In 1986, Congress enacted Public Law No. 99-625, a statute striking a careful balance between the needs of California fishermen and conservation goals for the southern sea otter. The law allowed the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) to establish a new sea otter colony off the California coast—on the condition that the agency simultaneously create a “management zone†to protect the rights of California fishermen operating normally in the area after the sea otters’ introduction.
For several decades, FWS largely enforced the law as Congress passed it. Fishermen continued working and the southern sea otter population grew steadily. But in 2012, FWS abandoned the management zone’s protections, subjecting fishermen operating normally in the area to the possibility of ruinous fines, and even prison time, for alleged crimes as simple as “disturbing†a sea otter by causing it to swim in a new direction.
On April 24, 2026, Pacific Legal Foundation filed two petitions with FWS to reestablish the abandoned protections for fishermen’s rights. The petitions argue in favor of restoring protections for fishermen within the southern sea otter management zone off the California coast and, in light of the species’ recovery, delisting the otter from the Endangered Species Act.
The petition to restore fishermen’s protections within the management zone argues that abandoning the protections violated the very law that allowed FWS to act in the first place. Congress specifically charged FWS with preserving fishermen’s rights while establishing a new sea otter colony. Instead, FWS prioritized the growth of the otter population at any cost to Californians’ rights or the survival of other native species.
PLF’s petition to delist the sea otter highlights years of data by FWS and the U.S. Geological Survey to show that the species has achieved the delisting threshold the agency established in its recovery plan: 3,090 animals. The otter population has reached and exceeded this number for years, and the problems supporting its original listing as a threatened species have now been resolved or substantially reduced—for example, through technological advances reducing the danger of events like oil spills. The otter’s recovery is a success story—one that should not be diminished or misconstrued to keep the species listed on the Endangered Species Act in perpetuity.
If U.S. Fish & Wildlife enacts the changes PLF advocates for in its petitions, the reforms would restore the protections Congress enacted to protect fishermen’s rights and eliminate some of the burdensome regulations they currently face.
What’s At Stake?
- California fishermen should not be punished because the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service abandoned the protections Congress enacted to defend their rights.
- When Congress enacts legislation that carefully balances commerce and conservation, federal agencies cannot disregard parts of the law to prioritize their own interests.
- Federal agencies cannot ignore evidence or repeatedly move goalposts to continue listing animals on the Endangered Species Act when the species has recovered.
