Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Morton

Citation: 5 ELR 20327
No. No. 1983-73, 388 F. Supp. 829/7 ERC 1298/(D.D.C., 12/30/1974)

The court rules that the Bureau of Land Management's programmatic environmental impact statement for its livestock-grazing permit program under the Taylor Grazing Act is not sufficient, alone, to comply with the requirements of NEPA. The BLM must therefore prepare additional impact statements which discuss in detail the environmental effects of the proposed livestock grazing and alternatives to such grazing in specific areas of the public lands which are or will be licensed for such use. The court notes that these specific assessments need not be made in a separate EIS for each permit, and holds that it is initially within the BLM's discretion to determine whether an EIS should be prepared for each of the 52 grazing districts in the nation, or for several districts in a particular area. The court retains jurisdiction to facilitate future review of the methods chosen by the BLM to implement these NEPA responsibilities.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Edward L. Strohbehn, Jr.
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
917 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005

John Roger Beers
John E. Bryson
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
664 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, Cal. 94301

Counsel for Defendants
William M. Cohen
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530

James Coda
Department of Interior
Washington, D.C. 20240