Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Defenders of Wildlife v. Andrus (Alaska Wolf Kill)

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
627 F.2d 1238 (1980)


Facts

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game announced a program to kill wolves from aircraft in an attempt to increase the amount of moose in the interior region of the State of Alaska. Most of the wolves were located on federal land. The U.S. Department of the Interior (Department) (defendant) failed to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the program before authorizing it. The Defenders of Wildlife and other environmental and wildlife-preservation organizations (plaintiffs) filed a complaint against the secretary of the interior (secretary) and other Department officials (defendants), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that the wolf hunt would disrupt the interior region’s ecology by interfering with the natural-selection process. The complaint also stated that the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Act), 43 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., required the secretary to evaluate whether meeting the Act’s environmental objectives required federal intervention to prevent the killing of wildlife. The Act gave state wildlife-management authority to the states and also permitted, but did not require, the secretary to supersede a state wildlife-management program after consulting with state authorities. The district court issued a temporary restraining order requiring the defendants to take all necessary steps to end the wolf-hunt program on federal land. The defendants appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (McGowan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.