Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP · 2019-02-25 · Kristine Marie Akland AKLAND LAW FIRM, PLLC...

Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone:(406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]

Cody J. Wisniewski (CO Bar No. 50415) MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION 2596 South Lewis Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 Phone: (303) 292-2021 Fax: (303) 292-1980 [email protected] Pro Hae Vice Application Pending

Attorneys for Applicants for Intervention

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

CROW INDIAN TRIBE; et al., Plaintiffs,

) ) ) ) )

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; et al., )

and

Defendants, ) ) ) )

WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, )

Applicants for Intervention. )

Case No. 9:17-cv-00089-DLC

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00117-DLC, 9: 17-cv-OO 118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00119-DLC, and 9:17-cv-00123-DLC)

WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C. PRICE, AND W&M THOMAN RANCHES' MOTION TO INTERVENE

Case 9:17-cv-00089-DLC Document 115 Filed 02/28/18 of 6

scan

Filed MSO

Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming Stock Growers Association,

Charles C. Price, and W&M Thoman Ranches, LLC (collectively "Applicants"),

by and through their undersigned counsel, respectfully move for leave to intervene

in each of the above-captioned, consolidated cases on the side of Defendants, as a

matter of right, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2). In the

alternative, Applicants seek permissive intervention pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 24(b ).

This Motion is supported by the Brief in Support of Wyoming Farm Bureau

Federation, Wyoming Stock Growers Association, Charles Price, and W&M

Thoman Ranches' Motion to Intervene and accompanying exhibits, which are filed

concurrently herewith. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(c),

Applicants are also filing, concurrently herewith, a responsive pleading to the

operative complaint in each of the above-captioned, consolidated cases.

Counsel for the parties were contacted regarding this motion. Counsel for

Plaintiffs Crow Tribe, et al. in Case No. 9: 17-cv-00089 reserve their position on

this motion until they have the opportunity to review the pleadings. Counsel for

Plaintiffs The Humane Society of the United States, et al. in Case No. 9:17-cv

OO 117 reserve their position on this motion until they have the opportunity to

review the arguments herein. Counsel for Plaintiff WildEarth Guardians in Case

No. 9:17-cv-00118 reserve their position on this motion until they have the

APPLICANTS' MOTION TO INTERVENE 2


opportunity to review the arguments herein. Counsel for Plaintiffs Northern

Cheyenne Tribe, et al. in Case No. 9: 17-cv-OO 119 reserve their position on this

motion until they have the opportunity to review the arguments herein. Counsel

for Plaintiffs Alliance for the Wild Rockies, et al. in Case No. 9:17-cv-00123

reserve their position on this motion pending review of the arguments in the

briefing.

Counsel for Defendants take no position on this motion until they have the

opportunity to review the pleadings. Counsel for Defendant-Intervenor State of

Wyoming does not oppose this motion. Counsel for Defendant-Intervenor State of

Idaho does not oppose this motion. Counsel for Defendant-Intervenor National

Rifle Association of America do not oppose this motion. Counsel for Defendant

Intervenor Safari Club International do not oppose this motion. Counsel for

Defendant-Intervenors State of Montana do not oppose this motion. Counsel for

Defendant-Intervenors Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks do not

oppose this motion.

II

II

II

II

II



~ DATED thisU day of~18.

Respectfully submitted,

S=R~~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]


Attorneys for Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming Stock Growers Association, Charles C. Price, and W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the i 7!J:!-day of Y ~U,,,.\\f\H 2018 the forgoing

document, and its attachments, were served in conventional form by U.S. Mail,

postage prepaid, on the following attorneys:

Peter J. Breuer Jeffrey S. Rasmussen Katie D. Frayler Michael W. Holditch FREDERICKS PEEBLES & MORGAN LLP 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO 80027

Kristine Marie Akland AKLAND LAW FIRM, PLLC 317 E. Spruce St. PO Box 7274 Missoula, MT 59807

Nicholas Arrivo THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES 1255 23rd Street, NW Suite 450 Washington, DC 2003 7

John R. Mellgren WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER-EUGENE 1216 Lincoln Street Eugene, OR 97401

Matthew Kellogg Bishop WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER I 03 Reeder's Alley Helena, MT 59601

APPLICANTS' MOTION TO INTERVENE

Kelly E. Nokes WILDEARTH GUARDIANSMISSOULA 117 W. Broadway PO Box 7516 Missoula, MT 59801

Joshua Osborne-Klein ZIONTZ CHESTNUT VARNELL BERLEY & SLONIM 2101 Fourth Avenue Suite 1230 Seattle, WA 98121

Timothy J. Preso Joshua R. Purtle EARTHJUSTICE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND - BOZEMAN 313 East Main Street Bozeman, MT 59715

David A. Bell BELL LAW FIRM PLLC 1917 South Higgins A venue Missoula, MT 59801

Rebecca Kay Smith PUBLIC INTEREST DEFENSE CENTER PO Box 7584 317 East Spruce Street Missoula, MT 59807

Timothy M. Bechtold BECHTOLD LAW FIRM PO Box 7051 Missoula, MT 59807-7051

5


Coby Howell OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY I 000 SW Third Ave Suite 600 Portland, OR 97204-2024

Michael Richard Eitel U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Environment and Natural Resources Division Wildlife & Marine Resources Section 999 18th Street South Terrace Suite 370 Denver, CO 80202

Adrian Ann Miller SULLIVAN MILLER LAW PLLC 3860 A venue B, Suite C East Billings, MT 59102

Erik Edward Petersen D. David DeWald WYOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL 2320 Capitol A venue Cheyenne, WY 82002

James David Johnson WILLIAMS LAW FIRM PO Box 9440 Missoula, MT 59807-9440

Kathleen E. Trever IDAHO OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 600 S. Walnut Street Boise, ID 83712

Steven W. Strack STA TE OF IDAHO 700 W. State Street, 2nd Floor P. 0. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0010

Robert T. Bell REEP BELL LAIRD & JASPER, P.C. 2955 Stockyard Road Missoula, MT 59808

Douglas S. Burdin SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL 501 2nd Street NE Washington, DC 20002

Michael Thomas Jean NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 11250 Maples Mill Road Fairfax, VA 2203

Jeremiah D. Weiner Timothy C. Fox MONTANA ATTORNEY GENERAL 215 N Sanders PO Box 201401 Helena, MT 59620-1401

Rebecca Dockter William A. Schenk MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF FISH WILDLIFE AND PARKS 1420 East 6th A venue PO Box 200701

. Wisniewski (CO Bar No. 50415) MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION



Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31 st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone:(406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]




MISSOULA DIVISION

CROW INDIAN TRIBE, CROW CREEK ) SIOUX TRIBE, STANDING ROCK ) Case No. 9:17-cv-00089-DLC SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX ) TRIBE, PONCA TRIBE OF NEBRASKA, ) (Consolidated with Case Nos. PIIKANI NATION, THE CRAZY DOG ) 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, SOCIETY, HOPI NATION BEAR CLAN, ) 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, NORTHERN ARAPAHO ELDERS ) 9:17-cv-00119-DLC, SOCIETY, DAVID BEARSHIELD, ) and 9:17-cv-00123-DLC) KENNYBOWEKATY,LLEVANDO ) FISHER, ELISE GROUND, ARVOL ) [PROPOSED] ANSWER OF LOOKING HORSE, TRAVIS PLAITED ) WYOMING FARM BUREAU HAIR, JIMMY ST. GODDARD, PETE ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STANDING ALONE, NOLAN YELLOW ) STOCK GROWERS KIDNEY, and GARY DORR, ) ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C.

Plaintiffs, ) PRICE, AND W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC --------------

Case 9:17-cv-00089-DLC Document 115-1 Filed 02/28/18 Page 1 of 47

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RYAN ZINKE, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GREG SHEEHAN, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or his Successor in Office, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, and HILARY COOLEY, Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator,

Defendants,

and

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

STATE OF WYOMING; STATE OF ) IDAHO; NATIONAL RIFLE ) ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; SAFARI ) CLUB INTERNATIONAL; STATE OF ) MONTANA; and MONTANA ) DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE ) AND PARKS, )

Defendant-lntervenors,

and

) ) ) )

WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, ) ___ A~p........_p_tz_·ca_n_ts~fi'--o_r_ln_t_er_v_en_t_io_n_. ___ )

Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation ("WyFB"), Wyoming Stock Growers

Association ("WSGA"), Charles C. Price, and W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC

("Thoman Ranches") (collectively "Defendant-Intervenors") answer above

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS 2


captioned Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint and Petition for Permanent

Injunction and Declaratory Relief, ECF No. 22, as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. The allegations in paragraph 1 constitute Plaintiff's introduction of

their lawsuit and claims for relief, to which no response is required. The

allegations in paragraph 1 also cite, quote, and/or purport to paraphrase one or

more legal authorities, which authorities speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their own content. To the extent a response is required, Defendant

Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 1.

2. The allegations in paragraph 2 contain Plaintiffs' characterization of

this action, to which no response is required. To the extent a further response is

required, Defendant-Intervenors deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief

requested or any relief whatsoever.

3. In response to paragraph 3, Defendant-Intervenors admit Congress

enacted the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"). The remaining allegations in

paragraph 3 characterize the ESA, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence

of its contents. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors

deny the allegations in paragraph 3.

4. The allegations in paragraph 4 cite, quote, and/or purport to

paraphrase one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak for themselves



and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a response is

required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 4.




required, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to form

a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 5 and for that reason deny

them.





a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 6 and for that reason deny

them.

7. The allegations in paragraph 7 contain legal conclusions, to which no

further response is required. To the extent a further response is required,

Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as

to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 7 and for that reason deny them.





and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 8 also

contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the extent a

response is required, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 8 and

for that reason deny them.









further response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant

Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the

veracity of the allegations in paragraph 10 and for that reason deny them.


response is required. The allegations in paragraph 11 also cite, quote, and/or

purport to paraphrase one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak for



themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a further

response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 11.

12. Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to

form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 12 and for that

reason deny them.


response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors





JURISDICTION AND VENUE




themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a


16. The allegations in paragraph 16 contain legal conclusions to which no









reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.















and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 22

also contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the

extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations related to

Plaintiffs' actions in paragraph 22, and for that reason deny them.

PARTIES



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.


form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 3 5 and for that

reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.

38. Defendant-Intervenors admit that the Department of the Interior

("DOI") is an executive department of the United States Government and that



Ryan Zinke is the Secretary of the DOI. To the extent the remaining allegations of

paragraph 38 attempt to describe the obligations of Secretary Zinke, the legal

authorities that contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves

and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 3 8


extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 38.

39. Defendant-Intervenors admit the DOI is a Cabinet-level executive

agency. To the extent the remaining allegations of paragraph 39 attempt to

describe the obligations of the DOI, the legal authorities that contain such

obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best evidence of

their own content. The allegations in paragraph 39 also contain legal conclusions,

to which no further response is required. To the extent a further response is


40. Defendant-Intervenors admit Defendant Greg Sheehan is the Acting

Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") and that FWS is an agency

within the DOI. To the extent the remaining allegations in paragraph 40 attempt to

describe the obligations of Director Sheehan, the legal authorities that contain such

obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best evidence of

their own content. The allegations in paragraph 40 also contain legal conclusions,



to which no further response is required. To the extent a further response is


41. Defendant-Intervenors admit that FWS is an agency within the DOI.

To the extent the remaining allegations of paragraph 41 attempt to describe the

obligations of FWS, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and

responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their own

content. The allegations in paragraph 41 also contain legal conclusions, to which

no further response is required. To the extent a further response is required,

Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 41.

42. Defendant-Intervenors admit that Defendant Hilary Cooley, or her

Successor in Office, is the current Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator. To the

extent the remaining allegations of paragraph 42 attempt to describe the obligations

of Hilary Cooley, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and





II

II

II



FACTS

Endangered Species Act

43. The allegations in paragraph 43 purport to characterize the ESA,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own content. To the extent a














4 7. The allegations in paragraph 4 7 cite, quote, and/or purport to






extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 47.









paragraph 49.





51. Paragraph 51 characterizes FWS' Distinct Population Segment

("DPS") Policy, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents.

The allegations in paragraph 51 also contain legal conclusions, to which no further





52. Paragraph 52 characterizes FWS' DPS Policy, which speaks for itself

and is the best evidence of its contents. The allegations in paragraph 52 also




further response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant






Consultation Policies



























61. The allegations in paragraph 61 cite, quote, and/ or purport to





















required, Defendant-lntervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 70.















a belief as to the veracity of the remaining allegations in paragraph 78 and for that

reason deny them.




also contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is necessary. To the

extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient

knowledge or information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in

paragraph 79 and for that reason deny them.








paragraph 80.

Religious Significance of the GYE Grizzly Bear



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.


form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in the first two sentences of

paragraph 86 and for that reason deny them. The allegations of the third sentence

of paragraph 86 contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is required.

To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the

allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 86.






paragraph 87.

GYE Grizzly Population Delisting: Conservation Strategy and Final Rule

88. The allegations in paragraph 88 purport to characterize a Federal

Register publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own

content. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the

allegations in paragraph 88.







90. The allegations in paragraph 90 cite, quote and/or purport to









paragraph 91.












paraphrase a press release, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its

own content. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the









also contain legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a






further response is required. The allegations in paragraph 98 also cite, quote,



and/or purport to paraphrase one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak

for themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a



further response is required. The allegations in paragraph 99 also cite, quote,




information to form a belief as to the veracity of the remaining allegations of



paraphrase one or more documents, which speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their own content. To the extent a response is required, Defendant


veracity of the remaining allegations of paragraph 100 and for that reason deny

them.


paraphrase one or more legal authorities or documents, which speak for themselves





a belief as to the veracity of the remaining allegations of paragraph 101 and for that

reason deny them.


paraphrase one or more legal authorities or documents, which speak for themselves




reason deny them.






paragraph 103.






reason deny them.



105. The allegations in paragraph 105 contain legal conclusions, to which

no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant


veracity of the remaining allegations of paragraph 105 and for that reason deny

them.








veracity of the remaining allegations in paragraph 107 and for that reason deny

them.



reason deny them.


Register publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own



content. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the



paraphrase one or more legal authorities or documents, which documents speak for



information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations of paragraph 110

and for that reason deny them.





no response is required. The allegations in paragraph 112 also cite, quote, and/or




COUNT I

113. Defendant-Intervenors incorporate their answers to the allegations in

paragraphs 1-112 by reference, as if fully set forth herein.








paragraph 114.






paraphrase one or more judicial decisions, which decisions speak for themselves




paragraph 116.








paragraph 117.






paragraph 118.






paragraph 119.






paragraph 120.








paragraph 121.






paragraph 122.






paragraph 123.








paragraph 124.






paragraph 125.


no further response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant


127. The allegations in paragraph 127 also contain legal conclusions, to

which no further response is required. To the extent a response is required, the



no further response is required. The allegations in paragraph 128 also cite, quote,















COUNT II


















paragraph 13 5.









paragraph 13 7.

COUNT III


paragraphs 1-13 7 by reference, as if fully set forth herein.








paragraph 139.






paragraph 140.






paragraph 141.









COUNT IV
















required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 14 7.














152. The allegations in Paragraph 152 cite, quote, and/or purport to







paragraph 152.

15 3. The allegations in paragraph 15 3 cite, quote, and/ or purport to





paragraph 15 3.

COUNTV



15 5. The allegations in paragraph 15 5 cite, quote, and/ or purport to










no further response is required. To the extent a response is required, the







and/ or purport to paraphrase one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak



COUNT VI




























II

II



COUNT VII








paragraph 168.





extent a response is required, Defendant-lntervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 169.






1 71. The allegations in paragraph 171 contain legal conclusions, to which






1 73. The allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 1 73 cite, quote,

and/or purport to paraphrase one or more judicial decisions, which decisions speak

for themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in

paragraph 173 also contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is

required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the





COUNT VIII


paragraphs 1-17 4 by reference, as if fully set forth herein.












COUNT IX





















paragraph 187.















paragraph 190.




RELIEF REQUESTED

The remainder of Plaintiffs' complaint constitutes their requests for relief, to

which no response is required. To the extent a further response is required, the

Defendant-Intervenors deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or any

relief whatsoever.

GENERAL DENIAL

Defendant-Intervenors deny any allegations in Plaintiffs' complaint, whether

express or implied, that are not specifically admitted, denied, or qualified herein.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Plaintiffs fail to state a claim against Defendants upon which relief

can be granted for some or all of their claims.

2. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over some of all of

Plaintiffs' claims.



3. Defendant-Intervenors reserve the right to assert any other claims or

defenses as may be available or may become available during the course of these

proceedings.

~ ,.-.~ DATEDthis~dayofr~ 018.


s~!u~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: ( 406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]





Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: ( 406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]




MISSOULA DIVISION

THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE ) UNITED STATES, and THE FUND FOR ) ANIMALS, )

Plaintiffs, )

v.

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the Department of Interior; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; RYAN ZINKE, Secretary of the Interior; GREG SHEEHAN, Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and JIM KURTH, Deputy Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

~~~~~~~~~-)

Case No. 9: 17-cv-00117-DLC

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00089-DLC, 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, 9:17-cv-00119-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-OO 123-DLC)

[PROPOSED] ANSWER OF WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C. PRICE, AND W&M THOMAN RANCHES, LLC


Service, Defendants,

and

) ) ) ) )


Defendant-lntervenors,

and

) ) ) )

WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, ) ___ A~p~p_l_ic_a_nt_s~.fo_r_l_n_te_rv_e_n_ti_on_. ___ )


Association ("WSGA"), Charles C. Price, and W&M Thoman Ranches, LLC

("Thoman Ranches") (collectively "Defendant-Intervenors") answer above-

captioned Plaintiffs' Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, ECF No. 1,

as follows:

INTRODUCTION


form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 1 and for that reason

deny them.





deny them.



and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 3 are

also legal conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the extent a









and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph also

contain legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a further







contain legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a further





contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is required. As to the

remaining allegations in paragraph 7, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient

knowledge or information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations and



this action and their claims for relief, as well as conclusions of law, to which no

response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant

Intervenors deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or any relief

whatsoever.








10. The allegations in paragraph 10 are legal conclusions to which no




PARTIES



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.


response is required. To the extent that any response is required, Defendant




this action, as well as conclusions of law, to which no response is required. To the



extent the allegations of paragraph 15 attempt to describe the obligations of

Defendants, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and responsibilities

speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent

any further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the remaining


LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The Endangered Species Act



and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a further response is


1 7. The allegations in paragraph 17 characterize the ESA, which speaks

for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further


18. The allegations in paragraph 18 characterize the ESA, which speaks








20. The allegations in paragraph 20 characterize a Federal Register

publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the


paragraph 20.


for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further response is


22. The allegations in paragraph 22 characterize the ESA and federal

regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their

contents. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny

the allegations in paragraph 22.








regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their





26. The allegations in paragraph 26 characterize the ESA and a Federal

Register publication, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their



The Distinct Population Segment Policy




28. The allegations in paragraph 28 characterize the ESA and U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service's ("FWS") Distinct Population Segment ("DPS") Policy,

which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. To the


paragraph 28.

29. The allegations in paragraph 29 characterize FWS's DPS Policy,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a

further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 29.






paragraph 30.

31. The allegations in paragraph 31 characterize FWS' s DPS Policy,



paragraph 31.




paragraph 3 2.




paragraph 3 3.




paragraph 34.



35. The allegations in paragraph 35 state legal conclusions to which no


Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 3 5.

The Administrative Procedure Act


response is required. The allegations in paragraph 36 also characterize the

Administrative Procedure Act ("AP A"), which speaks for itself and is the best

evidence of its contents. To the extent any response is required, Defendant


3 7. The allegations in paragraph 3 7 contain legal conclusions, to which no

response is required. The allegations in paragraph 3 7 also characterize the AP A,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent any



response is required. The allegations in paragraph 3 8 also characterize the AP A,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent any



response is required. The allegations in paragraph 39 also characterize judicial

opinions and the AP A, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of



their contents. To the extent any response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny


FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Grizzly Bear Biology



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.


publication, which speak for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the

extent any response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 4 3.







45. Defendant-Intervenors admit the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

("GYE") grizzly bear population lives in, on, and around Yellowstone National

Park, Grand Teton National Park, National Forest land, and other public and

private land in Wyoming. As to the remainder of the allegations in paragraph 45,


to the veracity of the allegations and for that reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.

The FWS' Previous Attempts to Reduce Protections for GYE Grizzly Bears


response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-







53. The allegations in paragraph 53 characterize a Federal Register notice,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. As to the other

allegations in paragraph 53, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations and for that reason

deny them. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors












The 2016 Proposed Grizzly Bear Delisting Rule


publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own content. To

the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the




evidence of their own content. To the extent a further response is required,





Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 58. Further, to the extent

that Plaintiffs intend to incorporate the substance of such documents into the



complaint by reference, Defendant-Intervenors deny all allegations and legal

conclusions therein.
















paraphrase one or more documents and legal authorities, which speak for





Further, to the extent that Plaintiffs intend to incorporate the substance of such

documents into the complaint by reference, Defendant-Intervenors deny all

allegations and legal conclusions therein.







































publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the




paragraph 67.

68. The allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 68 purport to

characterize the contents of a Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself

and provides the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further response is

required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in the first sentence of

paragraph 68. The allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 68 cite, quote,

and/or purport to paraphrase one or more documents, which speak for themselves


required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 68. Further, to

the extent that Plaintiffs intend to incorporate the substance of such documents into

the complaint by reference, Defendant-Intervenors deny all allegations and legal



characterize the contents of a Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself

and provides the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further response is

required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in the first sentence of

paragraph 69. The allegations in the remainder of paragraph 69 cite, quote, and/or

purport to paraphrase one or more documents, which speak for themselves and are

the best evidence of their own content. To the extent a further response is required,








paraphrase one or more documents or legal authorities, which speak for themselves
















State Rule Litigation & Supplemental Letter to the FWS

73. Defendant-Intervenors are without knowledge or information

sufficient to ascertain the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 73 and for

that reason deny them.

74. The allegations in paragraph 74 characterize a June 20, 2017, letter,


further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors are without knowledge or

information sufficient to ascertain the truth or falsity of the allegations in


75. The allegations in paragraph 75 characterize a judicial opinion, which

speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further


76. The allegations in paragraph 76 characterize a judicial opinion, which

speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further


77. The allegations in the paragraph 77 characterize an Idaho Senate Bill,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. The allegations in

paragraph 77 also contain legal conclusions to which no further response is

required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny






reason deny them.

The Statutory Requirements for Delisting Grizzly Bears


Register publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its

contents. The allegations in paragraph 79 also contain legal conclusions, to which

no further response is required. To the extent any further response is required,



Register Publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its















extent any further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations

in paragraph 82.


















in paragraph 85.

86. The allegations in paragraph 86 purport to characterize one or more

documents or legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the best


Defendant-Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to ascertain

the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 86 and for that reason deny them.


documents or legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the best


Defendant-Intervenors are without knowledge or information sufficient to ascertain

the truth or falsity of the allegations in paragraph 87 and for that reason deny them.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

COUNT I






paragraph 89.



90. The allegations in paragraph 90 purport to characterize the ESA and

legislative history, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their









in paragraph 91.






in paragraph 92.








in paragraph 93.






in paragraph 94.






in paragraph 95.








in paragraph 96.






in paragraph 97.

COUNT II



99. The allegations in paragraph 99 purport to characterize the ESA and

federal regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of

their contents. The allegations in paragraph 99 also contain legal conclusions, to

which no further response is required. To the extent any further response is









in paragraph 100.






in paragraph 101.






in paragraph 102.






in paragraph 103.








in paragraph 104.






in paragraph 105.






in paragraph 106.

II

II



COUNT III




for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. The allegations in paragraph 108



in paragraph 108.






in paragraph 109.






in paragraph 110.








in paragraph 111.






in paragraph 112.

COUNT IV










in paragraph 114.






in paragraph 115.






in paragraph 116.






in paragraph 117.



RELIEF REQUESTED


which no response is required. To the extent a further response is required,


relief whatsoever.

GENERAL DENIAL







Plaintiffs' claims.



proceedings.

DATED this U T~ay of F~ 2018.


!!:;!!~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street



P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: ( 406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]









MISSOULA DIVISION

WILDEARTH GUARDIANS, a nonprofit ) organization,

Plaintiff,

v.

RYAN ZINKE, as Secretary of the Department of the Interior; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; GREG SHEEHAN, as Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE,

Defendants,

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

and ) ----------


(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00089-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00117-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00119-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-00123-DLC)

[PROPOSED] ANSWER OF WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C. PRICE, AND W&M THOMAN RANCHES, LLC


) STATE OF WYOMING; STATE OF ) IDAHO; NATIONAL RIFLE ) ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; SAFARI ) CLUB INTERNATIONAL; STATE OF ) MONTANA; and MONTANA ) DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE ) AND PARKS, )

Defendant-Intervenors,

and

) ) ) )

WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, ) ____ A......_p...._pl_ic_a_n_ts_fi_o_r_In_t_erv_en_t_io_n_. ___ )


Association ("WSGA"), Charles C. Price, and W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC


captioned Plaintiffs' Complaint, ECF No. 1, as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. The allegations in paragraph 1 are Plaintiff's characterization of its

lawsuit, to which no response is required. The allegations in paragraph 1 also

purport to characterize federal statutes, which speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their contents. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-




2. The allegations in paragraph 2 are Plaintiff's characterization of its

lawsuit, to which no response is required. The allegations in paragraph 2 also

purport to characterize a Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself and

is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further response is required,



paraphrase one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak for them.selves






























its action and claims for relief, as well as conclusions of law, to which no response

is required. The allegations in paragraph 8 also cite, quote, and/or purport to


and are the best evidence of their own content. As to the remaining allegations in

paragraph 8, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to

form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations and for that reason deny them.







themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. As to the remaining

allegations in paragraph 9, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations and for that reason

deny them.

PARTIES



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.


form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph



13 and for that reason deny them. Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

the second sentence of paragraph 13.

14. Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 14.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.

17. Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in the first sentence of

paragraph 17. The allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 1 7 are legal

conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required,

Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 17.

18. In response to the allegations in paragraph 18, Defendant-Intervenors

admit Ryan Zinke is the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior. To the


Secretary Zinke, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and


content. The remaining allegations in paragraph 18 are legal conclusions, to which



no response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant

Intervenors deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 18.


admit the Department of the Interior ("DOI") is a federal department. To the

extent the allegations of paragraph 19 attempt to describe the obligations of the

DOI, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and responsibilities speak

for themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. The remaining

allegations in paragraph 19 are legal conclusions, to which no response is required.

To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the

remaining allegations in paragraph 19.


admit Greg Sheehan is the Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

To the extent the allegations of paragraph 20 attempt to describe the obligations of

Acting Director Sheehan, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and


content. The remaining allegations in paragraph 20 are legal conclusions to which




admit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") is an agency within the U.S.



Department of Interior. To the extent the allegations of paragraph 21 attempt to

describe the obligations of FWS, the legal authorities that contain such obligations

and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their own

content. The remaining allegations in paragraph 21 are legal conclusions, to which



FACTS

The Grizzly Bear



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.

33. The allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 33 are legal

conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required,

Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 33.

As to the remainder of the allegations in paragraph 33, Defendant-Intervenors lack

sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the veracity of the

allegations and for that reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.



reason deny them.

The Grizzly Bear's Decline in the Contiguous United States.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS I I


The Service's Listing of Grizzly Bears as a Threatened Species in the Contiguous United States.














The Service's Plan to Recover Grizzly Bears in the Contiguous United States.








paragraph 46.






paragraph 4 7.











and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent the allegations of

paragraph 50 attempt to describe the obligations of the Interagency Grizzly Bear



Committee ("IGBC"), the legal authorities that contain such obligations and
























paragraph 54.










paragraph 56.






paragraph 57.





and are the best evidence of their own content. To the extent the allegations of

paragraph 58 attempt to describe the obligations of the IGBC, the legal authorities

that contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the

best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 58 also contain

legal conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the extent a further











paragraph 60.








paragraph 61.

The Status of the Service's Plan to Recover Grizzly Bears in the Contiguous United States.

62. The allegations in the paragraph 62 are legal conclusions, to which no

response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors







paragraph 63.





extent a further response is required, Defendant-lntervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 64.








paragraph 65.






which no further response is required. To the extent a further response is required,







paragraph 68.





















II

II



The Service's 2017 Decision to Designate and Delist Grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.



contents. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-lntervenors deny















paragraph 7 4 and for that reason deny them.














a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 76 and for that reason

deny them.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION



78. The allegations in paragraph 78 purport to characterize the

Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), which speaks for itself and is the best evidence

of its contents. The allegations in paragraph 78 also contain legal conclusions, to





79. The allegations in paragraph 79 purport to characterize the contents of

a Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of

its contents. The allegations in paragraph 79 also contain legal conclusions, to



80. The allegations in paragraph 80 purport to characterize the contents of

Federal Register publications, which speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 80 also contain legal

conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the extent a further







paragraph 81.








paragraph 82.






paragraph 83.






paragraph 84.








paragraph 85.






paragraph 86.






paragraph 87.






paragraph 88.








paragraph 89.






paragraph 90.











paragraph 92.






paragraph 93.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION



95. The allegations in paragraph 95 purports to characterize the ESA,

which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its own content. The allegations

in paragraph 95 also contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is

required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny


96. The allegations in paragraph 96 purports to characterize the ESA and

federal regulations, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their

own content. The allegations in paragraph 96 also contain legal conclusions, to




Defendant-lntervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 96.






paragraph 97.






paragraph 98.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION




regulations, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents.

The allegations in paragraph 100 also contain legal conclusions, to which no










paragraph 101.






paragraph 102.






paragraph 103.








paragraph 104.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 106.








paragraph 107.






paragraph 108.






paragraph 109.






paragraph 110.



FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 112.






paragraph 113.








paragraph 114.






paragraph 115.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 11 7.








paragraph 118.






paragraph 119.






paragraph 120.








paragraph 121.






paragraph 122.






paragraph 123.






paragraph 124.








paragraph 125.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 127.












paragraph 129.






paragraph 130.






paragraph 131.








paragraph 13 2.






paragraph 133.






paragraph 134.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION










paragraph 136.






paragraph 13 7.






paragraph 13 8.








paragraph 139.






paragraph 140.






paragraph 141.

RELIEF REQUESTED


which no response is required. To the extent a further response is required, the




relief whatsoever.

GENERAL DENIAL







Plaintiffs' claims.



proceedings.

T'1 -DATED this 1-( day off~ 2018.


jk{~~ Steven P. Rufflfo~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]



Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]




MISSOULA DIVISION

NORTHERN CHEYENNE TRIBE, SIERRA CLUB, CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY and NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiffs,

v.

) ) Case No. 9:17-cv-00119-DLC ) ) (Consolidated with Case Nos. ) 9:17-cv-00089-DLC, ) 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, ) 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, ) and 9: 17-cv-00123-DLC) )

RYAN ZINKE, Secretary of the Interior; ) (PROPOSED] ANSWER OF GREG SHEEHAN, Acting Director of the ) WYOMING FARM BUREAU U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; HILARY ) FEDERATION, WYOMING COOLEY, Grizzly Bear Recovery ) STOCK GROWERS Coordinator; and U.S. FISH AND ) ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C. WILDLIFE SERVICE ) PRICE, AND W&M THOMAN

___ D____,,_e,fi_en_d_a_n_ts-'-, ________ ) RANCHES, LLC

--- ------------------------------------------


and ) )


Defendant-Intervenors,

and

) ) ) )

WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, ) ___ A~p~p_lz_·ca_n_ts~fi~o_r_In_t_er_v_en_t_io_n_. ___ )





as follows:

INTRODUCTION



response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-



Intervenors deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or any relief

whatsoever.

2. The allegations in paragraph 2 cite, quote and/or purport to paraphrase

one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak for themselves and are the

best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 2 are also legal

conclusions, to which no further response is required. To the extent a response is




deny them.














paragraph 10.



Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 11 and deny that Plaintiffs are

entitled to the relief requested or any relief whatsoever.




response is required. The allegations in paragraph 12 also characterize Federal

statutes, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents.

To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny that

Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or any relief whatsoever.


this action, as well as conclusions of law, to which no response is required. The

allegations in paragraph 13 cite, quote, and/or purport to paraphrase one or more

legal authorities, which authorities speak for themselves and are the best evidence

of their own content. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-





14. The remaining allegations in paragraph 14 contain legal conclusions,

to which no response is required. The allegations in paragraph 14 also purport to

characterize a written notice of June 30, 2017, which speaks for itself and is the

best evidence of its own content. To the extent a further response is required,



PARTIES


characterize a Federal Register notice, which speaks for itself and is the best

evidence of its contents. Defendant-Intervenors are without knowledge or

information sufficient to ascertain the truth or falsity of the allegations in the

second sentence of paragraph 15.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.



reason deny them.


documents, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents.


to the veracity of the remaining allegations in paragraph 20 and for that reason

deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.



24. The allegations in paragraph 24 constitute legal conclusions, to which


Intervenors deny the allegations in the first and third sentences of paragraph 24 and

lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the veracity of the

allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 24 and for that reason deny them.










content. The allegations in paragraph 26 also contain Plaintiffs' characterization of


extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the remaining



admit Greg Sheehan is the Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.



To the extent the allegations of paragraph 27 attempt to describe the obligations of

Acting Director Sheehan, the legal authorities that contain such obligations and







admit Hilary Cooley is the Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator for the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service ("FWS"). To the extent the allegations of paragraph 28

attempt to describe the obligations of Hilary Cooley, the legal authorities that

contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 28 also contain

Plaintiffs' characterization of this action, as well as conclusions of law, to which




admit FWS is a federal agency within the Department of Interior ("DOI"). To the

extent the allegations of paragraph 29 attempt to describe the obligations of FWS,

the legal authorities that contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for




response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the remaining allegations in

paragraph 29.

THE GRIZZLY BEAR







reason deny them.



contents. To the extent a further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors lack

sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the veracity of the

allegations in paragraph 32 and for that reason deny them.



reason deny them.





reason deny them.

GRIZZLY LISTING UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

35. In response to paragraph 35, Defendant-Intervenors admit Congress

enacted the Endangered Species Act ("ESA"). The allegations in paragraph 35

also purport to characterize the ESA, which speaks for itself and is the best

evidence of its contents. The allegations in paragraph 35 also cite, quote, and/or


themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in

paragraph 35 also contain legal conclusions, to which no further response is

requires. To the extent any further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors


36. The allegations in paragraph 36 are legal conclusions, to which no

response is required. The allegations in paragraph 36 also purport to characterize

the ESA, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the


in paragraph 36.

3 7. The allegations in paragraph 3 7 are legal conclusions, to which no

response is required. The allegations in paragraph 3 7 also purport to characterize



the ESA and the FWS's Distinct Population Segment ("DPS") Policy, which speak

for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. To the extent any


paragraph 3 7.



and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 3 8 are



paragraph 3 8.






paragraph 39.

PRIOR RECOVERY AND DELISTING ACTIONS

40. The allegations in paragraph 40 consists of argument and narrative,

and need not be admitted or denied. To the extent a response is required,









paragraph 41.






paragraph 42.






paragraph 43.



44. The allegations in paragraph 44 are contain legal conclusions, to

which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant


THE CHALLENGED RULE


characterize one or more legal authorities, which authorities speak for themselves

and are the best evidence of their contents. To the extent a further response is




and are the best evidence of their contents. To the extent a further response is




and are the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 4 7 also



paragraph 4 7.





and are the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 48 also



paragraph 48.



reason deny them.



reason deny them.





further response is required, Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or

information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 51









paragraph 52.






paragraph 53.






paragraph 54.








paragraph 5 5.






paragraph 56.






paragraph 57.






paragraph 58.








paragraph 59.



reason deny them.






paragraph 61.








paragraph 62.


characterize one or more documents, which documents speak for themselves and

are the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 63 also



paragraph 63.






paragraph 64.






paragraph 65.








paragraph 66.






paragraph 67.






paragraph 68.








paragraph 69.






paragraph 70.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION





the ESA, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the


paragraph 72.

73. The allegations in paragraph 73 purport to characterize one or more a

Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its











7 5. The allegations in paragraph 7 5 purport to characterize one or more a















SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 79.






paragraph 80.






THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION








paragraph 83.






paragraph 84.






RELIEF REQUESTED




relief whatsoever.

GENERAL DENIAL







Plaintiffs' claims.



proceedings.



-tj_ DATED this2..l_ day off~ 2018.


Jt&-i~ Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406) 255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]









MISSOULA DIVISION

ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES, ) NATIVE ECOSYSTEMS COUNCIL, and ) WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT )

Plaintiffs,

v.

RY AN ZINKE, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, GREG SHEEHAN, Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and HILARY COOLEY, Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator

Defendants,

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

and ) ----------


(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00089-DLC 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-00119-DLC)

[PROPOSED] ANSWER OF WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES C. PRICE, AND W&M THOMAS RANCHES, LLC


) STATE OF WYOMING; STATE OF ) IDAHO; NATIONAL RIFLE ) ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; SAFARI ) CLUB INTERNATIONAL; STATE OF ) MONTANA; and MONTANA ) DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE ) AND PARKS, )

and

Defendant-lntervenors, ) ) ) )


~~~A~p~p_l_ic_a_n_~~fi_o_r_ln_t_erv~en_t_io_n_.~~~)





as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. The allegations in the first and second sentences of paragraph 1

constitute the Plaintiffs' characterization of their lawsuit and require no response.

The allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 1 purport to characterize the

contents of a Federal Register publication, which speaks for itself and provides the



best evidence of its contents. To the extent a further response is required,



characterize the contents one or more legal authorities, which speak for themselves

and provide the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 2 also

constitute legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a


ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES



deny them.














PARTIES


no response is required. To the extent the allegations are not legal conclusions,


























admit Hilary Cooley is the Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator for the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service ("FWS"). To the extent the allegations of paragraph 12

attempt to describe the obligations of Hilary Cooley, the legal authorities that

contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for themselves and are the best

evidence of their own content. The allegations in paragraph 12 also contain

Plaintiffs' characterization of this action, as well as conclusions oflaw, to which




admit Greg Sheehan is the Acting Director ofFWS. To the extent the allegations

of paragraph 13 attempt to describe the obligations of Acting Director Sheehan, the



legal authorities that contain such obligations and responsibilities speak for

themselves and are the best evidence of their own content. The allegations in

paragraph 13 also contain Plaintiffs' characterization of this action, as well as

conclusions of law, to which no response is required. To the extent a further

response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the remaining allegations in

paragraph 13.










FACTUAL BACKGROUND

15. The allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 15 are vague and

rhetorical, and on that basis Defendant-Intervenors cannot form a belief regarding

the truth of the allegations and for that reason deny them. Defendant-Intervenors

deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 15. The remaining



allegations in paragraph 15 purport to characterize a Federal Register publication,



paragraph 15.



reason deny them.



and provide the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 17

also constitute legal conclusions, to which no response is required. To the extent a


information to form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in paragraph 1 7



















characterize the contents one or more authorities, which speak for themselves and

provide the best evidence of their contents. The allegations in paragraph 20 also

























response is required, and further purport to characterize legal authorities, which

speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. To the extent

a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in paragraph 26.


form a belief as to the veracity of the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph

27 and for that reason deny them. The allegations in the second and third



sentences of paragraph 27 purport to characterize legal authorities, which speak for

themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendant-Intervenors

deny the allegations in the fourth sentence of paragraph 27. To the extent any


paragraph 27.









reason deny them.



reason deny them.

APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

32. The allegations in paragraph 32 purport to characterize the

Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), which speaks for itself and is the best evidence



of its contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny














3 7. The allegations in paragraph 3 7 purport to characterize the ESA,








THE SERVICE'S DECISION


Register publication and judicial opinions, which speak for themselves and are the

best evidence of their contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant







contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the





CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF









45. The allegations in paragraph 45 purport to characterize a legal

authority, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the


paragraph 45.


legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their


the allegations in paragraph 46 .

. 47. Defendant-Intervenors lack sufficient knowledge or information to


reason deny them.









50. The allegations in paragraph 50 characterize one or more Federal

Register publications, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of

their contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny



response is required. The allegations in paragraph 51 also purport to characterize a

judicial opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To

the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 51.


response is required. The allegations in paragraph 52 also purport to characterize a

judicial opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To

the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 52.

53. The allegations in paragraphs 53 are legal conclusions, to which no







contents. The allegations in paragraph 54 also constitute legal conclusions, to

which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant




deny the allegations in paragraph 5 5.

56. The allegations in paragraph 56 purport to characterize a judicial

opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the


paragraph 56.


response is required and purport to characterize one or more legal authorities,



paragraph 57.


response is required and purport to characterize one or more legal authorities,





paragraph 5 8.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF




no response is required and purport to characterize a federal regulation, which

speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a response is








one or more legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence

of their contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-Intervenors deny





response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-lntervenors


THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF








one or more legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence

of their contents. To the extent a response is required, Defendant-lntervenors deny











response is required, and purport to characterize the ESA, which speaks for itself

and is the best evidence of its contents. To the extent a response is required,











FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF




response is required, and purport to characterize the Administrative Procedure Act

("APA"), which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. To the




paragraph 74.

7 5. The allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 7 5 purports to

characterize one or more legal authorities, which speak for themselves and are the

best evidence of their contents. The remaining allegations in paragraph 75


further response is required, Defendant-lntervenors deny the allegations in

paragraph 7 5.

76. The allegations in paragraph 76 purports to characterize one or more


contents. The allegations in paragraph 76 also constitute legal conclusions, to







response is required, and purport to characterize the ESA and AP A, which speak

for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. To the extent a further




RELIEF REQUESTED




relief whatsoever.

GENERAL DENIAL







Plaintiffs' claims.


defenses as may be available, or may become available during the course of these

proceedings.

~ DATED this2£ day of~ 2018.


&;~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street



P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: ( 406) 255-7224 Fax: (406) 256-8526 [email protected]





Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone:(406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]




MISSOULA DIVISION


v.

) ) ) ) )


and

Defendants, ) ) ) )



Case No. 9: 17-cv-00089-DLC

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-OO 119-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-00123-DLC)

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION


Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation submits the following corporate

disclosure statement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.l(a) and U.S.

District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule 24.l(b)(3)(C).

Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation is a non-profit, membership association,

incorporated in the State of Wyoming. Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation is not

publicly traded and has no parent corporation. There is no publicly held

corporation that hold more than ten percent of its stock .

. -rh F~ DATED th1s26 day of 018.



CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR WYFB 2






MISSOULA DIVISION

) CROW INDIAN TRIBE; et al., Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 9: 17-cv-00089-DLC

v. ) ) )


and

Defendants, ) ) )

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00117-DLC, 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, 9:17-cv-00119-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-00123-DLC)

) CORPORATE DISCLOSURE WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) STATEMENT FOR WYOMING FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) STOCK GROWERS GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) ASSOCIATION C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, )



Wyoming Stock Growers Association submits the following corporate

disclosure statement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.l(a) and U.S.

District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule 24.1 (b )(3 )(C).

Wyoming Stock Growers Association is a non-profit, membership

association, incorporated in the State of Wyoming. Wyoming Stock Growers

Association is not publicly traded and has no parent corporation. There is no

publicly held corporation that owns ten percent or more of its stock.

DATED this 2-6'-fhday of ~-2018.


s~~~ CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone:(406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]



CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR WSGA 2






MISSOULA DIVISION


) ) ) ) v. )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; eta!., )

and

Defendants, ) ) ) )




(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9: 17-cv-00117-DLC, 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-OO 119-DLC, and 9:17-cv-00123-DLC)

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR W&M THOMAN RANCHES, LLC


W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC, submits the following corporate disclosure

statement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.l(a) and U.S. District

Court forthe District of Montana Local Rule 24.l(b)(3)(C).

W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC, is a for-profit, member owned and operated

company, incorporated in the State of Wyoming. W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC,

is not publicly traded and has no parent corporation. There is no publicly held

corporation that owns ten percent or more of its stock.

DATED this26"1A;day 0~2018.



CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR W&M THOMAN RANCHES, LLC 2






MISSOULA DIVISION

) CROW INDIAN TRIBE; et al., Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 9:17-cv-00089-DLC

v. ) ) )


and

Defendants, ) ) )

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-OO 119-DLC, and 9:17-cv-00123-DLC)

) MOTIONFORADMITTANCE WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) PRO HAC VICE OF CODY J. FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) WISNIEWSKI GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, )



Pursuant to U.S. District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule

83.l(d), Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming Stock Growers Association,

Charles C. Price, and W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC (collectively "Applicants")

hereby move for admission pro hac vice of non-resident attorney, Cody J.

Wisniewski, in connection with the above-captioned, consolidated cases.

Steven P. Ruffatto of Crowley Fleck PLLP, a resident member of the

Federal Bar of the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, has agreed to

serve as local counsel in this case, through all phases, in accordance with U.S.

District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule 83.l(d)(5).

This Motion is supported by the Declaration of Cody J. Wisniewski in

Support of Admittance Pro Hae Vice, filed concurrently herewith.

WHEREFORE, Applicants respectfully request this Court grant their Motion

for Admittance Pro Hae Vice of Cody J. Wisniewski.

DATED this 2£7flay off~ 2018.


~ P12fi!tc Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406) 255-7224 Fax: (406) 256-8526 [email protected]

MOTION FOR ADMITTANCE PRO HAC VICE OF CODY J. WISNIEWSKI 2


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 'J.-q 1ll-day otY~N\~ 2018 the forgoing

document, and its attachments, were served in conventional form by U.S. Mail,

postage prepaid, on the following attorneys:

Peter J. Breuer Jeffrey S. Rasmussen Katie D. Frayler Michael W. Holditch FREDERICKS PEEBLES & MORGAN LLP 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO 80027

Kristine Marie Akland AKLAND LAW FIRM, PLLC 317 E. Spruce St. PO Box 7274 Missoula, MT 59807

Nicholas Arrivo THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES 1255 23rd Street, NW Suite 450 Washington, DC 2003 7

John R. Mellgren WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER-EUGENE 1216 Lincoln Street Eugene, OR 97401

Matthew Kellogg Bishop WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER 103 Reeder's Alley Helena, MT 59601

Kelly E. Nokes WILDEARTH GUARDIANSMISSOULA 117 W. Broadway PO Box 7516 Missoula, MT 59801

Joshua Osborne-Klein ZIONTZ CHESTNUT VARNELL BERLEY & SLONIM 2101 Fourth Avenue Suite 1230 Seattle, WA 98121

Timothy J. Preso Joshua R. Purtle EARTHJUSTICE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND - BOZEMAN 313 East Main Street Bozeman, MT 59715

David A. Bell BELL LAW FIRM PLLC 1917 South Higgins A venue Missoula, MT 59801

Rebecca Kay Smith PUBLIC INTEREST DEFENSE CENTER PO Box 7584 317 East Spruce Street Missoula, MT 59807

Timothy M. Bechtold BECHTOLD LAW FIRM PO Box 7051 Missoula, MT 59807-7051

MOTION FORADMITTANCEPROHAC VICE OF CODY J. WISNIEWSKI 4


Coby Howell OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY 1000 SW Third Ave Suite 600 Portland, OR 97204-2024

Michael Richard Eitel U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Environment and Natural Resources Division Wildlife & Marine Resources Section 999 18th Street South Terrace Suite 370 Denver, CO 80202

Adrian Ann Miller SULLIVAN MILLER LAW PLLC 3860 Avenue B, Suite C East Billings, MT 59102

Erik Edward Petersen D. David De Wald WYOMING ATTORNEY GENERAL 2320 Capitol A venue Cheyenne, WY 82002

James David Johnson WILLIAMS LAW FIRM PO Box 9440 Missoula, MT 59807-9440

Kathleen E. Trever IDAHO OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 600 S. Walnut Street Boise, ID 83712

Steven W. Strack STA TE OF IDAHO 700 W. State Street, 2nd Floor P. 0. Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0010

Robert T. Bell REEP BELL LAIRD & JASPER, P.C. 2955 Stockyard Road Missoula, MT 59808

Douglas S. Burdin SAFARI CLUB INTERNATIONAL 50 I 2nd Street NE Washington, DC 20002

Michael Thomas Jean NA TI ON AL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 11250 Maples Mill Road Fairfax, VA 2203

Jeremiah D. Weiner Timothy C. Fox MONTANA ATTORNEY GENERAL 215 N Sanders PO Box 201401 Helena, MT 59620-1401

Rebecca Dockter William A. Schenk MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF FISH WILDLIFE AND PARKS 1420 East 6th Avenue PO Box 200701 Helena, MT 59620-0701

·ewski (CO Bar No. 50415)

OUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION



Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP 490 North 31st Street P.O. Box 2529 Billings, Montana 59103 Phone: (406)255-7224 Fax: ( 406) 256-8526 [email protected]




MISSOULA DIVISION

) CROW INDIAN TRIBE; et al., Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 9:17-cv-00089-DLC

v. ) ) )


and

Defendants, ) ) )

(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00119-DLC, and 9: 17-cv-00123-DLC)

) DECLARATION OF CODY J. WYOMING FARM BUREAU ) WISNIEWSKI IN SUPPORT OF FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) MOTION FOR ADMITTANCE GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) PRO HAC VICE C. PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, )



I, Cody J. Wisniewski, declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1746, that the following statements are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge:

1. I reside in Denver, Colorado. I am employed by Mountain States

Legal Foundation, located at 2596 South Lewis Way, Lakewood, Colorado 80227.

My contact information is: telephone - (303) 292-2021, ext. 20; fax - (303) 292-

1980; and email - [email protected].

2. Pursuant to U.S. District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule

24 .1 ( c )(2 ), if leave to intervene is granted, I will immediately pay the pro hac vice

admission fee of $255.00, as stated on this Court's website.

3. I am proficient in filing using the CM/ECF system and am certified to

do so for the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

4. I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Colorado

(CO Bar No. 50415), admitted on December 8, 2016. I am also admitted to

practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Nov. 29,

2017).

5. I am in good standing and eligible to practice before the above-

referenced courts.

6. I am not currently, nor have I ever been suspended or disbarred by any

court.

DECLARATION OF CODY 1. WISNIEWSKI 2


7. I have never been held in contempt or otherwise disciplined by any

court for disobedience to its rules or orders and have never been sanctioned under

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 11 or 3 7(b ), ( c ), ( d), or ( f), or their state

equivalents.

8. I am not currently practicing pro hac vice in this Court, nor have I

ever been admitted to practice before this Court pro hac vice.

9. I understand that pro hac vice admission in this Court is personal to

me and is not admission for Mountain States Legal Foundation. Upon pro hac vice

admission, I will comply with, and be bound by, the local rules of the United States

District Court for the District of Montana.

8. Steven P. Ruffatto of Crowley Fleck PLLP, 490 North 31st Street,

P.O. Box 2529, Billings, Montana 59103, (406) 255-7224 shall serve as local

counsel, with whom this Court and counsel may readily communicate regarding

this case and upon whom papers and filings shall be served.

9. I acknowledge that I submit to and am subject to the disciplinary

jurisdiction of this Court for any alleged misconduct arising during the course of

these proceedings.

DATED this ~y of__,_~~~"-"'

y J. Wisniewski (CO Bar No. 50415) MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION

DECLARATION OF CODY J. WISNIEWSKI 3


2596 South Lewis Way Lakewood, Colorado 80227 Phone: (303) 292-2021 Fax: (303) 292-1980 [email protected] Pro Hae Vice Application Pending

DECLARATION OF CODY J. WISNIEWSKI 4



MISSOULA DIVISION


v.

) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; eta!., ) Defendants, )

and

WYOMING FARM BUREAU

) ) ) )

FEDERATION, WYOMING STOCK ) GROWERS ASSOCIATION, CHARLES ) PRICE, and W&M THOMAN ) RANCHES, LLC, )



(Consolidated with Case Nos. 9:17-cv-00117-DLC, 9:17-cv-00118-DLC, 9: 17-cv-00119-DLC, And 9:17-cv-00123-DLC)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ADMITTANCE PRO HAC VICE OF CODY J. WISNIEWSKI

Pending before the Court is Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming

Stock Growers Association, Charles Price, and W &M Thoman Ranches, LLC' s

(collectively "Applicants") Motion for Admittance Pro Hae Vice of Cody J.

Wisniewski, to appear as counsel in the above-captioned, consolidated matters,

pursuant to U.S. District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule 83 .1 ( d)

("Motion"). Cody J. Wisniewski has indicated he will work with Steven P.

Ruffatto of Crowley Fleck PLLP, in Billings, Montana, who will serve as local

counsel. It appears Cody J. Wisniewski meets the qualifications to be admitted pro

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ADMITTANCE PRO HAC VICE


' :'

hac vice before this Court. Accordingly, the requirements of U.S. District Court

for the District of Montana Local Rule 83.l(d)(3) have been met.

IT IS ORDERED that:

(1) Applicants' Motion is GRANTED;

(2) Cody J. Wisniewski is admitted to practice before this Court pro hac

vice in the above-captioned, consolidated cases, to represent Applicants, provided

the pro hac vice fee has been paid;

(3) Local Counsel must comply with U.S. District Court for the District of

Montana Local Rule 83.l(d)(5); and

(4) Cody J. Wisniewski must conduct himself in accordance with U.S.

District Court for the District of Montana Local Rule 83.2.

DATED this __ day of ____ 2018.

Hon. Dana L. Christensen Chief Judge, United States District Court

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ADMITTANCE PRO HAC VICE 2


Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP · 2019-02-25 · Kristine Marie Akland AKLAND LAW FIRM, PLLC...

Documents

Transcript of Steven P. Ruffatto CROWLEY FLECK PLLP · 2019-02-25 · Kristine Marie Akland AKLAND LAW FIRM, PLLC...