United States v. Ertsgaard

No. 99-30242 (222 F.3d 615) (9th Cir. August 25, 2000)

ELR Digest

The court holds that a fisherman could be prosecuted under the Lacey Act for violating individual fishing quota regulations for halibut promulgated under the Northern Pacific Halibut Act. The court first holds that the alleged violations of halibut regulations do not fall within the Lacey Act's exemption for regulations promulgated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and ManagementAct. Under the exemption, an individual cannot be charged for violating regulations promulgated under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Because the council that issued the halibut regulations was created by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the fisherman argued that any regulations developed by the council must be fishery management plans in effect under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. However, the Halibut Act, not the Magnuson-Stevens Act, vested in the council the authority and responsibility to develop regulations governing the harvesting of halibut. The fisherman's alleged violations, therefore, are subject to prosecution under the Lacey Act, and the district court's holding to the contrary is reversed.

The full text of this opinion is available from ELR (5 pp., ELR Order No. L-257).

Counsel for Plaintiff
John L. Smeltzer
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Counsel for Defendant
Brian M. Doherty
Gilmore & Doherty
1029 Third Ave., Ste. 500, Anchorage AK 99501
(907) 279-4506

[31 ELR 20012]

[OPINION OMITTED BY PUBLISHER IN ORIGINAL SOURCE]