## Facts

- The National Elk Refuge (NER) is a federally owned wildlife refuge in Wyoming within the National Wildlife Refuge System, administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
- Elk in the greater Yellowstone area carried brucellosis, a disease affecting reproduction that also posed risks to Wyoming’s domestic cattle industry.
- Wyoming developed a program to vaccinate elk using a vaccine known as “Strain 19” and sought permission to vaccinate elk when they migrated onto the NER.
- After years of study, FWS declined to authorize Strain 19 vaccination on the NER, citing unresolved concerns about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness in elk.
- Wyoming relied in part on a savings clause in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (NWRSIA) to argue it retained sovereign authority to manage wildlife on refuge lands.
- Wyoming sued the United States and the Secretary of the Interior seeking declaratory relief recognizing state authority and alleging the refusal (and related delay) violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
- The district court dismissed the complaint, and Wyoming appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether NWRSIA’s savings clause preserved a sovereign state right allowing Wyoming to direct elk disease management on the NER in a way that limits FWS’s refuge-management authority.
2. Whether FWS’s refusal to allow Strain 19 vaccination on the NER was reviewable and unlawful under the APA, or instead within the agency’s broad statutory discretion.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Wyoming’s claims.
- The court held the refuge statutes give FWS primary authority to manage wildlife on refuge lands and the NWRSIA savings clause did not give Wyoming a right to override federal management decisions.
- The court concluded FWS’s decision to disallow Strain 19 vaccination was within its statutory discretion and Wyoming did not establish an APA violation warranting judicial relief.

## Legal Principles

- Federal statutes governing the National Wildlife Refuge System vest FWS with broad authority to administer refuge lands consistent with the system’s conservation mission, including decisions about permitted wildlife-management activities.
- A statutory savings clause preserving state authority to manage wildlife on refuge lands generally operates as a non-diminution provision; it does not confer power to control refuge management contrary to federal objectives.
- Under the APA, courts generally defer to an agency’s scientific and technical judgments in wildlife-management decisions when Congress has left substantial discretion and there are no clear statutory standards compelling a particular outcome.

## Conclusion

The court rejected Wyoming’s attempt to compel a state-directed elk vaccination program on a federal refuge, holding that federal refuge law leaves controlling wildlife-management decisions to FWS and that the agency’s refusal to permit Strain 19 vaccination fell within its discretionary authority under the governing statutes and the APA.


State of Wyoming v. United States, 279 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2002)