Kokechik Fishermen’s Association v. Secretary of Commerce
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
839 F.2d 795 (1988)
- Written by Kyli Cotten, JD
Facts
In 1952, the United States, Canada, and Japan entered a treaty in which Japan agreed to refrain from fishing for salmon in certain areas of the North Pacific. In 1978, an amendment to the treaty allowed Japanese fishermen to fish for salmon inside United States territory. The Japanese fishermen were initially exempted from the restrictions under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (the MMPA), which was designed to protect marine mammals. In 1981, the United States government issued a permit to allow the Japanese fishermen to take a certain number of marine life protected by the MMPA such as porpoises, seals, and sea lions incidental to their salmon fishing. The takings occurred when such wildlife would get unintentionally trapped in the Japanese fishermen’s gillnet nets. In 1986, the Japanese fishermen reapplied for a five-year permit to continue to enjoy the exemption of MMPA requirements. The Secretary of Commerce (the secretary) (defendant), after an administrative hearing, issued a final rule granting a permit for a three-year period in which the Japanese fishermen could take a certain number of porpoises incidental to salmon fishing, but not other marine wildlife because it could not determine the fur-seal population. The Kokechik Fishermen’s Association (Kokechik) and the Center for Environmental Education (the CEE) objected to the permit being granted and brought suit. The district court preliminarily enjoined the secretary from issuing the permit, and the Japanese fishermen appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gesell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.