This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Environmental Law
Marine Mammal Protection Act
Endangered Species

Conservation Council for Hawai'i, et al. v. National Marine Fisheries Service, et al.

Published: Oct. 31, 2015 | Result Date: Sep. 14, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 1:13-cv-00684-SOM-RLP Settlement –  Injunction

Facts

Non-profit groups Conservation Council for Hawai'i, Animal Welfare Institute, the Center for Biological Diversity, and Ocean Mammal Institute brought an action against the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the United States Department of Commerce, Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, the United States Department of the Navy, the United States Department of Defense, and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Plaintiffs sued for declaratory and injunctive relief seeking to compel defendants to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act in connection with Navy training and testing activities in Hawaii and California.

The Natural Resources Defense Council Inc., Cetacean Society International, Animal Legal Defense Fund, Pacific Environment and Resources Center, and Michael Stocker, also filed a lawsuit, which was consolidated with this case.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that the Navy's surface vessels and use of sonar and explosives were harming whales, dolphins, sea lions and seals in the waters off Hawaii and California in violation of law. The plaintiffs challenged the National Marine Fisheries Service's decision allowing the Navy to use sonar and perform training activities that impacted marine mammals, including endangered species.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that the NMFS's conclusion that the Navy's activities would have a negligible impact on affected marine mammal species was valid. They further contended that NMFS prescribed sufficient mitigation and that the plaintiffs' remaining claims were prudentially moot or, in the alternative, lacked merit.

Result

The parties reached a settlement after the court found NMFS had violated its legal duty to ensure adequate protection of marine mammals, including endangered species, and that NMFS and the Navy had failed to consider alternatives that would reduce harm to marine mammals, including endangered species, by restricting training and testing in biologically important areas. The Navy agreed to limit its use of sonar and other activities off the coasts of Southern California and Hawaii. It is also prohibited from using sonar in certain marine mammal habitats entirely and must use "extreme caution" when operating its vessels.


#95790

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390