1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SAM HIRSCH,
Acting Assistant Attorney General
SETH M. BARSKY, Chief
S. J AY GOVINDAN, Assistant Chief
RICKEY D. TURNER, Trial Attorney
U.S. Department of J ustice
Environment and Natural Resources Division
Wildlife and Marine Resources Section
Ben Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7611
Washington, D.C. 20044-7611
(303) 844-1373 (Denver office)
(303) 844-1350 (fax)

Attorneys for Federal Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

WESTERN RANGELAND
COSERVATION ASSOCIATION;
PEARSON RANCH; YARDLEY
CATTLE CO.; RUNNIN C. FAMILY
PARTNERSHIP LP; WINTCH & CO.
LTD; J OEL HATCH; R. LARSON
SHEEP COMPANY LLC; MATTHEW
WOD AND MARILYN WOOD; PLATT
LIVESTOCK LLC; SAGE VALLEY
HOLDINGS; MICHAEL
CHRISTENSEN; DUSTIN
HUNTINGTON; TERRIL HUNT;
MARK EVENS,

Plaintiffs,
v.

S.M.R. J EWELL, in her official capacity
as Secretary of the U.S. Department of
the Interior; NEIL KORNZE, in his
official capacity as Director of the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management; J UAN
PALMA, in his official capacity as Utah
State Director of the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management;

Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 2:14-cv-327-PMW

FEDERAL DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO
PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF AND FOR MANDAMUS [ECF NO.
2]

















Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 1 of 12

2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants S.M.R. J ewell, in her official capacity as Secretary of Interior, and Neil
Kornze, in his official capacity as Director of the United States Bureau of Land Management,
and J uan Palma, in his official capacity as Utah State Director of the United States Bureau of
Land Management (collectively, BLM or Defendants), by and through the undersigned
counsel, submit the following Answer in response to Plaintiffs Complaint for Injunctive and
Declaratory Relief.
INTRODUCTION
The allegations set forth in the introductory paragraph consist of Plaintiffs
characterization of their case, to which no response is required. To the extent a response is
required, Defendants deny the allegations.
1. The allegations set forth in paragraph 1 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
2. The allegations set forth in paragraph 2 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
3. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in paragraph 3 which purport to characterize plaintiffs organization and therefore deny them.
4. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 4.
5. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in the first, fourth, and seventh sentences of paragraph 5 and therefore deny them. Defendants
admit the allegations in the second, third, and fifth sentences of paragraph 5. The allegations in
the sixth, eighth, and ninth sentences of paragraph 5 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
6. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 6 that Plaintiff
Yardley Cattle Co. is a grazing permittee on the Burn Knoll Allotment, which is managed by the
Cedar City Field Office of the BLM. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to
respond to the remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 6 and therefore deny them.
Defendants admit the allegations in the second, third, and fifth sentences of paragraph 6.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 2 of 12

3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations in the fourth
and seventh sentences of paragraph 6 and therefore deny them. The allegations in the sixth and
eighth sentences of paragraph 6 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required.
To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
7. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 7 that Plaintiff
Runnin C Family Partnership, LP, Lyle Carter is a grazing permittee on the Waterhollow
Allotment, which is managed by the Cedar City Field Office of the BLM. Defendants lack
sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the remaining allegations in the first sentence
of paragraph 7 and therefore deny them. Defendants admit the allegations in the second sentence
of paragraph 7. The allegations in the third and fourth sentences of paragraph 7 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required,
Defendants deny the allegations.
8. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 8 that Plaintiff
Wintch & Co., LTD is a grazing permittee on the Wah Wah Lawson Allotment, which is
managed by the Cedar City Field Office of the BLM. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or
information to respond to the remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 8 and
therefore deny them. Defendants admit the allegations in the second and third sentences of
paragraph 8. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in the fourth sentence of paragraph 8 and therefore deny them. The allegations in the fifth and
sixth sentences of paragraph 8 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required.
To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
9. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in the first sentence of paragraph 9 and therefore deny them. Defendants admit the allegations in
the second, third, and fourth sentences of paragraph 9. The allegations in the fifth and sixth
sentences of paragraph 9 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the
extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 3 of 12

4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 10 that Plaintiff
R. Larson Sheep Company, LLC is a grazing permittee on the Frisco and Willow Creek
Allotments, which are managed by the Cedar City Field Office of the BLM. Defendants lack
sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the remaining allegations in the first sentence
of paragraph 10 and therefore deny them. Defendants admit the allegations in the second
sentence of paragraph 10. The allegations in the third and fourth sentences of paragraph 10
constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is
required, Defendants deny the allegations.
11. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 11 that
Plaintiffs Matthew and Marilyn Wood are the grazing permittees on the Mountain Spring, Lone
Pine, Matheson, and Wood Winter Allotments, which are managed by the Cedar City Field
Office of the BLM. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the
remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 11 and therefore deny them. Defendants
admit the allegations in the second and third sentences of paragraph 11. The allegations in the
fourth and fifth sentences of paragraph 11 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is
required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
12. Defendants admit the allegation in the first sentence of paragraph 12 that Plaintiff
Platt Livestock LLC is a grazing permittee on the Pine Valley and Bull Spring Allotments, which
are managed by the Cedar City Field Office of the BLM. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge
or information to respond to the remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 12 and
therefore deny them. The allegations in the second and third sentences of paragraph 12
constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is
required, Defendants deny the allegations.
13. Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second, and fourth sentences of
paragraph 13. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in the third sentence of paragraph 13 and therefore deny them. The allegations in the fifth and
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 4 of 12

5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
sixth sentences of paragraph 13 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required.
To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
14. Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second, and third sentences of
paragraph 14. The allegations in the fourth and fifth sentences of paragraph 14 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required,
Defendants deny the allegations.
1

15. Defendants admit the allegations in the first and second sentences of paragraph
15. The allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 15 constitute conclusions of law to which
no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
16. Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second, and fourth sentences of
paragraph 16. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the allegations
in the third sentence of paragraph 16 and therefore deny them. Defendants admit the allegations
in the second, third, and fifth sentences of paragraph 16. The allegations in the fifth and sixth
sentences in paragraph 16 constitute conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the
extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
17. Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second, and third sentences of
paragraph 17. The allegations in the fourth and fifth sentences in paragraph 17 constitute
conclusions of law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required,
Defendants deny the allegations.
18. The allegations in paragraph 18 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
19. Defendants admit allegations in the first and second sentences of paragraph 19.
The allegations in the third sentence in paragraph 19 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.

1
On J uly 22, 2014, this Court granted Plaintiff Michael Christensen, Christensen Ranches
Notice to Dismiss with Prejudice. See ECF Nos. 23-1 and 31. Plaintiff Christensen is no longer
part of this lawsuit.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 5 of 12

6

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20. The allegations in paragraph 20 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(a),
which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any
allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
21. The allegations in paragraph 21 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(b)(1)
and (2) and 43 C.F.R. 4720.1, which speaks for themselves and contain the best evidence of
their contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning,
and/or context of the statute or regulation.
22. The allegations in paragraph 22 purport to characterize 43 C.F.R. 4710.3-1,
which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any
allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the regulation.
23. The allegations in paragraph 23 purport to characterize 43 C.F.R. 4700.0-2 and
16 U.S.C. 1332(f), which speaks for themselves and contain the best evidence of their contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the statute and regulation.
24. The allegations in paragraph 24 purport to characterize Exhibit A, which speaks
for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of Exhibit A.
25. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 25 that BLM determines excess
based solely on an analysis of the appropriate management level for each herd management area.
The remaining allegations in paragraph 25 purport to characterize Exhibit A, which speaks for
itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent
with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of Exhibit A.
26. The allegations in paragraph 26 purport to characterize Exhibit A, which speaks
for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of Exhibit A.
27. The allegations in paragraph 27 purport to characterize a 2005 Environmental
Assessment analyzing the appropriate management levels of wild horses on the Bible Springs,
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 6 of 12

7

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Blawn Wash, Four Mile and Tilly Creek Wild heard management areas, which speaks for itself
and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with
the plain language, meaning, and/or context of that document.
28. The allegations in paragraph 28 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
29. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 29.
30. The allegations in paragraph 30 purport to characterize a 2012 Environmental
Assessment on the Frisco Wild Horse Herd Management Area Plan and the Gather Plan for the
Cedar City Field Office, which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
that document.
31. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 31.
32. The allegations in paragraph 32 purport to characterize two letters (see Exhibits B
and C) sent by Defendants, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their
contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or
context of the letters.
33. The allegations in paragraph 33 purport to characterize two letters (see Exhibits B
and C) sent by Defendants, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their
contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or
context of the letters.
34. The allegations in paragraph 34 purport to characterize two letters (see Exhibits D
and E) sent by Defendants, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their
contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or
context of the letters.
35. The allegations in paragraph 35 purport to characterize a letter (see Exhibit F)
sent by Defendants, which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 7 of 12

8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the letter.
36. The allegations in paragraph 36 purport to characterize a letter sent by
Defendants, which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants
deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the letter.
37. The allegations in paragraph 37 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
38. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 38.
39. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 39. The
allegations in the second and third sentences of paragraph 39 purport to characterize the Wild
Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, 16 U.S.C. 1331, et. seq., which speaks for itself and
contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the
plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
40. Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 40 that the
damage to rangeland resources have been caused by excess wild horses. Defendants lack
sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the remaining allegations in paragraph 40 and
therefore deny them.
41. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 41.
42. Defendants deny the allegations in the first and third sentences of paragraph 42.
Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to respond to the remaining allegations in
paragraph 42 and therefore deny them.
43. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 43.
Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 43. The allegations in the
third sentence of paragraph 43 purport to characterize letters sent by Defendants, which speak for
themselves and contain the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the letters.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 8 of 12

9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
44. Defendants incorporate herein their responses to allegations set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 44.
45. The allegations in paragraph 45 purport to characterize 5 U.S.C. 551, 702, 704,
and 551(13) which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the statutes.
46. The allegations in paragraph 46 purport to characterize 5 U.S.C. 706 which
speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
47. The allegations in paragraph 47 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(a) and
43 C.F.R. 4710.3-1, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their
contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or
context of the statute or regulation.
48. The allegations in paragraph 48 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(b) and
43 C.F.R. 4720.1, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the statute or regulation.
49. The allegations in paragraph 49 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(b)(2)
and 16 U.S.C. 1332(f), which speak for themselves and contains the best evidence of their
contents. Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or
context of the statutes.
50. The allegations in paragraph 50 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations. The
allegations in paragraph 50 also purport to characterize the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and
Burros Act, 16 U.S.C. 1331, et seq., and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 43
U.S.C. 1701, et seq., which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 9 of 12

10

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the statutes.
51. The allegations in paragraph 51 purport to characterize Exhibit A, which speaks
for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of Exhibit A.
52. The allegations in paragraph 52 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
53. The allegations in paragraph 53 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
54. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 54.
55. Defendants incorporate herein their responses to allegations set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 55.
56. The allegations in paragraph 56 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1333(b)(2),
which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any
allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
57. The allegations in paragraph 57 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1332(f),
which speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any
allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
58. The allegations in paragraph 58 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
59. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 59.
60. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 60.
61. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 61.
62. Defendants incorporate herein their responses to allegations set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 62.
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 10 of 12

11

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
63. The allegations in paragraph 63 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1334, which
speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
64. The allegations in paragraph 64 purport to characterize 16 U.S.C. 1334, which
speaks for itself and contains the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegation
inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of the statute.
65. The allegations in paragraph 65 purport to characterize letters sent by Plaintiffs to
Defendants, which speak for themselves and contains the best evidence of their contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the letters.
66. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 66.
67. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 67.
68. Defendants incorporate herein their responses to allegations set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 68.
69. The allegations in paragraph 69 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
70. The allegations in paragraph 70 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
71. The allegations in paragraph 71 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
72. The allegations in paragraph 72 constitute conclusions of law to which no
response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations.
73. The allegations in paragraph 73 purport to characterize 28 U.S.C. 1361 and the
5 U.S.C. 551, which speak for themselves and contain the best evidence of their contents.
Defendants deny any allegation inconsistent with the plain language, meaning, and/or context of
the statutes.
GENERAL DENIAL
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 11 of 12

12

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
All allegations not specifically admitted herein are denied. Defendants deny the
challenged actions are in violation of any law or regulation.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The remainder of the complaint constitutes Plaintiffs request for relief, to which no
response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs
are entitled to the relief requested or any relief whatsoever.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1. To the extent that Plaintiff lacks standing to raise some or all of its claims, any
such claims should be dismissed.
2. To the extent that the Court lacks jurisdiction over Plaintiffs claims, any such
claims should be dismissed.
3. To the extent that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim on which relief can be
granted, any such claims should be dismissed.

Dated: September 22, 2014 Respectfully Submitted,

SAM HIRSCH,
Acting Assistant Attorney General
SETH M. BARSKY, Section Chief
S. J AY GOVINDAN,
Assistant Section Chief

/s/ Rickey D. Turner, J r.
RICKEY D. TURNER, J R.
Trial Attorney
U.S. Department of J ustice
Environment & Natural Resources Division
Wildlife & Marine Resources Section
999 18th Street
South Terrace, Suite 370
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 844-1373

Attorneys for Federal Defendants
Case 2:14-cv-00327-DB Document 43 Filed 09/22/14 Page 12 of 12