City of Livingston v. Park Conservation District
2013 MT 234
| Mont. | 2013Background
- Dispute over whether a channel adjacent to the Yellowstone River is part of the river’s natural watercourse and subject to the Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act (NSLPA).
- Heart K Ranch uses the channel to obtain Yellowstone River water for its water rights; river water enters and leaves the channel with high/low flows.
- City of Livingston owns land adjacent to the channel and claims Heart K’s maintenance harms its property.
- Park Conservation District (PCD) issued a declaratory ruling that the channel is a flood/high water/side channel and thus within the Act; City petitioned for review under § 75-7-125, MCA.
- PCD conducted hearings, site visit, and reviewed aerial maps, photographs, and documents, ultimately upholding that the channel is part of the Yellowstone River bed.
- District Court affirmed the PCD decision; City appeals challenging the ruling as arbitrary or capricious.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the channel is subject to NSLPA as part of the river bed | Livingston contends the channel is not a natural watercourse, thus outside the Act. | PCD and Heart K contend the channel is a natural waterway and within the Act’s scope. | Yes, channel is part of Yellowstone River bed and within the Act. |
| Whether the PCD decision was arbitrary or capricious | City argues PCD ignored evidence calling the channel a ditch and acted arbitrarily. | PCD properly weighed evidence and articulated totality-of-circumstances rationale. | No; decision not arbitrary or capricious; supported by substantial record. |
| Proper application of totality of evidence in judging the channel’s status | Kept focus on technical definitions and isolated documents labeling the channel a ditch. | PCD reconciled conflicting records and relied on physical characteristics and hydrological behavior. | Totality of circumstances supports treating the channel as part of the natural watercourse. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bitterroot River Protective Assoc. v. Bitterroot Conservation District, 309 Mont. 207, 45 P.3d 24 (2002 MT 66) (use of totality of record in identifying whether a river or channel falls under the Act)
- Bitterroot River Protective Assoc. v. Bitterroot Conservation District, 346 Mont. 507, 198 P.3d 219 (2008 MT 377) (interpretation of channel status under the Act and avoidance of rigid definitions)
- Keily Const. v. City of Red Lodge, 312 Mont. 52, 57 P.3d 836 (2002 MT 241) (standards for evaluating administrative decisions and statutory interpretation)
- Silva v. City of Columbia Falls, 258 Mont. 329, 852 P.2d 671 (1993) (definitions and review for arbitrariness under substantial rights review)
- Hidden Hollow Ranch v. Fields, 321 Mont. 505, 92 P.3d 1185 (2004 MT 153) (application of NSLPA to natural waterways and channels)