Please update your links! Our new website url is http://masglp.olemiss.edu . This old website will soon cease to exist!

Save the Manatee Club v. Ballard, 215 F. Supp. 2d 88 (D.D.C. 2002).

S. Beth Windham, J.D.
Sarah Elizabeth Gardner, J.D.

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to publish a final rule for new manatee sanctuaries and refuges on peninsular Florida.1 The court enforced a settlement agreement entered into by the parties, rejecting the argument of the FWS and the Corps that the agreement violated the Administrative Procedures Act.

Procedural History
Save the Manatee and seventeen other environmental groups filed suit against the FWS and Corps claiming they violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) by failing to protect the endangered manatee in Florida. The parties entered into settlement negotiations for nine months under the direction of a United States Magistrate and finally reached a settlement agreement in January 2001. This agreement was approved by the court and filed as an order. In July 2002, the court determined the defendants were bound by the plain language of the agreement and that they were in violation of the order and granted plaintiff’s motion to enforce the agreement. In an effort to benefit from the expertise in manatee protection of the various groups involved, the district court then ordered the parties to suggest an appropriate remedy.

Defendant’s Argument
The defendants failed to suggest a remedy for the violation and instead argued the Settlement Agreement violated the Administrative Procedures Act and should be vacated. In addition, the defendants argued that if the court determined it had to publish a final rule for manatee refuges and sanctuaries throughout peninsular Florida, they required an extension until December 2, 2002, “one day after the date to which defendants had originally deferred this rule-making prior to this court’s involvement.”2

Ruling
The court stated that the defendants’ “submission on the issue of remedy utterly fails to meet this Court’s expectation.”3 It held that the defendants had to publish a final rule for manatee refuges and sanctuaries in Florida by November 1, 2002 and granted the plaintiff’s request for attorney fees. The Court gave the plaintiffs until August 2, 2002 to submit to the court a proposed order with respect to any other relief related to the emergency designation of manatee protection zones. Finally, it held that all defendants, including the Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, should show cause as to why they were not in contempt of the court’s previous orders.

Conclusion
The court ordered the Corps and the FWS to comply with the settlement agreement they previously entered into with the plaintiff and refused to grant them an extension to publish a final rule for manatee sanctuaries and refugees.

ENDNOTES
1. Save the Manatee Club v. Ballard, 215 F. Supp. 2d 88, 89 (D.D.C. 2002).
2. Id.
3. Id. at 88

University of Mississippi