Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations v. Gutierrez

The Central Valley Project (CVP), administered by the United States Bureau of Reclamation (the bureau), was a system of dams, tunnels, and reservoirs that regulated water for California’s central valley. The California State Water Project (SWP), the largest state-run water project, was administered by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). Together, the CVP and the SWP shared facilities and coordinated operations under coordinated-operating agreements. In 2004, the Long-Term Central Valley Project and State Water Project Operations Criteria and Plan (the 2004 OCAP) was completed, describing the CVP and SWP’s ongoing and proposed operations. In early 2004, the bureau and DWR requested formal consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under § 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to examine ongoing and proposed operations covered in the 2004 OCAP. Pursuant to the consultation, the NMFS issued a biological opinion (BO) that examined the 2004 OCAP operation’s effects and found that the operations were not likely to jeopardize three varieties of salmonid species protected by the ESA or damage critical habitats. In formulating the BO, the NMFS relied on temperature and hydrology models that assumed temperatures observed between 1922 and 1994 would continue for 25 years and that did not account for available data showing the effects of global climate change on water availability. A coalition of environmental groups (the environmental groups) (plaintiffs) challenged the BO’s findings, arguing that the NMFS had violated § 7 of the ESA by failing to use the best scientific evidence available. The NMFS acknowledged that the BO should have included climate-change data and pledged to include the data in a reinitiated § 7 consultation. Both parties moved for summary judgment on the ESA claim.