Bennett v. Spear

The Bureau of Reclamation (bureau) oversaw the Klamath Project, a reclamation scheme in California and Oregon. In 1992, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), the bureau notified the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (defendant) that the Klamath Project might adversely affect two endangered species of fish. As required by the ESA, the FWS provided a biological opinion. It concluded the project might threaten the two endangered species and recommended options for avoiding the threatened harm, which included maintaining minimum water levels on two reservoirs. The bureau notified the FWS that it intended to comply with the recommendations. Two Oregon irrigation districts that received water via the Klamath Project, along with Brad Bennett and other ranchers within those districts (plaintiffs), sued the FWS and various government officials (defendants), alleging that (1) the FWS’s determination that the Klamath Protect jeopardized the fish species and the resulting imposition of minimum water levels violated ESA § 7 and (2) imposing minimum water levels violated ESA § 4 because the FWS failed to consider the economic impact. The complaint also alleged that the FWS’s conduct violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it constituted agency action that was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. The district court dismissed the complaint, concluding that the irrigation districts and ranchers did not have standing because their recreational, aesthetic, and commercial interests were not within the zone of interests protected by the ESA. The court of appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.