### Court Orders Federal Agency to Enhance Protections for Rice’s Whales in Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling
In a significant decision that could reshape the dynamics of offshore energy production in the Gulf of Mexico, a US District Court in Maryland has ruled that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) must revise its biological opinion to better protect the endangered Rice’s whale from harmful impacts associated with oil and gas drilling. The decision, which was issued on August 19, 2024, highlights the critical need for more robust measures to safeguard marine life amidst ongoing extraction activities.
The court’s ruling was a victory for environmental groups who had challenged the NMFS’s 2020 biological opinion, arguing that it underestimated the risks and harms of oil spills to protected species. Specifically, the court found that the opinion incorrectly assumed the population of Rice’s whales remained as large as it was before the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, when, in fact, the numbers had significantly diminished. Furthermore, the agency was criticized for addressing only two of the five identified stressors likely to jeopardize the Rice’s whale and failing to provide a clear explanation of how mitigation measures would effectively protect the species.
#### Impact on Oil and Gas Operations
The implications of this ruling extend far beyond environmental concerns. The court’s decision could potentially impact future oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, particularly if the revised biological opinion results in more stringent habitat protections for endangered species. The current leasing program, issued by the Biden administration in 2024, already features the fewest oil and gas lease sales in history, with only three auctions planned over the next five years. However, these measures may be insufficient in light of the court’s findings.
Energy trade associations, such as the American Petroleum Institute, the National Ocean Industries Association, and the EnerGeo Alliance, expressed concerns about the potential disruptions to energy production. They emphasized that delays in issuing a new biological opinion could jeopardize a