Court Finds Environment Minister's Failure to Identify Critical Habitat Unreasonable Alberta Wilderness Association v. Minister of Environment, 2009 FC 710

…the Recovery Strategy identifies four habitat requirements of the Greater SageGrouse: breeding habitat, nesting habitat, brood-rearing habitat and winter habitat. In so doing the respondent concluded that each habitat is essential to the Greater Sage-Grouse. In determining that no critical habitat could be identified, the respondent concluded that it could identify no critical breeding habitat, no critical nesting habitat, no critical brood-rearing habitat and no critical winter habitat. Had it been able to identity a party of or any one or more of these four habitat as critical, then it was required to identify that habitat pursuant to section 41(1)(c) of the SARA, as it is required to identify critical habitat “to the extent possible”. The Court then went on to consider the evidence before it regarding what was known about the Greater Sage-Grouse and these habitat types. The Recovery Strategy indicated, among other things, that no losses to active leks 5 was essential to the recovery of the species, identified some lek locations, and indicated that counts at active and inactive leks was an urgent priority. 6