Foster v. Vilsack, No. 14-3887 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs challenged the USDA's determination that a portion of their farmland is a wetland within the meaning of the pertinent federal statutes and regulations. The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the USDA, concluding that the agency's final decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to the law. In this case, the USDA did not err in determining that Site 1 had the requisite hydrology to quaify as a wetland, and the USDA properly determined that Site 1 would support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation under normal circumstances.
Court Description: Bye, Author, with Smith and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Food Security Act of 1985. The USDA's determination that a portion of the plaintiff's property was wetlands was supported by the evidence and was not arbitrary, capricious or contrary to law.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.