Judge leans toward conservationists in sage grouse dispute with feds

Lily Roby

PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) — An Oregon federal judge on Thursday heard dueling summary judgment motions over cattle grazing in key sage grouse research areas, signaling he may seek additional briefing on potential remedies before issuing a ruling.

U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon did not immediately decide whether to extend broad grazing restrictions, instead probing how any ruling could be structured for appeal and what relief would be appropriate if he rules against the government.

“If I were to agree with [the conservation group] on some points,” Simon said, “would it make sense to issue my opinion … and then promptly ask for briefing on an appropriate remedy?”

The dispute pits the Oregon Natural Desert Association against the Bureau of Land Management over a 2025 land use plan that reduced protections for “key research natural areas” meant to study the effects of grazing on sagebrush ecosystems.

Simon, who previously barred grazing on roughly 22,000 acres in April 2025, questioned whether making his preliminary injunction permanent would require extensive fencing that might later need to be undone.

“Why isn’t that a significant waste?” the Barack Obama appointee asked.

ONDA attorney David Becker argued the 2025 plan undermines the scientific purpose of the research areas, which were designed to provide ungrazed baseline conditions.

“The real key issue is the BLM never grappled with its prior finding that the 2015 closures represented the minimum” needed for meaningful research, Becker said, warning the changes would render studies “statistically insignificant” and deter long-term projects.

He emphasized urgency, saying delays in implementing protections, including fencing, risk ongoing harm: “Every day that goes by, there’s an ongoing irreparable injury."

Attorney Emma Hamilton, representing the BLM, countered that the revised plan reflects years of on-the-ground analysis.

“This is a case where we have two parties who just disagree about the best way to conserve,” she said.

Hamilton argued the earlier plan proved impractical in some areas due to terrain, wildlife movement and risks such as fence collisions near breeding grounds, adding that the 2025 plan still allows for meaningful research comparisons across the landscape.

An attorney for ranching interests, David Martin Hori, warned that removing grazing could increase wildfire risk and burden livestock operators.

The dispute traces back to a 2015 federal conservation plan for the greater sage grouse that designated 15 grazing-free research areas. After the BLM failed to fully implement those closures, ONDA sued in 2019 and won a 2022 order requiring compliance.

A revised 2025 plan reduced protected acreage from about 22,000 acres to roughly 3,700 acres, prompting the desert association’s latest lawsuit.