Court Strikes Down Fish & Wildlife Service’s Decision Not To List Joshua Tree As Threatened

WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

On May 12, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (“Service”) must reevaluate its determination that two species of Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia [western Joshua tree] and Yucca jaegeriana [eastern Joshua tree]) do not warrant a “threatened” listing under the federal Endangered Species Act (“FESA”). The ruling marks the second time that the district court has required the Service to revisit its listing decision for Joshua trees.

The case arose from the environmental group’s ongoing effort to list the Joshua tree as threatened. Previously, in 2015, the group unsuccessfully petitioned the Service to list the tree as threatened, leading to a lawsuit and a subsequent court ruling which required the Service to reconsider its decision. In 2023, the Service completed its reconsideration, again finding that listing was not warranted. That determination led to the present lawsuit.

The court’s analysis centered on the Service’s finding that Joshua trees would not become threatened in the “foreseeable future.” In the court’s view, the Service failed to show that its determination was based on the best available science because the Service did not use current climate change trends and standards in its predictive analysis. The court also found that the Service made a policy change with respect to its foreseeability assessments without adequately explaining why. For these and other reasons, the court ruled that the Service’s latest decision not to list Joshua trees was arbitrary and capricious.

The ruling is unlikely to have any immediate practical effect, other than to require the Service to reanalyze the listing petition in the coming months or years. Unlike the California Endangered Species Act (“CESA”), the FESA does not provide heightened protection to species during their candidacy for listing. Thus, eastern Joshua tree in California will remain subject only to regulation under the California Desert Native Plants Act and local ordinances. As for the western Joshua tree, which is protected as both a candidates species under CESA and the recently enacted Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act, the ruling should thus have little effect on the ongoing efforts by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife to develop the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Plan, which is scheduled for adoption by the California Fish and Game Commission at its June hearing.

By Sean Hungerford and Adam Guernsey, Partners at Harrison, Temblador, Hungerford & Guernsey LLP in Sacramento, California.

© 2025 – Harrison, Temblador, Hungerford & Guernsey LLP. All rights reserved. The information in this article has been prepared by Harrison, Temblador, Hungerford & Guernsey LLP for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.