16 U.S.C. § 1331
Congressional findings and declaration of policy
Congress finds and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; that they contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people; and that these horses and burros are fast disappearing from the American scene. It is the policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, or death; and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 80
cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: In Def. of Animals v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 751 F.3d 1054 (9th Cir. 2014).
In Def. of Animals v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 751 F.3d 1054 (9th Cir. 2014). “1 The Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1331–1340, was enacted in 1971, and states its general purpose as protecting “wild free-roaming horses and burros [] from capture, branding, harassment, or death; and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the…”
Fund for Animals, Inc. v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 460 F.3d 13 (D.C. Cir. 2006). “Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, Pub.L. No. 92-195, 85 Stat. 649 (1971) (the “Act” or the “Wild Horses and Burros Act”), to protect those animals from “capture, branding, harassment, or death.”
Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529 (1976). “” §1, 16 U. S. C. § 1331 (1970 ed., Supp. IV). The Act provides that all such horses and burros on the public lands administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or by the Secretary of Agriculture through the Forest Service are…”
Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Jewell, 847 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 2016). “” Petitioners alleged, in pertinent part, that the removal violated the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1331–1340, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.”
Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. David Bernhardt, 963 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2020). “16 U.S.C. § 1331 . When wild horses become too numerous for the land to support, Congress has mandated that BLM remove excess horses until it reestablishes ecological balance.”
Am. Wild Horse Pres. Campaign v. Sonny Perdue, 873 F.3d 914 (D.C. Cir. 2017). “First, the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (“Wild Horses Act”), 16 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq., charges the Secretaries of Intérior and Agriculture with “protecting] and managing] wild free-roaming horses and burros” on federal lands, id.”
W. Rangeland Conservation Ass'n v. Zinke, 265 F. Supp. 3d 1267 (D. Utah 2017). “Plaintiffs contend that BLM has failed to perform certain ministerial duties under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (‘WHA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1331 , et seq., and claim that BLM’s failure has adversely impacted their ability to utilize their grazing allotments.”
Wyoming v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 839 F.3d 938 (10th Cir. 2016). “(quoting 16 U.S.C. § 1331 ). “[T]he Act declares wild horses and burros to be an ‘integral part of the natural system of the public lands,’ 16 U.”
In Def. of Animals v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 648 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir. 2011). “Plaintiffs allege that the government's actions will violate the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act ("Wild Horses Act"), 16 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq., and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.”
Colorado Wild Horse v. Jewell, 130 F. Supp. 3d 205 (D.D.C. 2015). “ns of Colorado’s White River Resource Area: the West Douglas Herd Area (“West Douglas HA”) and the Pieeance-East Douglas Herd Management Area (“East Douglas HMA”), Finding the number of horses too high to maintain ecological balance and sustain multipurpose land use in those…”
Colorado Wild Horse & Burro Coalition, Inc. v. Salazar, 639 F. Supp. 2d 87 (D.D.C. 2009). “They argue, inter alia, that the decision violates the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act (‘Wild Horse Act” or “Act”), 16 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq. Defendants counter that BLM’s decision to remove the West Douglas Herd is a reasonable exercise of BLM’s discretion and is…”
Habitat for Horses v. Salazar, 745 F. Supp. 2d 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). “Plaintiffs claim that the BLM’s decision to remove wild horses from the North Piceanee Herd Area (or “North Piceanee”) in Colorado violates the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (“Wild Horses Act”), 16 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq., the Information Quality Act (“IQA”), Pub.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.