Tag Archives: Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Fishermen’s Lawsuit Revived for Abalone Protection
This lawsuit is about Eco-Based Management in the purest sense. Overruling a trial court, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals [Tuesday] reinstated 
lawsuit to protect abalone and other shellfish resources — and the industries dependent on them — from being ravaged by sea otters in the waters off the Southern California coast. The lawsuit — California Sea Urchin Commission, et al. v. Jacobson, et. al. — targets the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for illegally eliminating a “sea otter management zone” (i.e., a zone of protection for shellfish off the Southern California coast) which Congress established under a 1986 statute. PLF attorneys represent fishermen, a California state commission, and several nonprofit organizations with a direct interest in maintaining healthy populations of shellfish. In challenging the Service’s violation of its legal mandate to contain the sea otter population, PLF attorneys represent: The California Sea Urchin Commission, California Abalone Association, California Lobster and Trap Fishermen’s Association, Commercial Fishermen of Santa Barbara. Read the rest here 20:35
Regardless of legally caught sharks, California’s ban on possession and sale of shark fins stands
California’s ban on the possession and sale of shark fins survived a legal challenge Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal by Bay Area suppliers and sellers of shark fin soup, a traditional dish in the Chinese American community. “The purpose of the (California) shark fin law is to conserve state resources, prevent animal cruelty, and protect wildlife and public health,” the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said in a 2-1 ruling. The court said opponents of the state law had acknowledged that it still allows the use of about 95 percent of any legally caught shark for meat, skin and oils. The Obama administration at first supported opponents of the state law, filing arguments in 2013 that disputed California’s authority to restrict the sale of sharks that had been legally caught in federal waters. But it later changed its position after discussions with state fish and wildlife officials and said the two laws could be harmonized, with federal rules governing shark fishing while California regulated commerce within the state. Read the rest here 12:29
Court taking another look at higher commercial fishing fees for nonresidents
The state will get another chance to defend its former practice of charging nonresidents two to three times as much as Californians for commercial fishing licenses. A panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled 2-1 in September that the California laws discriminated unconstitutionally against nonresidents by making it harder for them to pursue their occupation. But on Friday, the court said a majority of its judges had granted the state’s request to refer the case to an 11-judge panel for a new hearing. Read the rest here 20:42
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholds California ban on legal shark fins
“The purpose of the shark fin law is to conserve state resources, prevent animal cruelty, and protect wildlife and public health,” said Judge Andrew Hurwitz in the 2-1 ruling, which upheld a federal judge’s decision in the state’s favor. In dissent, Judge Stephen Reinhardt interpreted federal law differently. The national government, Reinhardt said, is authorized to “manage and maximize the productivity of fisheries” in federal waters that extend 200 miles offshore. Bruce Wagman, an attorney for the Humane Society of the United States,,, Read the rest here 08:02
