REGIONAL- The U.S. District Court for Minnesota has denied a preliminary injunction request by Montana-based Wilderness Watch to stop all towboat activities in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. At the same time, the court ruled that the U.S. Forest Service can “continue its moratorium on new special-use permits for towboat operations.” Current towboat operators are unaffected by the ruling and can continue to operate for now.
Wilderness Watch, a nonprofit dedicated to the preservation of federally-designated wilderness areas, filed a lawsuit against the Forest Service back in February (case 0:23-cv-00284-NEB-LIB), alleging that the federal agency has violated at least three different federal acts with its management of towboats.
The group’s initial complaint included a request for a permanent injunction on “permitting any motorized use beyond the statutory cap and the quotas set out in the Forest Service’s wilderness management planning provisions.” The Timberjay covered the filing and its economic consequences for outfitters in the May 5 edition.
Preliminary injunction
Wilderness Watch requested a preliminary injunction, shortly after filing its lawsuit, to shut down all towboats in the BWCAW for 2023 until the current litigation was decided. The two sides argued their opposing viewpoints on the injunction in briefs and oral arguments back on March 29 before U.S. District Judge Nancy E. Brasel.
Then Brasel took over two months to deny the motion while the outfitting season got underway under a cloud of uncertainty.
Brasel issued her denial of the preliminary injunction on June 6, finding that “a preliminary injunction banning all towboat operations in the BWCAW is inappropriate … Nor is the Court persuaded that now is the time for an injunction,” noting that the Forest Service was preparing an analysis of towboat use in the BWCAW.
In her decision, Brasel added, “it is unclear how an artificial limit (through a preliminary injunction) would impact that analysis. The balance of harms and public interest favor completion (or at least further development) of that analysis before the Court alters the status quo with an injunction limiting towboat trips in the BWCAW.”
Jurisdiction
The latest decision was not a complete loss for Wilderness Watch. In her consideration of the group’s arguments, Judge Brasel touched on the matter of jurisdiction in the limited case of Wilderness Watch’s preliminary injunction request. Her determination on jurisdiction may foreshadow what might happen with the Forest Service motion to dismiss the case, filed in mid-May. The Forest Service had challenged the lawsuit on several points, including a claim that the district court lacks jurisdiction under the federal Administrative Procedures Act because “Wilderness Watch identifies no final agency action that authorized excess towboat use. The Forest Service also argues that challenging day-to-day operations is not enough to confer jurisdiction.”
That argument shaves some legal points that only a lawyer could recognize or love. The word “final” here refers to what determines a “final” regulatory action by a federal agency. Brasel found that the special permits issued by the Forest Service to towboat operators did satisfy the case law definition of “final” action, and therefore the court did have the standing to adjudicate the case.
Brasel stated that the determination over jurisdiction was made “at this point in the litigation with a limited record,” reflecting that the case has not yet been heard in court. Despite the preliminary and limited development of the lawsuit to date, Brasel’s determination regarding the court’s jurisdiction may be a preview of what could happen in the upcoming July 26 hearing.
The hearing in question will consider the Forest Service’s motion to dismiss, which is made on the basis that the court lacks jurisdiction.
Wilderness Watch must file its reply to the Forest Service motion to dismiss by June 19, while the Forest Service will have until July 19 for its rebuttal. The Timberjay will continue to follow this case which affects both the BWCAW and the outfitter industry that is a major support of the economy in northern St. Louis and Lake counties.