MONTANA WILDERNESS ASS'N v. McAllister
666 F.3d 549
9th Cir.2011Background
- MWA and related environmental plaintiffs challenge the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Travel Management Plan under the Study Act and APA.
- The Study Act directs maintenance of 1977 wilderness character and potential for wilderness designation pending congressional action.
- The Forest Service reconfigured motorized/mechanized use areas in the Hyalite-Porcupine-Buffalo Horn Wilderness Study Area to align with 1977 baselines, but volumes of use have increased since 1977.
- The Service acknowledged data gaps on historical use volumes and used them to justify not restoring or maintaining 1977-level solitude for current users.
- District court granted summary judgment for MWA, finding the plan arbitrary and remanding for NEPA/APA considerations; the Service appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit held the Service failed to maintain current wilderness character for current users, and failed to account for increased use volume; remand ordered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Study Act require maintaining 1977 wilderness character for current users? | MWA: yes, maintain 1977 character for current users. | McAllister: no, focus on physical characteristics for future designation suffices. | Yes; maintain 1977 wilderness character for current users. |
| Did the Service's failure to account for increased use volume render the plan arbitrary and capricious? | MWA: must consider increased volume and its impact on solitude. | McAllister: volume data not required due to physical focus. | Yes; failure to consider use-volume increase was arbitrary and capricious. |
| Did the Service violate NEPA by failing to address incomplete data on use changes under §1502.22? | MWA: incomplete data on use volumes relevant to environmental impacts must be acknowledged. | McAllister: data gaps are not relevant to the analysis. | Yes; incomplete data must be acknowledged and analyzed for impacts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2008) (arbitrary and capricious standard review framework)
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (U.S. Supreme Court 1983) (an agency's decision must be reasoned and evidence-based)
- Riverbend Farms, Inc. v. Madigan, 958 F.2d 1479 (9th Cir. 1992) (prejudicial error requires reversal when relevant facts are ignored)
- San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v. NRC, 449 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2006) (deal with uncertainties using accepted methods)