Opinion ID: 6500751
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Refuge Act

Text: For the same reasons that FWS’s decision to continue managed grazing on Clear Lake Refuge does not violate NEPA, it does not violate the Refuge Act either. Western Watersheds argues that the agency failed to ensure that grazing was a compatible use of the Refuge. See 16 U.S.C. § 668dd(d)(3)(A)(i). But, as explained, FWS reasonably decided to continue managed grazing for the benefit of sagegrouse, and, for the same reasons, reasonably determined that grazing would “not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the mission of the System or the purposes of the refuge.” See 16 U.S.C. § 668ee(1). FWS thus did not violate the Refuge Act in authorizing continued grazing on Clear Lake Refuge.