Montana grazing project proceeds despite sage grouse concerns
Monique Merrill
(CN) — A federal judge declined to block a grazing project in a threatened Montana bird’s habitat, but indicated the trio of conservation groups bringing the challenge was likely to succeed on key claims that federal land managers neglected to properly analyze the impact of the project.
U.S. District Judge Brian Morris said the groups showed a likelihood of success on claims the Bureau of Land Management acted arbitrarily by failing to disclose baseline sage grouse data and conduct a cumulative impacts analysis, but still found the groups had not met the standard required to block the project.
“Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, however, or to prove that the balance of equities and public interest tip sharply in their favor,” Morris, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote in a 27-page opinion.
The dispute centers on the Grasshopper Watershed in southwest Montana. The Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Native Ecosystems Council and Council on Wildlife and Fish sued the Bureau of Land Management in November over its authorization of grazing, livestock management and range improvement projects in the area.
The groups say the area contains highly valuable habitat for sage grouse, a bird species native to the western U.S. and Canada that has been in decline for decades due to habitat loss.
The conservation groups accused the agency of approving the projects without adequately analyzing the impacts they would have on sage grouse, its habitat and the habitat of other wildlife. They asked the court to block the agency’s approval of grazing, which typically starts on April 1.
Specifically, the conservation groups argued the agency failed to disclose crucial baseline information about the sage grouse population in the watershed. From 2021 to 2024, the Montana sage grouse population decreased by around 30%. Between 2002 and 2024, the population decreased by nearly 50%.
Morris found that the conservation groups were likely to prevail on their claim that the Bureau of Land Management violated the National Environmental Policy Act.
“Defendants seemingly should know the answer to whether sage grouse populations in the Watershed remain stable, have declined, or have increased,” Morris wrote. “This data should be included in a NEPA-compliant [environmental assessment].”
Morris also found that the agency failed to conduct and publish a cumulative impacts analysis on the effect of spring grazing on sage grouse.
The conservation groups were not as successful in their claims the agency violated the sage grouse Approved Resource Management Plan and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. The groups argued the agency violated both by again failing to include any baseline information about the sage grouse population in the watershed, but Morris noted the agency was not required to do so.
“The APA requires disclosure of relevant data and information. The ARMPA and FLPMA, apparently, do not,” Morris wrote.
To win a preliminary injunction, however, the plaintiffs must show both a likelihood of success and irreparable harm.
“Plaintiffs’ contentions that sage grouse loss will occur are unsupported by specific data and rely primarily upon general assertions about the status of sage grouse populations across the state,” Morris wrote.
“The court recognizes that it proves likely that defendants’ own failures to include sufficient data in the [environmental assessment] have contributed to plaintiffs’ lack of information,” Morris wrote. “The burden remains on plaintiffs, however, to demonstrate irreparable harm.”
Morris explained that the seemingly low percentage of the Montana population of sage grouse that occupy the watershed and the speculative nature of the harm contributed to the court’s reasoning.
Although the court denied the injunction, the conservation groups expressed encouragement by the order at large and optimism for summary judgment.
“The court agreed with plaintiffs that defendants could not meaningfully assess the impacts of reauthorizing widespread grazing and grazing infrastructure projects on sage grouse without that baseline information,” said Mike Garrity, executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies. “The court also explained that plaintiffs’ ability to prove irreparable harm likely was hindered by defendants’ failure to provide that information, further underscoring the degree of BLM’s error.”