This series will address current topics that deal with the Bureau of Land Managment (BLM), Wild Horse and Burro Program and Equine Protection Issues of national significance. If you are aware of a topic that you feel should posted here, please contact life@equinenet.org. |
|
The Animal Protection Institute and Fund for Animals
sued the BLM on several issues regarding the Wild Horse and Burro Program.
To see the exact wording of the suit, go here: The following is the agreement that was reached by all parties and received by the U.S. District Court on October 14, 1997. If you are interested in a short interpretation, go here:
|
|
CV-R-85-365-HDM ANIMAL PROTECTION INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC., a California non-profit corporation, and THE FUND FOR ANIMALS, INC., a New York non-profit corporation, Plaintiffs, v. BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior; PAT SHEA, Director of the BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT; TOM POGACNIK, Director, Wild Horse and Burro Program, Defendants. ________________________________________
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Plaintiffs Animal Protection Institute, Inc. and Fund for Animals ("Plaintiffs") and Defendants Bruce Babbitt, Bureau of Land Management, et al, ("Defendants") hereby state as follows:
A. Plaintiffs originally filed this action on July 16, 1985. After cross-motions for summary judgment, this Court entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs and permanently enjoined Defendants as follows: The Defendants are hereby enjoined and restrained from transferring the titles of wild free-roaming horses and burros to individuals who have, prior to the expiration of the one year "probationary period" prescribed by 16 U.S.C. 1333(c), expressed to the Secretary an intent, upon the granting of title, to use said animals for commercial purposes. API v. Hodel, 671 F. Supp. 695, 698 (D. Nev. 1987), aff'd, 860 F.2d 920 (9th Cir. 1988). Defendants appealed, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court's decision. In 1988 and 1989 plaintiffs brought motions for contempt. Both motions were denied by this Court. No further litigation has occurred in this case since that time B. On June 19, 1997, plaintiffs filed a motion to modify this Court's 1987 permanent injunction. All briefing on this issue is completed and the matter is pending before the court. On August 16, 1997, the court held a status conference and all parties participated by telephone. At that status conference, all parties agreed to enter into settlement negotiations on the following four issues as outlined by the court: i. Proposed language regarding intent in the Private Maintenance and Care Agreement. ii. Evaluation of a "report back" requirement by the adopter to BLM one year after the passage of title. iii. Examination of power of attorney adoptions iv. "self-policing" of BLM employee violations of statue. C. The parties subsequently exchanged letters outlining their positions on the four issues that were outlined by the court. Based on these letters, the parties agreed to enter into a formal mediation on the four issues, which mediation was held on October 7, 1997. WHEREFORE, IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF THIS ACTION AND PENDING MOTIONS BEFORE THIS COURT, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Defendants will submit to the Office of Management and Budget the following language to be inserted into the (1) Private Maintenance and Care Agreement and (2) Application for Title: Under penalty of prosecution for violating 18 U.S.C. 1001, which makes it a federal crime to make false statements to any agency of the United States, I hereby state that I have no intent to sell this wild horse or burro for slaughter or bucking stock, or for processing into commercial products, within the meaning of the Wild and Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act, 16 U.S.C. 1331 et seq., and regulations, 43 C.F.R. 4700.0-5 (c)." Defendants agree to the following interim goals. Defendants will submit this proposed language for inclusion into the Private Maintenance and Care Agreement and the Application for Title to OMB within three months of the court's approval of this Settlement Agreement. Defendants agree that they will undertake every effort to expedite the review of the proposed language in the Private Maintenance and Care Agreement and the Application of Title. If OMB has not approved the proposed language in the Private Maintenance and Care Agreement and Application for Title by April 30, 1998, Defendants agree to provide Plaintiffs with a written statement of reasons therefore, as well as a written description of the Defendants' efforts to ensure that its responsibilities under this paragraph are being met. 2. Defendants agree to begin negotiations to enter into memorandums of understanding with slaughterhouses in the United States and Canada that slaughter horses for human consumption. BLM commits to negotiating in the MOUs the following provisions: (1) That the slaughteryards will agree to retain all paperwork on all BLM freeze-branded horses for a period of one year and make these documents available to BLM annually or upon demand, (2) That the slaughterhouses will agree to notify BLM or a designated person immediately upon the slaughterhouse's receipt of a BLM freeze-branded horse that does not have titling papers. BLM commits to sending an Instructional Memorandum to each State Director with instructions to enter into negotiations with the slaughterhouses for these MOUs within three months of the court's approval of the Settlement Agreement. BLM further commits to negotiating with the slaughterhouses to enter into MOUs by April 30, 1998, and if successful, will provide a copy of each MOU to plaintiffs by April 30, 1998. If these goals are not achieved, the defendants agree to provide Plaintiffs with a written statement of reasons such MOUs were not completed by April 30, 1998. 3. Defendants commit a begin negotiations with the United States Department of Agriculture to enter into a memorandum of understanding that would allow USDA inspectors of slaughterhouses that process horses for human consumption to notify BLM if the inspector becomes aware of untitled BLM freeze branded horses during USDA inspections. BLM will undertake every effort to enter into an MOU with USDA by July 1, 1998. BLM commits to reporting to Plaintiffs by July 1, 1998, the status of these negotiations with USDA. 4. On the issue of powers of attorney, the parties agree as follows. In 1990, BLM published a final rule prohibiting the use of powers of attorney to adopt wild horses if more than four untitled wild horses or burros were in one location, 55 Fed. Reg. 39151 (Sep. 25, 1990). BLM will propose a regulation to terminate powers of attorney entirely. BLM commits to publishing the proposed regulation to terminate powers of attorney within three months of the court's approval of this Settlement Agreement. Plaintiffs agree that BLM will publish the regulation for notice and comment and review and evaluate comments to the proposed regulation. BLM commits to evaluating the comments pursuant to the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, and publishing its decision on the powers of attorney in the Federal Register. BLM commits to publishing its final decision on the termination of powers of attorney by April 30, 1998. BLM is in the process of developing criteria for the regulation of the adoption of more than four animals. BLM will provide these criteria to plaintiffs by April 30, 1998. The parties agree that pursuant to the Wild Horse and Burro Act, 16 U.S.C. 1333(c), the Secretary is authorized upon application by the transferee to grant title to not more than four animals to the transferee at the end of the one-year period. 5. Any of the provisions of this Settlement Agreement may be modified for good cause shown. Modification of the terms set forth in this Settlement Agreement shall be by written consent of plaintiffs and defendants, or through the filing of an appropriate action or motion with the Court. 6. The terms of this Settlement Agreement are not intended to be enforceable by any person or entity other than the parties hereto and the Court. If there is a concern about a breach of this Settlement Agreement, or failure to accomplish any of the purposes of paragraph 1-4, the parties will first seek to resolve the matter among themselves. It is agreed that, before seeking judicial enforcement of any term of this Settlement Agreement, the complaining party shall first provide 30 days; advance notice, in writing, to the party alleged to be in breach. Such notice shall include a citation to the specific provision that has allegedly been breached, together with a succinct statement of the facts establishing the alleged breach. Both parties agree to make available appropriate representatives to discuss the circumstances surrounding the alleged breach during the 30-day period in an effort to resolve the matter. If the parties are unable to do so, either party may file an action or motion with the Court for enforcement of the Settlement Agreement or other appropriate judicial relief. The parties request this court to retain jurisdiction to resolve any such action or motion brought pursuant to this paragraph. 7. Nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall be construed as relieving defendants of the obligation to act in a manner consistent with any applicable law, including any applicable provisions of the Wild Horse and Burro Act, 16 U.S.C. 1331 et seq., the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551-559, 701-706, the Anti-Deficiency Act, 5 U.S.C. 1341, Privacy Act, and other applicable law. Nothing in the Settlement Agreement shall be construed to circumvent any requirements of any other Federal Agency, including the Office of Management Budget. 8. The undersigned representatives of each party certify that they are fully authorized by the party or parties they represent to execute this Settlement Agreement. 9. This Settlement Agreement is effective and binding on the parties as of the date it is executed by the parties. 10. This Settlement Agreement is in full settlement of this action and the motions currently pending before this court. Plaintiffs agree that they will bring no further actions related to any modification, change, or addition to the Permanent Injunction or for any such further injunction or other relief in this action. The parties retain the right to bring any future motion for contempt of the Permanent Injunction. |
The BLM has agreed to do the following:
|
