Coastal areas in the United States are already experiencing the effects of sea-level rise, and the best available science predicts significant additional sea-level rise this century. In addition to sea-level rise, storm intensity and storm surge are also increasing. In some coastal areas, continuing population growth is compounding the threats of climate change and sea-level rise.

At the same time, one in six of the federally listed endangered and threatened species in the United States is threatened by sea-level rise. Coastal species face displacement, extirpation, and even extinction due to loss of habitat. They are at risk of being trapped between rising sea levels and human development. This threat is exacerbated by unyielding human-made coastal fortifications. This coalescence of factors leads to the phenomenon known as "coastal squeeze "-the loss of transitional habitat between land and sea.

For coastal areas this means that some of the most imperiled species will be pushed closer to the brink of extinction. "Assisted migration" refers to one policy prescription to address this problem. The federal government, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has the authority-and responsibility-to consider active and passive assisted migration under the Endangered Species Act in managing species threatened with habitat loss due to sea-level rise. The federally protected Florida panther, loggerhead sea turtle, Key tree-cactus, and Lower Keys marsh rabbit inhabit critically imperiled habitat in south Florida and are analyzed to examine this issue from the perspective of species from differing taxa, habitat types, and natural histories. This Article concludes that assisted migration, coupled with preserve and corridor protection and dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, are necessary for the conservation of imperiled species threatened with sea-level rise.

It is widely acknowledged that pesticides impact the environment and wildlife in deleterious ways. The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") registers and oversees the use of over one billion pounds of pesticides in the United States each year to control weeds, insects and other organisms. Yet for decades the EPA has been notoriously derelict in its duties to comply with the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), specifically Section 7(a)(2), which requires the EPA, in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, to ensure that the pesticides it registers do not harm imperiled species. Indeed, by virtue of its Section 7 failures, the EPA is also in violation of Section 9 of the ESA for the take of listed species, which results from pesticide applications. Similarly, the EPA has not met its regulatory obligations with respect to Sections 7(a)(1) and 2(c) of the ESA.

The EPA identifies the process of initiating Section 7 consultation as a major hurdle to complying with the ESA. After decades of protracted litigation between the EPA, the Services, and environmental nonprofits, the National Academy of Sciences ("NAS") convened a study to review technical and scientific issues regarding the assessment of the risks posed by pesticides to listed species, which the agencies had hoped would address the consultation stalemate. While the NAS report proposes some scientific recommendations that may facilitate the consultation process, it expressly acknowledges that it does not address the significant political and policy obstacles that appear to retard the EPA's efforts to comply with the ESA. This article argues that the EPA should suspend the registration of all new pesticides until it can comply with its mandates under the ESA. It demonstrates that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ("FIFRA") grants the EPA the authority to suspend registration and that the ESA, supported by over twenty years of case law, mandates compliance.