Oregon Natural Desert Ass'n v. Carolyn Freeborn

Good Law
511 F. App'x 655
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 15, 201312-35759California548 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs seek to enjoin Defendants Thomas Ryan, Donald Gonzalez, the BLM, and the Department of the Interior from permitting any livestock grazing in the Louse Canyon Management Area until the BLM completes NEPA review of the impact of grazing on the greater sage-grouse. They also seek an order requiring the BLM to conduct an EIS. The district court denied both requests. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. The district court did not err in allowing grazing to continue pursuant to the 2006 permits. Even though those permits were replaced by the 2010 permits, once the district court set aside the 2010 decisions (which authorized the 2010 permits), the 2006 permits could be reimplemented. The district court’s ruling had no effect on the 2006 permits.

2. The district court did not err in declining to enjoin all grazing pending NEPA review. First, it was not an abuse of discretion to find that Plaintiffs failed to establish that grazing under the interim grazing strategy was likely to irreparably injure the sage-grouse population in Louse Canyon. See Winter v. Nat’l Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7, 22, 129 S.Ct. 365 , 172 L.Ed.2d 249…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.