Here is the complaint in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. National Marine Fisheries Service (W.D. Wash.):
Swinomish and Squaxin Island Sue over Endangered Species Act Regulatory Change
Environmental
President Trump Revokes Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments Weeks after Tenth Circuit Decision
On July 13, 2026, President Trump issued proclamations revoking the Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument.
This comes just weeks after the Tenth Circuit reversed the District of Utah’s dismissal of the lawsuits seeking to dismantle the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments. The Tenth Circuit’s decision remanded the matter back to the District Court for further proceedings. Here is the briefing from the Tenth Circuit.
Tenth Circuit Decision:
Plaintiff’s Opening Briefs:
Opening Brief of Individual Plaintiffs
Opening Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants Garfield County, Utah, et al.
Response Briefs:
Federal Defendants’ Consolidated Answering Brief
Response Brief of Suwa Intervenors-Appellees
Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Pueblo of Zuni, And Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Response Brief
Plaintiffs’ Reply Briefs:
Reply Brief of Individual Plaintiffs
Reply Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants Garfield County, Utah, et al.
New Scholarship on Wild Horses on Federal and Indian Lands
Elaina Erola has published “Wild and Untamed: The Problem of Wild Horses on Federal and Indian Lands” in the Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation.
Here is the abstract:
The management of wild horses in the American West has long been framed as a question of animal welfare, environmental stewardship, and federal land management. Missing from this discourse, however, is the disproportionate burden that unmanaged wild horse populations impose on Tribal Nations. This Article argues that the United States has failed to fulfill its trust responsibilities to federally recognized Tribes by inadequately addressing wild horse overpopulation on Indian lands, resulting in significant ecological degradation, resource depletion, and economic harm.
Drawing on historical accounts, federal statutes, agency practices, and case studies from the Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Nation, Wind River Reservation, Yakama Nation, Ute Indian Tribe, and others, this Article examines how federal wild horse policies have produced consequences that extend beyond Bureau of Land Management jurisdiction. While federal agencies devote substantial resources to managing wild horses on public lands, Tribal governments are often left to confront similar or greater population pressures with limited funding, uncertain jurisdictional authority, and inadequate federal support.
The Article situates these challenges within the broader framework of the federal trust responsibility, arguing that Indian lands, water resources, forage, wildlife habitat, and culturally significant plant species constitute trust assets deserving protection. Relying on trust doctrine jurisprudence, including United States v. Mitchell (“Mitchell II”), the Article contends that the federal government’s failure to address unmanaged horse populations on Tribal lands may constitute a breach of its fiduciary obligations. Finally, it explores potential legal and policy solutions, including expanded funding through self-determination contracts, enhanced consultation and co-management mechanisms, and greater recognition of Tribal authority to determine the legal status and management of wild horses within their territories.
By reframing wild horse overpopulation as both a tribal sovereignty issue and a trust responsibility issue, this Article highlights an overlooked dimension of federal Indian law and environmental governance and calls for a more equitable allocation of resources and decision-making authority to Tribal Nations.
Ninth Circuit Affirms Yurok/Hoopa/Feds Win in Klamath River ESA Fight
Blumm and McMichael on Tribal Fish and Wildlife Co-Management in Oregon
Michael Blumm and Connor McRobert have posted “Tribal Comanagement at the State Level: The Oregon Experience” on SSRN.
Here is the abstract:
Ecological disturbances are straining conventional fish and wildlife management, which tribal knowledge can inform to produce more effective management. Although federal policy has recognized government-to-government relations with Tribal Nations, most day-today regulation of fish and wildlife runs through state agencies. This Article argues that Oregon has provided an important management framework between the state and Tribal Nations. Since 2022, Oregon has entered a series of state-tribal agreements that constitute a durable and increasingly replicable co-management framework. This Article contends that these agreements reflect a second-generation, state-driven adaptation of an earlier co-management framework that emerged from the Columbia River treaty-rights litigation. Although Oregon has not formally ceded legal primacy, the agreements nonetheless shift considerable operational authority to Tribal Nations through recurring harvest negotiation, shared scientific information, hunting and fishing licensing, and habitat coordination. Some limits to the co-management framework appear in Willamette Falls, an important historic intertribal commons, where overlapping tribal claims expose the shortcomings of bilateralism. Habitat restoration likewise tests whether Oregon’s framework can apply beyond the harvest context. Consequently, the Article concludes that the Oregon-tribal agreements offer a workable but conditional framework of inter-sovereign resource management for other states and Tribal Nations, and other resources.
Coalition of Large Tribes Joins Oil Company Efforts to Undo Boulder County’s Fight Against Climate Change
Here is COLT’s amicus brief in support of the petition for writ of certiorari in Suncor Energy (USA) Inc. v. Board of Commissioners for Boulder County:
Yurok Tribe and Allies Prevail over EPA on decaBDE Regulation
Here is the opinion in Yurok Tribe v. EPA.
An excerpt:
The panel granted a petition for review of a 2024 Rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) concerning regulation of Decabromodiphenyl Ether (“decaBDE”), an additive flame retardant used in numerous products, and remanded without vacatur of the 2024 Rule to the EPA for renewed rulemaking and any other proceedings.
Amended Complaint in Apache Stronghold v. United States
Ninth Circuit Rejects Federal En Banc Petition in Sho-Ban v. DOI but Some Judges Have Thoughts
Here is the order and accompanying, dueling opinions in Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. Dept. of the Interior.
En banc stage briefs:
Tribal Response to En Banc Petition
Panel materials here.
Indian Peaks Band Files to Protect Tribal Water Rights
On April 1, 2026, the Indian Peaks Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah filed a Notice of Appeal and Petition for Stay with the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s March 2, 2026, approval of the Pine Valley Water Supply Project.
The filing seeks review of BLM’s decision authorizing a large‑scale groundwater extraction and pipeline project in southern Utah and asks the IBLA to stay the project approvals while the appeal is pending. The Band argues that the decision violates federal law, including the National Environmental Policy Act, and unlawfully threatens the Band’s federally reserved water rights and culturally significant resources.
You can see more here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.