From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Babbitt

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 6, 1999
175 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 1999)

Opinion

Nos. 98-36151, 98-36152

Argued and Submitted April 13, 1999 — Seattle, Washington.

Filed May 6, 1999

COUNSEL

James S. Angell, Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, Bozeman, Montana, for the plaintiffs-appellants.

Andrew Mergen, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for the defendants-appellees.

John E. Bloomquist, Doney, Crowley, Bloomquist Uda, Helena, Montana, for the intervenors-appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Montana, Charles C. Lovell, District Judge, Presiding, D.C. No. CV-96-00082-CCL, D.C. No. CV-97-00030-CCL.

Before: Harry Pregerson and David R. Thompson, Circuit Judges, and Robert J. Kelleher, Senior District Judge.

The Honorable Robert J. Kelleher, Senior United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.


ORDER

[2] We affirm for reasons set forth in the district court's well-reasoned opinion and order reported at Intertribal Bison Cooperative, et al., v. Babbitt, 25 F. Supp.2d 1135 (D. Mont. 1998).

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Babbitt

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 6, 1999
175 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 1999)
Case details for

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Babbitt

Case Details

Full title:GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION; JACKSON HOLE ALLIANCE FOR RESPONSIBLE…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: May 6, 1999

Citations

175 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 1999)

Citing Cases

Western Watersheds Project v. Salazar

This Court has determined that the NPS Organic Act "allows [NPS] to determine whether selective removal of…

Western Watersheds Project v. Salazar

Finally, the Park Service has discretion to manage the Yellowstone bison at levels that can be accommodated…