Carson-Truckee Water Conservancy District v. Clark

741 F.2d 257 (1984)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D operates Stampede Dam in a way that conserves two species of fish, the cui-ui fish, and Lahontan cutthroat trout, that are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Washoe Project allows D to sell water from the dam for city and industrial uses. D used the water to help the fish and refused to sell to Ps because there was not enough for both usages. Ps sought a declaratory judgment that this decision violated the Washoe Project. Ps contend that D's authority is defined solely by ESA § 7(a)(2) and argued that D is authorized only to take actions that avoid 'jeopardizing' the continued existence of a species. Ps contend that D may not do more than that. Ds contend they may do more than just not jeopardize but may take affirmative action to preserve a species. The ESA directs D to conserve threatened and endangered species to the extent that they are no longer threatened or endangered. The court ruled for D; in that the ESA gave D authority to conserve endangered species until they were no longer threatened. The Court found that D was required to sell water to Nevada cities but that D’s duty to supply Indian Tribes and to obey the ESA took precedence over to duty to sell to cities. The court found that D’s decisions were not arbitrary and capricious. Ps appealed.