Caribbean Marine Services Co. v. Baldridge

844 F.2d 668 (9th Cir. 1988)

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

Congress enacted the Marine Mammal Protection Act to reduce the number of incidental kills and injuries to marine mammals permitted in the course of commercial fishing operations. D promulgated regulations requiring permit holders to allow an employee of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Administration) to accompany fishing vessels 'for the purpose of conducting research and observing operations, including collecting information which may be used in civil or criminal penalty proceedings, forfeiture actions, or permit or certificate sanctions.' D's new policy of hiring female, as well as male, observers to accompany selected fishing vessels on their voyages prompted the present litigation. D notified the tuna fleet that women were being trained as observers and that the female observers could be placed aboard the vessels in the near future. The letter sent to each owner stated that no alterations of the vessels or special accommodations would be required, but that any adjustments that could be made to achieve compatibility between male crew members and female observers were encouraged. Caribbean (Ps) were notified that a female observer would be assigned to accompany their vessels. In two separate actions, Ps, the owners, and crew filed these actions for declaratory and injunctive relief. Ps alleged that D's directive requiring the presence of female observers threatened a violation of the crew members' constitutional privacy rights and a violation of regulations requiring the observer to carry out his duties so as to minimize interference with fishing operations, 50 C.F.R. § 216.24(f)(2) (1986). Ps obtained temporary restraining orders prohibiting D from implementing its new directive. Ps moved for preliminary injunctive relief. Besides the intimate settings on the boats, Ps contend that the presence of a female observer could destroy morale and distract the crew, thus affecting the crew's efficiency and decreasing the vessel's profits. Due to the captains' practice of assigning government observers to bunk in the dormitory bunkrooms and the crew members' habit of undressing, showering, and relieving themselves on deck, the crew members allegedly would be forced to expose their naked bodies to the view of the observer both above and below the deck. Ps also contend that the crew may harass or sexually assault a female observer. Such tortious conduct could subject the owners to uninsurable liability, and further endanger their profits. D submitted declarations pointing out that Administration regulations do not require that observers be placed in shared bunkrooms, that private quarters on tuna vessels may remain vacant throughout a fishing voyage, and that both male and female observers had been assigned private accommodations on boats in the past. D presented the experience of one woman on one boat for 48 days. The court granted Ps motion. The court determined that the balance of hardships tipped sharply in favor of the owners and crew. The court decided that the injunction would merely preserve the status quo, and this was important considering 'the fact that the tuna industry is not as viable as it once was.' D appealed.