Background
Colvin & Son, LLC and Stone Cabin Ranch challenged Bureau of Land Management gather plans for the Little Fish Lake Joint Management Area and the Stone Cabin Complex in Nye County, Nevada. BLM had determined that wild-horse populations substantially exceeded the areas’ appropriate management levels and adopted plans to gather and remove excess horses.
The ranches brought Administrative Procedure Act claims alleging that the plans violated the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, which directs BLM to “immediately remove” excess animals after determining that overpopulation exists and action is necessary. The district court granted summary judgment to the federal defendants.
The Court’s Holding
The Ninth Circuit affirmed. It held that the Act requires BLM to remove excess animals as promptly as logistically and reasonably possible while accounting for humane treatment and the Act’s other requirements. “Immediately,” the court concluded, does not demand instantaneous action or impose a fixed timetable for removals.
The gather plans met that standard. Each required BLM to pursue an initial gather promptly to reach low appropriate management levels, while recognizing practical constraints such as weather, terrain, holding capacity, contractor availability, gather efficiency, and population undercounts. The court also held that conditions affecting later population-control measures and maintenance gathers did not violate the immediacy requirement because those measures apply after low management levels have been achieved.
Key Takeaways
- The Wild Horses Act requires prompt, practicable removals—not an instantaneous removal or a specified deadline.
- BLM may account for logistical constraints and statutory duties concerning humane treatment when setting removal plans.
- A challenge to an allegedly delayed implementation may be brought, where appropriate, under APA Section 706(1); this appeal challenged the plans themselves under Section 706(2).
Why It Matters
The decision gives BLM substantial discretion to design the timing of wild-horse removal plans, so long as the plans require removal as promptly as reasonably and logistically possible under the Act. It also distinguishes a facial challenge to a gather plan from a claim that BLM has unreasonably delayed carrying out its statutory duty.