet records for there new home! They also come with a collar and bag of treats! They are raised in our home with 4 children! So they do come pre-spoiled :) we try to start ...
German line Rottweiler puppy
OMEN is a German bred Rottweiller .hes registered and comes with papers.. he is crate trained and is a loving puppy hes very playful and loves kids hes been raised around 13 kids ,I have a bully male and they dont get along which is why Im looking for a good home for him he is UTD on shots but is gonna need his rabies and booster shot in August . Any questions u can reach me by mail or text. Price is very negotiable
Adorable & super sweet 2 year old female American Bulldog
Lily is an active two year old girl who is very sweet & very good with kids. She is a bit shy when meeting new people and animals but warms up quickly. We rescued her from a junkyard when she was a puppy, she was the runt of the litter, malnourished, full of ticks & fleas, and scarred up from being beaten up by the other dogs. You would never know that to look at her now! She is a beautiful, sweet, super active, cuddly big headed baby! She is fixed and updated on her shots. She needs an owner or a ...
1 year old labradoodle, 1st generation, up to date on shots, not spayed, Raised with kids and other dogs,
1 year old labradoodle, female, first generation, up to date on shots, likes children and other dogs, not spayed
French bulldog
Diesel is a French Bulldog stud searvice available he is 2 years old if interested please contact many. 16302902597
UKC TRI FEMALE PITBULL..(pocket pit)
Karma is just 3 months old doing wonderful with house braking.. she has been around kids and other dogs.. very playful girl.. she is ukc papered.. first 3 sets of shots and workings done already.. she is also micro chipped. .she has champion pocket pits in her back round.. she won't be over 16inch tall.. call or text 8159159526. 1500 firm.. last pix is of mom and dad..
Golden doodle puppies are here! 4 girls and 5 boys born Feb. 25th and will be ready for new homes May 1st. Mom is golden retriever and dad is a standard poodle. Both are beloved family raised pets. Mom has been raised by me since a pup. She went thru obedience class in Nov. and graduated top of her class. She is very sweet and affectionate and has great manners. Dad has been raised by an elderly couple along with other small animals. He has also had his hips, legs, eyes and shoulders all ...
Male/Female Born 1/11/14 Great temperament, Very Social, Home raised. Vet checked, 1st shots and worming, heart worm preventative started. Looking for loving families. Feel free to call, text or email with questions. Located in Rockford area. Will deliver to Rolling Meadows area.
amazing UKC pr stud for sale
Amazing UKC registered stud for sale. He is not neutered, blue gene carrier, born: 5/28/2012 Sire: Koname Dam: wcg TwoFace asking,$1000.00 (open to honest reasonable offers.) serious inquiries only please! 331-575-3080


text: Sprint today launched a mobile shopping portal that features more than 30 online retailers. You can now browse and purchase products from these retailers right on your mobile phone. Here is more info: "Customers of Sprint can now shop and buy products from more than 30 online retailers right on their Sprint phones through one easy-to-use mobile commerce tool. With the launch today of Mobile Shopper, powered by Boulder-based mobile shopping company mShopper, Sprint is the first U.S. wireless carrier to launch a mobile shopping portal, bringing the online shopping experience to the wireless phone. Sprint data subscribers can access Mobile Shopper at no additional charge to make quick and easy price comparisons and purchases directly from their handsets. At launch, Mobile Shopper features more than 7 million products for sale at more than 30 popular online retailers such as eLuxury, eBags, Bluefly, Shoes.com and many more, all easily accessible through a single tool. Users can search for a specific product to find which retailer offers it at the lowest price, or they can browse inventory by retailer or category. When they've found a product they're interested in, customers can email the details to themselves for future use, share the details with a friend, or purchase the product right from their phone. "With Mobile Shopper, Sprint customers get a powerful shopping tool that they can use on-the-go to buy products or compare online prices to in-store merchandise," said George Ranallo, director of consumer data applications for Sprint. "The speed of the Sprint Mobile Broadband Network gives our customers fast mobile access to innovative data applications such as Mobile Shopper, right on the one device they always have with them - their Sprint phone." For easy purchasing, customers can set up a Mobile Shopper account right on their phone or on a PC at www.sprint.com/mobileshopper to save their shipping address and credit card information with a secure PIN. To make a purchase, customers select an item and enter their phone number and PIN to apply their saved account information without having to type it in each time. Charges appear on the customer's credit card statement, just as they would for an online purchase made from a PC. Alan Goode, a senior analyst at Juniper Research, sees an increasing market for mobile purchasing. He estimates that in North America, mobile purchasers will spend $505 million in 2008, increasing to $1.9 billion by 2010. Mobile Shopper is immediately available on most data-enabled Sprint phones, at no additional charge for Sprint data subscribers. To access the service, Sprint customers should select the Web icon on their phone's main menu and type "shop" into the search box. Standard data usage charges apply." ----------------------------------------------------- To read our latest phone reviews please visit: HTC S630 Nokia E90 Communicator 6 HTC Advantage X7501 Windows Mobile 6 E-TEN Glofiish X500+ Apple iPhone HTC Mogul Windows Mobile 6 Phone HTC Touch Windows Mobile Phone BlackBerry 8830 World Edition for Verizon T-Mobile Wing Palm Treo 755p Nokia N75 HTC S710 WIndows Mobile Smartphone Nokia N95 with 5 megapixel camera LG VX9400 with Digital Mobile TV on Verizon BlackBerry 8800 on Cingular Samsung u740 for Verizon LG VX8600 for Verizon Palm Treo 750 on Cingular More News. . . ----- MTR News |


text:
Coverage: CSN
7:00 PM ET, February 1, 2012
Wells Fargo Center, Philadelphia, PA
Top Performers
Chicago: C. Watson 20 Pts, 4 Reb, 4 Ast, 1 Blk
Philadelphia: A. Iguodala 19 Pts, 9 Reb, 4 Ast, 2 Stl, 1 Blk
PHILADELPHIA, PA - FEBRUARY 1: Louis Williams #23 of the Philadelphia 76ers shoots against the Chicago Bulls on February 1, 2012 at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and/or using this Photograph, user is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. Mandatory Copyright Notice: Copyright 2012 NBAE (Photo by Jesse D. Garrabrant/NBAE via Getty Images)


text:
UBM Plc (UBM.L,UBMJF.PK) announced that Dame Helen Alexander will join the Board as a non-executive director on May 10, 2012 and will succeed John Botts as chairman following the company's Annual General Meeting which will be held on May 11, 2012.
Botts will retire from the Board at the conclusion of the Annual General Meeting.
Dame Helen Alexander is chairman of the Port of London Authority, Incisive Media and deputy chairman of esure Group Holdings, a non-executive director at Rolls-Royce Group Plc, and senior adviser to Bain Capital. She was president of the CBI 2009-2011, and chief executive of the Economist Group until 2008, having joined the company in 1985 and been managing director of the Economist Intelligence Unit from 1993 to 1997. She was also a non-executive director of Centrica Plc from 2003 to 2011. She is also Chancellor of the University of Southampton, and is involved in other not-for-profit organizations in education, media, the internet and the arts.
Click here to receive FREE breaking news email alerts for UBM plc and others in your portfolio
by RTT Staff Writer
For comments and feedback: firstname.lastname@example.com
Business News


text:
BAFTAs 2011: The Winners
As the last big awards event before the Oscars, all eyes in the film world are always firmly on our very own…
MoreEver since Janet Gaynor won the first ever Best Actress Oscar in 1929 for her performances in Seventh Heaven, Street Angel and Sunrise: A song of Two Humans (the first awards celebrated films spanning two years), the world has been captivated by Oscars' ladies. We've put together a gallery of our favourite female winners throughout the years, celebrating key moments in film history.
What's your favourite moment from the Oscars? Let us know in the comments section below.
Hattie was the first black actress to be… More details
This was Audrey's first and only Oscar for her… More details
In 1969 the Best Actress award had tied winners… More details
The actress who won the award for her performance… More details
One of the most memorable and loved Best Actress… More details
11 year old Anna Paquin won Best Supporting… More details
This notorious speech may go down as one of… More details
Julia won her first Oscar for her performance as… More details
Halle Berry became the first black woman to win… More details
Last year Kathryn made Academy Award history by… More details


text:
Who gives a shit about this petty cat-fight? I mean Reba has not said anything as nasty or mean-spirited as the Dixie Chicks have. I am not a big George W. Bush fan myself, but the man is entitle to some level of respect. I wasn't extremely surprised, considering the close friendship between the Bush family and Reba. In regard to record sells......very few female country stars have sold as much as Reba has in her career. I respect the success of the Dixie Chicks, but they do need to take a more subtle approach to how they express their opinions. The fact is.....Reba was a star when they were in diapers. I highly doubt slamming the old gal is going to win you brownie points for long. Reba has a special charisma that people are drawn too, whether they like her music or not.
Chicks On Top
Let me add my voice to the growing chorus that's applauding the Dixie Chicks new album, Taking the Long Way, and its unrepentant stance against America's continuing drift, what Natalie Manes said about Bush and Nashville's pitifully small-minded crap. Make that the small-mindedness of the mainstream country music establishment and somenot all of its fans.
The always smug Reba McEntire, who entirely made a fool of herself on the ACM award telecast by tweaking the Chicks can only dream of the kind of sales they've nailed down: 525,000 the first week and 271,000 in the second. Another good week and they strike platinum.
To be fair, no, it's not strictly a country record, more like urban country folk rock. And to go even further, they haven't been a purist country act in a long time.
The best part for me is the reaction the record has drawn here in New York, a town where causes large and small are always welcome. This morning I saw two people in Starbucks sipping Caramel Macchiatos, buying what, judging by their reaction, was their first country music record ever. Now that's what I call marketing.
Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | Analog Sources Accessories Featured | Music Columns Features | Show Reports | Show Reports |
Recommended Components Blogs Latest News Community |
Shop Resources Subscriptions |


text:
Perhaps the architect of 1 Symbol Plaza in Holtsville had a premonition, based on the building's obvious "M" shape when viewed from the sky.
Today's Biz Blog Sightseeing brings you the headquarters of Motorola's enterprise mobility business, housed in the exoskeleton of the the former bar code behemoth, Symbol Technologies.
No word has been released yet on how many jobs will be cut from the facility in the coming year, but a January announcement confirmed that there will be some downsizing indeed.