WildEarth Guardians v. Bucknall

The federal district court for the District of Montana ordered federal defendants to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the reauthorization of a predator damage and conflict management program in Montana that allowed the capture and sometimes the killing of animal predators, including grizzly bears. The court agreed with the plaintiffs that the environmental assessment failed to take a hard look at the program’s impacts on grizzly bears and remanded without vacatur for preparation of an EIS. The court found that the defendants should have considered information about the sex and location of removed grizzly bears, that the defendants relied on outdated grizzly bear mortality data, and that the defendants acted arbitrarily and capriciously by “shrugging off legitimate concerns about connectivity and declining to analyze the cumulative effects of lethal grizzly bear removals” outside certain areas. The decision did not address the complaint’s allegation that the defendants failed to take into account other threats to the grizzly bear such as climate change and loss of important food sources.

A lawsuit filed in the federal district court for the District of Montana challenged federal defendants’ decision to continue a predator damage management program in Montana that would result in the killing of native predators, including grizzly bears, which are listed as threatened in the contiguous United States. The plaintiffs’ allegations included that the defendants failed to take into account threats to the grizzly bear, including climate change. The complaint asserted claims under the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.