Hodel

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment came on regularly for hearing before the undersigned on November 19, 1984. All parties were present and represented by respective counsel as was amicus curiae, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. The parties have in effect submitted the case for trial upon an agreed record since neither plaintiffs nor defendants have alleged that genuine triable factual issues exist.

On May 9, 1984, plaintiffs (five environmental and wildlife organizations and one individual) filed a petition for review and complaint challenging the final rules and agency actions of the Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, “the Secretary,” and the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, “the BLM.” Based on the various issues presented and the status of the parties involved, the Court finds that jurisdiction is properly predicated on the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 . INTRODUCTION

The case before the Court is complex and involves issues of national importance and first impression. The regulations under attack are amendments to existing Department of Interior regulations with one common characteristic. Each pertains to the management…