Modesto Irrigation District v. Gutierrez

619 F.3d 1024 (2010)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Modesto Irrigation District v. Gutierrez

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
619 F.3d 1024 (2010)

Facts

Steelhead and rainbow trout were two types of Pacific salmon. Steelhead were born in fresh water but then migrated to the ocean for one to five years before returning to freshwater to spawn. In contrast, rainbow trout remained in freshwater their whole lives. Although the fish differed in migration pattern, size, and their predators and prey, they did interbreed to some extent. The offspring from such interbreeding could be either type of fish. The steelhead population was declining in California’s Central Valley. Consequently, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (defendant) decided to list the steelhead as a threatened species in that region. To do so, the NMFS defined steelhead as a distinct species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), departing from the NMFS’s earlier policy of classifying interbreeding Pacific salmon as a single species. The operations of Modesto Irrigation District and other irrigation districts in the Central Valley (irrigation districts) (plaintiffs) were impacted by the listing of steelhead as a threatened species. The irrigation districts sued the NMFS and associated government officials (defendants), arguing that the listing violated the ESA because the ESA required that interbreeding species such as steelhead and rainbow trout be treated as a single species. The district court disagreed with that interpretation of the ESA and upheld the NMFS’s decision to list steelhead as a distinct species. The irrigation districts appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Schroeder, J.)

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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership