United States Ninth Circuit

In a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) challenge to eighteen amendments to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) grazing regulations, partial summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where: 1) the BLM failed to address concerns raised by its own experts, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the EPA, and state agencies; and 2) there was resounding evidence from agency experts that the eighteen amendments to the BLM's grazing regulations may affect listed species and their habitat. However, the order is vacated in part where the district court failed to consider plaintiffs' Federal Land Policy and Management Act claim under the framework and with the deference set forth in Chevron.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/01/2010
• Published 09/01/2010

Judges

• Richard A. Paez

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Roderick E. Walston, Joseph Feller