This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Tuesday, November 27th, 2018.

I'm Caleb Brown.

The Supreme Court has sent a key property rights case back to a lower court.

The question presented was about a federal designation of critical

habitat for the dusky gopher frog. Before the court's decision today, Holly Fretwell

of the Property and Environment Research Center argued that no matter how the court

ended up ruling, there's no victory here for the frog.

And that's all because of how the feds have interpreted the Endangered Species Act.

We spoke in October at the State Policy Network annual

meeting. The critical issue of this case is that the frog is going to lose regardless,

but what's actually happening is the dusky gopher frog is an endangered species and it has been put on the list and the Fish and wildlife service has found some potential habitable land that is

potentially suitable for the dusky gopher frog but is not currently

habitat for the dusky gopher frog, but is not currently habitat for the dusky gopher frog, and they have

designated it as critical wildlife habitat for the dusky gopher frog.

This is on private land, and the private landowner can no longer develop on this land which was the intention and

is at stake of losing about 30 million dollars as a result of the designation of the

critical wildlife habitat.

So the case was taken to the Supreme Court to determine whether the Fish and Wildlife Service

could designate critical wildlife habitat on an area that is suitable but not currently

inhabited by a protected species. Okay and as you note that you say the frog will

lose either way because this isn't current habitat for the frog,

but what's the bigger issue with regard to conservation? The bigger issue with regard to conservation is that the Endangered Species Act as it is presently is not actually enhancing habitat for the species that are either threatened or endangered.

...