The Fund for Animals, et al., Plaintiff, v. Jack Ward Thomas, Chief of the United States Forest Service et al. Defendants. Wyoming Outfitters Association, et al. Cross-Plaintiffs Intervenor - Defendants v. Jack Ward Thomas, et al., Cross-Defendants

Civil Action No. 94-672

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4982

 
April 14, 1994 , Decided  
April 14, 1994 , Filed

JUDGES:  [*1]  Sporkin

OPINION BY: STANLEY SPORKIN

OPINION: ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on motion by Cross-Plaintiffs and Intervenor-Defendants Wyoming Outfitters Association, et al. for a temporary restraining order. In a nutshell, the Outfitters argue that they should be permitted to conduct black bear hunts this spring using a "baiting" technique in the national forest lands of Wyoming . Bear baiting is a practice by which hunters, primarily bow hunters, attract hungry bears to "bait stations" by use of decaying animal carcasses and other bear-enticing morsels. It was explained by intervenors at oral argument that bow hunters prefer to use the baiting technique because a bow hunter must get closer to the prey than a firearm hunter to guarantee a "clean kill", alleviating the inhumane situation of crippled bears escaping into the forest after a less-than-perfect shot.

The Forest Service for some time has struggled with the issue of whether to permit "bear baiting" on national forest lands. Most recently, the Forest Service issued a March 14, 1994 "interim" policy stating it would permit bear baiting in Wyoming at the commencement of bear hunting season this spring. The March 14, 1994 policy would [*2]  reverse a prior decision announced in May 1993 which prohibited bear baiting on national forest lands in Wyoming pending development of a nationwide policy on baiting. In response to the interim policy announced on March 14, 1994 , the Fund for Animals on March 28, 1994 filed this lawsuit under the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Forest Management Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act. The Fund for Animals sought relief from the Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture for failure to comply with applicable legislation in instituting the "interim policy". Confronted with this pending lawsuit, the Forest Service entered into a stipulation with the Fund for Animals which was approved by Judge Johnson on April 1,1994, whereby the Forest Service would prohibit bear baiting-thereby maintaining the status quo as it has existed since 1993-pending formulation of a uniform national bear-baiting policy.

The intervenor Outfitters claim that they will be injured by the Forest Service's stipulation with the Fund for Animals which would ban bear baiting in Wyoming . The spring bear hunting season is fast approaching and the Outfitters have booked [*3]  hunts with the expectation that the use of bait would be permitted. They claim their businesses and reputations are threatened by the cancellation of bear baiting during the coming hunting season. They seek to temporarily restrain the Forest Service from prohibiting bear baiting during the spring hunt.

The Court is unconvinced that the intervenors will suffer irreparable injury. In addition, if any public interest is being served, it is through the protection of grizzly bears and other threatened species that the Fund for Animals persuasively argues are attracted and sometimes mistakenly killed by black bear hunters using the bear bait technique. Neither have the intervenors demonstrated a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits. Upon consideration of the motion, and all opposition thereto, and having heard argument by the parties, it is hereby

ORDERED that the motion for a temporary restraining order be denied.
 
DATE: 4/14/94

Stanley Sporkin

United States District Court