Defenders of Wildlife v. Salazar
651 F.3d 112
D.C. Cir.2011Background
- The National Elk Refuge and Grand Teton National Park management plan aims to end supplemental winter feeding of elk and bison.
- The plan is a 15-year phased approach to reduce reliance on feeding, increase natural forage, monitor diseases, and allow for vaccination and population management.
- The plan rejects a five-year deadline proposed by petitioners as potentially harmful to elk health and habitat objectives.
- The agencies concluded a fixed deadline would be too restrictive given ecological, social, and political variables; they emphasize an adaptive framework.
- The Defenders sued under the Administrative Procedure Act, challenging the absence of a deadline as arbitrary and capricious.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the agencies, and the court of appeals affirmed, upholding the plan’s approach and flexibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the lack of a deadline renders the plan arbitrary | Defenders: deadline required to satisfy conservation goals. | Salazar/Wyoming: flexible, adaptive plan furthers conservation without fixed date. | Not arbitrary or capricious; plan balances objectives and commits to ending feeding. |
| Whether the plan adequately implements Improvement Act objectives with other factors | Defenders: priority must be conservation over other considerations. | Plan considers fourteen statutory factors alongside conservation. | Plan is consistent with Act and permits adaptive management. |
| Whether Wyoming has a veto over ending supplemental feeding | Wyoming veto power could obstruct plan goals. | Language is aspirational; no veto; Secretary retains control. | Wyoming has no veto; plan remains under Secretary's duty to end feeding. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bluewater Network v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (Arbitrary and capricious review standards and factors)
- Castlewood Prods., LLC v. Norton, 365 F.3d 1076 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (APA review and agency decision-making scrutiny)
- Wyoming v. United States, 279 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2002) (Preemption principles in federal wildlife management)