Alleged BLM Faulty Email No Excuse Not to Use Scientific Wild Horse Data

By TRAVIS SANFORD of the Courthouse News Service

Excuses and Deception Does Not Hold Water with District Judge

WASHINGTON (CN) – The Bureau of Land Management “may not simply remain studiously ignorant of material scientific evidence” just because an email error delayed its receipt of the evidence, a federal judge has ruled.

The decision means District Court Judge Beryl Howell, will review a motion for summary judgment filed by the American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign in a suit to block a plan by the BLM to castrate wild stallions and return them to public lands.

The BLM proposed the initiative in 2008 and 2011. The bureau says the program is necessary to control herd populations which it says can double every four years.

The AWHPC challenged the bureau’s plans in the D.C. district court arguing that they violated the Wild-Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act which makes it a crime to kill or harass a feral horse and burros. Earlier this year the horse groups asked Judge Howell for summary judgment in the case relying on expert declarations from four wild horse behavior experts and biologists.

The BLM asked Judge Howell to strike any references to the expert testimony from the motion for summary judgment arguing that the testimony was not part of the administrative record that she is restricted to considering when ruling on the actions of a federal agency.

The horse group argued, and Judge Howell agreed, that the declarations of the experts where part of the administrative record because the group had included lengthy excerpts from the expert declarations in comments it filed within the agency’s public comment period on the proposed plan.

The BLM argued that because of an email error the agency did not actually receive copies of the expert declarations until the day after the public comment period closed, and so they should be excluded from the record. It also claimed the court was obligated to give the agency a strong presumption of regularity in its records.

While she agreed with the presumption of regularity, Judge Howell noted that the BLM already had copies of the expert declarations from previous administrative proceedings and litigation over its castration plans.

“While it would have been a courtesy for the Plaintiffs to include a copy of the Expert Declarations already possessed by BLM along with their comments relying on these Expert Declarations, they were not required to do so,” Howell wrote.

As it was Howell said, “Plaintiffs have shown that they specifically directed the agency to the Expert Declarations in their timely-filed comments and later, less than two hours after the comment period ended, attempted to submit the Expert Declarations to the agency.”

This and their repeated attempts in the days following the closing of the public comment period to make sure the declarations were part of the record “constituted evidence that BLM considered the materials at least indirectly,” the judge said.

In conclusion, abbreviating administrative record to AR, Howell wrote,

“The Court finds no reason to exclude the complete Expert Declarations from the AR merely because of a technical problem in forwarding copies of the Expert Declarations to the Defendants in a timely manner.”

Click (HERE) to read court comments

6 comments on “Alleged BLM Faulty Email No Excuse Not to Use Scientific Wild Horse Data

  1. Well equine advocates, there you go! DOI DIDN’T get the email, IN TIME NO LESS!!!

    LIARS, LIARS….PANTS ON FIRE!!!!!

    This is what citizens and advocates are dealing with…….LIARS!!!!!!!!!

    And this is just with the “gelding in NV” case!

    They use every excuse (based on lies and ignoring regulations AND science) to whack our wild equines and steal the land and water. USDA does the same thing with a ton of apathy to butcher and flat out abuse our equines shipped to H*LL; states and localities do too.

    What has this country come to……….

  2. In an unrelated case from 2010, the court found for the plaintiffs and declared:

    “For the same reasons that the court found BLM had violated NEPA, it held that BLM violated ESA. The court reasoned that because BLM failed to consider

    “relevant expert analysis and concerns”

    or

    “articulate a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made”, its actions were arbitrary and capricious in violation of the agency’s obligations under ESA.”

    This decision reminds agencies of the following two principles:

    1) agencies must consider relevant expert analysis and concerns and provide adequate responses if the agency decides to reject the expert’s conclusion;

    2) when the agency is changing an existing policy or rule, the agency must articulate a rational connection between the facts found and the choice to adopt the amendments.”

    Not just for that case, but for all instances where an action must have a basis in science. It seems that, rather than have to respond to relevant expert analysis – to follow through on ‘the hard look’ – they’re now directing thier energies toward hiding it. So much effort applied to ensure wild horse and burro removals take place, they will go to these ridiculous extremes rather than just do their job.

    We must be doin’ something right!

    • Lisa LeBlanc……

      SUPERB SUMMATION!!!!!!!!!!!

      And this is the game they have been playing all along; skirt the regs, the Act, multiple reasons for removal, etc with little bits at removal, reduction of herd areas. etc.

      Most excellent, Lisa….thank you.

      p.s. ain’t it the truth.

  3. now we need to file suit for each & every roundup/stampede because they are all illegal. fight fire with fire. pray for honest judges.

Care to make a comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s