Natural Resources Defense Council v. Morton

388 F. Supp. 829 (1974), aff'd per curiam, 527 F.2d 1386, cert. denied, 427 U.S. 913 (1976)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Morton

United States District Court for the District of Columbia
388 F. Supp. 829 (1974), aff'd per curiam, 527 F.2d 1386, cert. denied, 427 U.S. 913 (1976)

  • Written by Robert Cane, JD

Facts

The Bureau of Land Management (bureau) (defendant) managed over 171 million acres of public land. The bureau administered about 24,000 licenses, permits, and leases for livestock grazing on bureau-managed land. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the bureau prepared a programmatic environmental-impact statement covering its entire livestock-grazing program. The programmatic environmental-impact statement was intended to provide an overview of the cumulative environmental impact of the bureau’s livestock-grazing program and serve as the foundation for environmental analyses and supplemental environmental-impact statements for specific grazing-management actions. However, the bureau provided no guidance regarding what circumstances called for the preparation of supplemental environmental-impact statements. Further, the proposed programmatic environmental-impact statement did not include a detailed analysis of local geographic conditions relevant to specific areas and provided citizens an opportunity to comment on only the programmatic environmental-impact statement, rather than allowing local input. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) (plaintiff) filed suit against the bureau. The NRDC claimed that the bureau failed to comply with NEPA in its issuance of renewed grazing permits over the past four years and would continue to fail to comply with NEPA because it had not prepared and will not prepare environmental-impact statements analyzing the actual environmental impacts of grazing on specific local environments. Evidence indicated that 84 percent of grazing land under management of the bureau was in fair, poor, or bad condition and that bureau-managed land had seriously deteriorated. The NRDC sought declaratory relief that the bureau’s programmatic environmental-impact statement was not sufficient to comply with NEPA and that the bureau must assess the specific environmental effects of permits issued.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Flannery, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership