tidwell-brief

1. Facts in the Case:
In June, 2000, the BLM issued a Record of Decision calling for the release of 80 wild horses into what
was known as the Bonanza Herd Area on federally owned and managed rangeland located in Uintah
County, Utah.
The Resource Management Plan for the area in which the Bonanza Herd Area is located was issued by
the BLM in 1985. That Plan called for zero wild horses to be maintained in the Bonanza Herd Area. The
District Court however found that the BLM had never adhered to that Plan. In fact, by 1999 there was a
herd of at least 250 wild horses in the Bonanza. In that year, after an outbreak of Equine Infectious
Anemia, the BLM gathered and tested that number of horses. The infected horses were euthanized and
the “negative testing” horses were put under quarantine by the Utah State Veterinarian until April 4,
2000.
Once the quarantine was lifted, the BLM issued an Environmental Assessment containing the decision to
release 80 “negative-test” horses back into the Bonanza Herd Area.
It should be noted that this was a “management decision” not a plan or planning effort. It was a
management decision based on the existing Resource Management Plan, even though the Plan called
for zero wild horses in the Bonanza Herd Area.
2. Allegations of the Plaintiffs
a. Uintah County
After unsuccessfully trying to get the BLM to alter its decision, Uintah County filed the lawsuit in which
the District Court applied the coordination provision of FLPMA to set the decision aside. The County
charged that the BLM failed to follow the process of coordination outlined in the Federal Land
Management and Policy Act, thus failed to allow the County’s “procedural rights” “including consistency
review requirements under 43 USCA Section 1712 ( c) (9) and 43 C.F.R. Section 1610.3-2.”
24 | P a g e