A federal judge in Montana is weighing whether to split and transfer two lawsuits challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s decision to reduce protections for greater sage grouse habitat across millions of acres in the western United States.
The legal dispute centers on resource management plan amendments approved by the bureau that affect sage grouse populations spanning nine states from California to North Dakota. Conservation groups argue the amendments weaken critical habitat protections by removing key restrictions and expanding oil and gas leasing opportunities.
Seven conservation organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Gallatin Wildlife Association, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Rocky Mountain Wild, the Sierra Club, the Western Watersheds Project, and WildEarth Guardians, filed suit in March. A second lawsuit followed later that month from the Montana Wildlife Federation, the Wilderness Society, and Defenders of Wildlife, specifically targeting Wyoming and Montana plan amendments.
Wyoming state officials are now requesting that U.S. District Judge Brian Morris dismiss the cases or transfer them to Wyoming federal court. Ethan Paddison from the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office emphasized the state’s significant investment in sage grouse conservation, noting Wyoming has spent nearly three decades and over $100 million developing its core area strategy for the species.
The state maintains that its resource management plan differs substantially from other states’ plans, incorporating unique local factors and conservation frameworks. Wyoming manages approximately 17 million acres of Bureau of Land Management surface lands designated as sage grouse habitat, representing 24% of all such federal lands.
Judge Morris expressed concern about potentially conflicting rulings if the cases were separated, noting that Wyoming appeals would go to the Tenth Circuit while Montana appeals would reach the Ninth Circuit. The federal government supports transferring all claims to Wyoming, with Justice Department attorney Luther Hajek arguing for keeping the cases together in a jurisdiction with a higher concentration of sage grouse habitat.
Conservation groups strongly oppose the transfer. Michael Freeman, representing three conservation organizations through Earthjustice, characterized the current litigation as a continuation of previous sage grouse protection cases. He argued that transferring the case would reward a “rush to courthouse” strategy and create inefficiencies by having multiple courts decide similar issues.
Andrew Missel from Advocates For The West, representing the larger coalition of conservation groups, described the transfer attempt as “a pretty naked display of gamesmanship.” Both attorneys stressed that national decisions regarding sage grouse protection should be adjudicated together in a single court.
The greater sage grouse, a ground-dwelling bird known for its elaborate mating displays, has experienced sharp population declines primarily due to habitat loss. The species is considered threatened across its range, making habitat protection a critical conservation priority.
Adding complexity to the situation, Wyoming and the Western Energy Alliance have filed their own lawsuit in Wyoming federal court, seeking a declaration that the state’s amended plan complies with federal law. Conservation attorneys characterized this filing as a strategic maneuver to influence venue decisions.
Judge Morris indicated he would issue a ruling on the venue question within the coming weeks. The decision will determine whether the cases proceed in Montana or Wyoming courts, potentially affecting how sage grouse habitat protection measures are implemented across the western United States.
Leave a Reply