Sauk Prairie Conservation Alliance v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 944 F.3d 634 (7th Cir. 2019)

In this 2019 opinion, the Seventh Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court declined to take the case. The appellate court found that the Program of Utilization was a “high-level” document that addressed potential recreational uses in “broad strokes” and did not limit those uses to low-impact recreation. Both dog training and off-road motorcycle riding were recreational uses, and thus there was no violation of the Program of Utilization or the FPASA.

• State: Wisconsin

• Procedural Status: Case concluded.

• Date: 2019

• Keywords: Conversion; low-impact; military; National Environmental Policy Act; open space; preliminary injunction; public fee land; recreation; restrictive covenant.

• Summary of Facts and Issues: Over a series of transactions beginning in 2011, the federal Department of Defense transferred 3,050 acres of the former Badger Army Ammunition Plant to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The transactions took place pursuant to the Federal Lands to Parks program. The DNR’s original four-page application to the National Park Service, called the Program of Utilization, emphasized a variety of low-impact recreational uses, but stated that a more detailed master plan outlining all appropriate uses would be prepared at a later date. The NPS approved the Program of Utilization, and transferred various parcels to DNR with the following restrictive covenant in the deed: “[T]he property shall be used and maintained exclusively for public park or public recreation[al] purposes for which it was conveyed in perpetuity… as set forth in the Program of Utilization… , which program and plan may be amended from time to time at the request of either the Grantor or Grantee.” The deeds also stated that if the DNR violated this condition, the land shall revert to the federal government at its option. According to the Sauk Prairie Conservation Alliance (the Alliance), the DNR’s use of the land was limited to the low-impact recreational uses explicitly mentioned in the Program of Utilization. But in December 2016, the DNR approved allegedly high-impact uses, including motorcycle racing, helicopter flight training by the Wisconsin Army National Guard, hunting dog training, and paintballing. The Alliance filed a federal suit in January 2017, claiming that these high-impact uses violated the terms of the transfer to the DNR. In June 2017, the Alliance moved for a preliminary injunction to prevent three of the disputed uses: (1) off-road motorized vehicles, (2) increased dog training and gun use, and (3) helicopter training. In later filings, the Alliance claimed that defendants have violated the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (FPASA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

• 2017 Holding: In response to the preliminary injunction motion and before receiving any opposition from the defendants, the District Court held that the Alliance had not shown that temporarily allowing the three disputed uses while the case proceeded would cause irreparable harm, and therefore denied the preliminary injunction. The court acknowledged that the Alliance made a “good showing that the contested high-impact uses will disrupt wildlife,” but also noted that even on an expedited briefing schedule, the court would not be able to issue an injunction before the end of the nesting season. See Related Resources for the 2018 opinion.

• 2018 Holding: The trial court ruled for the United States on summary judgment, finding no violation of the FPASA or the NEPA. Even if the use of the property did not comply with the Program of Utilization filed by the DNR, there was no cause of action under either statute. Furthermore, the deed to the DNR expressly allowed for aviation training on a particular parcel, and nothing in the statute required that recreational activities be low-impact. See Related Resources for the 2018 opinion.