The Endangered Species Act of 1973 authorizes citizens to bring suits against the government to protect threatened wildlife and plant life. When the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service decided to restrict the amount of water released from an irrigation project along the Oregon–Washington border, Oregon ranchers brought suit against the federal government. The ranchers maintained that their businesses would be severely damaged as a result of this decision. They also alleged that the government had not used the “best scientific and commercial data available,” as required by the federal statute. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the ranchers did not have standing because the statute only provided for citizen suits brought on behalf of endangered species. Should citizens who believe that the government has been overly pro-environment and insufficiently sensitive to the economic consequences of environmental protection have standing to sue the government?