2-Bar Ranch Limited Partnership v. United States Forest Service, No. 19-35351 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiffs, cattle ranchers, filed suit in federal district court, claiming that the Service's decision to apply the 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures to the Dry Cottonwood Allotment, instead of the allowable use levels in the 2009 Forest Plan, violated the National Forest Management Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of partial summary judgment to plaintiffs and remanded with instructions to grant summary judgment to the Service. The panel concluded that the Service lawfully applied a particular set of standards for protecting stream habitats from the effects of cattle grazing, the 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures, to plaintiffs' grazing permits. The panel also concluded that plaintiffs were not entitled to attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act for their administrative appeal.
Court Description: Grazing Permits / Equal Access to Justice Act. The panel reversed the district court’s partial grant of summary judgment to Plaintiff cattle ranchers in their action challenging the U.S. Forest Service’s decision to apply 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures to the Dry Cottonwood Allotment in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, where plaintiffs had grazing permits for their cattle; held that Plaintiffs were not entitled to attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) for their administrative * The Honorable Jennifer Choe-Groves, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. 2-BAR RANCH LTD. PARTNERSHIP V. USFS 3 appeal; and remanded with instructions to grant summary judgment to the Service. In 1995, the Service amended some forest plans, including the 1987 Deerlodge Forest Plan. To implement the Plan’s new grazing standard, the Service developed a set of mitigation measures (the “1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures”) that applied to specific allotments, including the Dry Cottonwood Allotment. In 2009, the Service replaced the 1987 Deerlodge Forest Plan with the 2009 Forest Plan, and continued to apply the 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures. The district court held that the Service’s application of the 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures to the Dry Cottonwood Allotment was arbitrary and capricious and violated the National Forest Management Act. The panel held that the plain language of the 2009 Forest Plan supported the Service’s application of the 1995 Riparian Mitigation Measures to the Dry Cottonwood Allotment, and to Plaintiffs’ grazing permits. The Service’s incorporation of the 1995 measures into Plaintiffs’ grazing permits was therefore lawful. Because the 2009 Forest Plan was not ambiguous in any pertinent respect, the panel did not reach the Service’s alternative argument that the panel should defer to its regulatory interpretation. EAJA provides that an agency that conducts an adversary adjudication shall award to a prevailing party fees and other expenses incurred in connection with that proceeding. An agency proceeding is an “adversary adjudication” for EAJA purposes only if it is actually governed by the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”)’s formal adjudication requirements, as opposed to similar requirements of another statute or regulation. 5 U.S.C. § 554 delineates the scope of proceedings governed by the formal 4 2-BAR RANCH LTD. PARTNERSHIP V. USFS adjudication requirements of the APA. The panel held that the Service’s administrative appeal process was not governed by Section 554. The panel held further that the administrative appeal here was not an “adversary adjudication” for purposes of EAJA. The panel concluded that the Service properly denied Plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees for their administrative appeal.
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.