Opinion ID: 186849
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: plo 7254

Text: 35 The Secretary must manage the public lands under principles of multiple use and sustained yield. 43 U.S.C. § 1732(a). `Multiple use management' is a deceptively simple term that describes the enormously complicated task of striking a balance among the many competing uses to which land can be put, `including, but not limited to, recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and [uses serving] natural scenic, scientific and historical values.' Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55, 58, 124 S.Ct. 2373, 159 L.Ed.2d 137 (2004) (quoting 43 U.S.C. § 1702(c)) (alteration in original). Sustained yield requires the Secretary to control depleting uses over time, so as to ensure a high level of valuable uses in the future. Id. (citing 43 U.S.C. § 1702(h)). 36 Mount Royal and the Woods family argue that the Secretary did not utilize multiple use management principles in issuing PLO 7254 and thus his decision was arbitrary and capricious. They contend that DOI had developed an anti-mining agenda, Appellants' Br. at 41, as early as 1993 and that the decision to issue PLO 7254 was predetermined, id. at 30-34. In support of their argument, the appellants suggest that the First Proposal represented a complete `about face,' id. at 31, from previous BLM policy regarding the Hills and that, by proposing a withdrawal that did not conform to the West HiLine Plan, 12 BLM `put the cart before the horse,' id. at 32, in violation of FLPMA and implementing regulations. Mount Royal and the Woods family also contend that the withdrawal violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution by seeking to protect an area of religious significance to Native Americans at the expense of mineral development. 37 In attempting to make the First Proposal conform to the West HiLine Plan, BLM drafted the Amendment/EIS utilizing principles of multiple use management. BLM considered four alternatives for managing the Hills. After analyzing the pertinent natural resources and economic and social conditions found in the study area, Final Sweet Grass Hills Resource Management Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement 13, reprinted in JA at 485, the environmental, social, and economic consequences of implementing the [four] alternatives, id. at 31, JA at 502, and feedback from interest groups and individuals[,] ... Federal, state, local agencies and Native American tribes, id. at 56, JA at 527, it recommended withdrawing the entire public mineral estate. Subsequently, in its 1997 ROD, BLM approved the preferred alternative contained in the Amendment/EIS. JA at 631. 38 Consistent with BLM's recommendations, the Secretary issued PLO 7254 to protect unique resources within the Sweet Grass Hills [ACEC] and surrounding areas, including areas of traditional spiritual importance to Native Americans, habitat which has high potential for reintroduction of the endangered peregrine falcon, seasonally important elk and deer habitat, and aquifers that provide potable water to local residents. Notification to Congress as Required by FLPMA 204(c)(2), Sweet Grass Hills 20-Year Withdrawal 1, reprinted in JA at 654. In the statutorily-required Notification to Congress, the Secretary addressed all twelve factors listed in 43 U.S.C. § 1714(c)(2), explaining in detail the proposed withdrawal's effects on current natural resource uses in the Hills, see id. § 1714(c)(2)(2), its effects on current land users, see id. § 1714(c)(2)(3), its incompatib[ility] with current land uses, see id. § 1714(c)(2)(4), and its effect on state and local government interests and the regional economy, see id. § 1714(c)(2)(8). Most important, after receiving the Secretary's notification, the Congress chose not to exercise its reserved power under FLPMA to veto the withdrawal. That is, the Congress did not adopt a concurrent resolution disapproving the withdrawal, id. § 1714(c), but instead let it stand. 39 With respect to the appellants' argument that the decision in PLO 7254 was predetermined, the record demonstrates that, while the 1988 West HiLine Plan and subsequent draft EIS regarding the Mount Royal/Manhattan Plan recommended allowing mineral location and entry in the Hills, strong public opposition to mining in the wake of the draft EIS's release rather than any BLM anti-mining agenda influenced its decision to consider a withdrawal. BLM's 1993 Application for Withdrawal concludes: 40 [T]he public was not as cognizant of the significance of the conflict between hardrock mining and the ACEC designation until recently when exploration and possible mining was presented as a reality. Similar activity in other areas of Montana contributed to this public awareness. As a result of these most recent public inputs, local residents, as well as Native Americans, have provided new information concerning the importance of the resource values, particularly cultural and hydrologic. 41 Petition/Application for Withdrawal of Sweet Grass Hills 12 (July 15, 1993), reprinted in JA at 298. Furthermore, the appellants ignore FLPMA's implementing regulations which expressly allow for the simultaneous issuance of a withdrawal proposal and preparation of a West HiLine Plan amendment to conform to the proposal. See 43 C.F.R. § 1610.5-5 (If the amendment is being considered in response to a specific proposal, the analysis required for the proposal and for the amendment may occur simultaneously.). 42 Finally, PLO 7254 does not violate the Establishment Clause. Supreme Court precedent makes clear that government action conforms to the Establishment Clause if: (1) the action has a secular ... purpose, (2) the primary effect of the action neither advances nor inhibits religion and (3) the action does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612-13, 91 S.Ct. 2105, 29 L.Ed.2d 745 (1971) (internal citation and quotation omitted). The Secretary enunciated several secular purposes for withdrawing the Hills, including protection of aquifers and the environment. Furthermore, PLO 7254 does not primarily affect religious interests; on the contrary, it protects all non-mineral resources in the Hills. Id. Finally, the land order does not foster excessive government entanglement with religion because it neither regulates religious practices nor increases Native American influence over management of the Hills. See Appellee's Br. at 46. 43 In sum, DOI followed FLPMA's land management guidelines in withdrawing 19,685 acres of public mineral estate located in the Hills from mineral location and entry for 20 years and, accordingly, its withdrawal decision contained in PLO 7254 is neither arbitrary nor capricious. 44 For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to the Department of the Interior. 45 So ordered.