Cattle graze on rangeland in Eastern Oregon. A federal judge has ruled that grazing must end without delay in 13 research pastures totaling 22,800 acres in Eastern Oregon.

SALEM — Federal land managers unlawfully failed to shut down grazing on nearly 22,800 acres in Eastern Oregon intended for rangeland research, according to a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Michael Simon has agreed with environmental advocates who claim the U.S. Bureau of Land Management must stop allowing livestock on the 13 key “research natural areas” under a sage grouse conservation plan.

“It is an immediate, binding commitment to set aside 22,765 acres as unavailable to grazing,” the judge said.

The 2015 plan specifically required those pastures to be closed to livestock, which is meant to provide habitat needed in scientific studies on the vulnerable bird species, he said.

Prohibiting grazing in these research natural areas isn’t a “voluntary or optional” action that BLM can choose to implement if it has enough funds or lacks more pressing priorities, Simon said.

“The court thus finds that the key RNA closure is a binding commitment that BLM has a duty to implement,” he said.

The history of the RNA grazing closures is complicated by repeated changes to the sage grouse management plan, as well as the paperwork implementing it.

Originally enacted during the Obama administration as part of a broader sage grouse strategy for the West, the plan was superseded by a revised version during the Trump administration.

The Trump administration’s plan didn’t require grazing to stop in the 13 research pastures, but it was overturned by a federal court that reinstated the earlier Obama-era version.

Adding to the confusion were the various documents involved in the plan’s approval, which in some cases referenced details from preliminary proceedings.

A key disagreement arose over whether the plan established a five-year deadline to halt grazing on the 22,800 acres.

Though the five-year timeline was mentioned only in a preliminary document, the Oregon Natural Desert Association and two other environment plaintiffs said it was incorporated by reference in the final sage grouse plan.

Their claim was opposed by the BLM and nine ranches that intervened in the lawsuit. They argued the five-year time frame wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the plan’s final version and thus didn’t set a deadline.

On this point, the BLM and the ranchers prevailed.

The judge has ruled that the environmental plaintiffs are impermissibly “blurring the distinctions” between documents with different purposes.

“The court may not compel this timeline or method,” Simon said.

Despite his finding, the judge has agreed that BLM took too long to halt grazing in the pastures.

The planned closures are more than a “broad projection” because they’re “tied to specific locations and details” that effectively limit the BLM’s flexibility, he said.

Even though the BLM may undertake more analysis before taking certain steps, the pasture closures are “discrete agency actions” that must be implemented under the plan, he said.

“Agencies cannot excuse their failure to act on a perpetual series of procedural requirements,” Simon said.

While there’s no concrete deadline to end grazing, the agency has “unreasonably delayed” the action by waiting seven years, according to the judge, who added that he “questions the diligence through which BLM has pursued the mandated closures.”

The 22,800 acres represent less than 1% of BLM property open to grazing in Oregon, while postponing the closures “prevents the collection of unique and unavailable data,” Simon said. “Significant public benefit can be gained from a very limited set of closures.”

Ranchers who use the research pastures argued the closures would “disrupt established grazing patterns, seasonal rotations and other management strategies.”

However, the judge said these “economic impacts don’t weigh against the plaintiffs,” noting that BLM notified the ranchers of the pending closures more than two years ago, as required.

“BLM’s own regulations indicate that two years are adequate to adjust to the cancellation or modification of a grazing permit,” he said.

The judge concluded that BLM has violated federal land management and administrative laws and must stop grazing in the pastures “without further delay.”

The environmental plaintiffs, BLM and ranches will file additional court briefs on the appropriate legal “remedy” for the government’s violations early next year.

Until the judge decides on that remedy, the BLM cannot “further authorize grazing on any portions of the 13 key RNAs designated unavailable to grazing” in the plan, he said.