BLM Announces Plans to Ask the IBLA to Remand the DOR and Cancel Spay Experiments
BLM is Frustrated, to Say the Least
©CAES 07 November 2018
Yesterday we filed the latest round with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) in our case to stop the brutal sterilization experiments on pregnant wild mares in Oregon.
In our Answer to the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) latest round, Citizens Against Equine Slaughter (CAES) allegations were that the decision made was not following proper procedures per National Environmental Policy Act including:
– There was no Environmental Impact Study (EIS) and no appropriate EIS to tier (refer) to.
– The choice of ovariectomy over other alternatives including native PZP was arbitrary and capricious and cruel for the sake of cruelty.
– The cost analysis to support this arbitrary decision was based on a fraudulent and out of date characterization of PZP as requiring roundup and branding thereby artificially and fraudulently inflating PZP costs. (Native PZP is no longer experimental since 2012 when it was registered by the EPA in order to allow feasible on range management per the EPA label in 2012.
– That the BLM was ignoring both federal animal cruelty laws regarding experimentation (AWA) as well as state and local animal cruelty laws regarding animals and sentients.
That in itself should cause the IBLA to rule in our favor but we also asked for a time extension because BLM is blocking Freedom Of Information Act requests for documents surrounding the deaths of horses gathered from the Warm Springs Herd Management Act.
While CAES did also state that there was public disgust and extreme controversy requiring an EIS, CAES did not file a case to only watch the illegal torture of sentient beings.
Today the BLM announced to a federal court, Kathrens et al. v Zinke et al. (3:18cv1691) that they intend to ask the IBLA for a redaction of their Decision of Record (DOR). This was exactly what the result of our 2016 case was.
BLM cannot cancel a DOR while the DOR is under appeal (our case is that appeal) with the IBLA.
BLM has asked the Portland court to delay entering the preliminary injunction because they plan to ask for remand in our case and that will make the Portland court case moot.
“Before BLM can rescind the portion of the Decision Record relating to the spay study itself, the Interior Board of Land Appeals must first vacate and remand the decision record to BLM. (emphasis added) See, e.g., Benton C. Cavin, 166 IBLA 78, 81-82 (2005) (after appeal to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, “BLM has no jurisdiction unilaterally to reverse a decision under appeal and grant relief”). BLM will file a motion to vacate and remand the Decision Record with the Interior Board of Land Appeals in the coming days.
Because BLM will soon rescind the portion of the Decision Record relating to the spay
study, Plaintiffs’ claims will soon be moot and there will be no need for an order relating toPlaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction.” (emphasis added)
“Therefore, Defendants respectfully request that the Court stay entry of Plaintiffs’ proposed order, or any other order on the motion for preliminary injunction, for 14 days, until November 21, 2018. Defendants will submit a status report on November 21, 2018, informing the Court of their progress toward rescinding the Decision Record.”
While the Kathrens et al makes the claim that these experiments are socially unacceptable. CAES asserted in our case that they are illegal.
CAES thanks all of you who have supported us, the little fish, in an ocean of sharks! You made this happen, all of you keep us going with your support and love. We’re in this for the horses, not the media, not the credit or fame, but the truth and the law that will save our horses. Thank you from us at CAES, and from the horses and their unborn foals.
“Unity is only effective when you are fighting the same battles” – TJB™