A federal judge has ruled against livestock groups’ attempt to halt the U.S. Forest Service’s (USFS) shooting of feral cattle in a New Mexico forest.

In a Jan. 29 ruling, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico upheld the federal agency’s decision to remove cattle from the Gila Wilderness, one of the largest swaths of public land in the Southwest. In February 2022 and 2023, the USFS initiated an aerial shooting operation to cull feral cattle in the Gila National Forest, claiming concerns over environmental degradation and threats to wildlife habitats and public safety.

“The feral cattle in the Gila Wilderness have been aggressive towards wilderness visitors, graze year-round, and trample stream banks and springs, causing erosion and sedimentation,” said Camille Howes, Gila National Forest supervisor. “This action will help restore the wilderness character of the Gila Wilderness enjoyed by visitors from across the country.”

The agency killed a little over 80 head of cattle in aerial shootings by helicopter. The agency said operations were concluded in March 2023 and has not again notified of plans to conduct additional shooting operations.

The New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association (NMCGA), along with private ranchers and the Humane Farming Association, filed suit against the agency, arguing the USFS violated federal regulations by not following standard procedures for removing unauthorized livestock.

Former NMCGA President Loren Patterson told WLJ at the time that the association was worried about the precedent the shootings would set and the potential impacts to private property. In addition, he noted the waste of beef and the consequences of improper carcass management.

The livestock interests filed for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to stop the shootings, which were denied. The district court did not find that the removed cattle met the definition of “unauthorized livestock” as they were unowned and feral, and therefore, the USFS was not required to follow impoundment procedures.

“The plaintiffs express concerns regarding the operation’s impact on goodwill and the potential loss of customers, but these potential harms are not sufficient to justify the granting of injunctive relief here,” the court wrote in an opinion.

A week after the court denied the restraining order and injunction, the Center for Biological Diversity intervened in the lawsuit in support of USFS. The court granted the group in September 2023 the right to intervene.

In February 2024, a four-hour-long hearing was held between the parties.

“I feel more convinced of the correctness of the construction that I gave in a rather quick way in 2023,” district judge James O. Browning said during the hearing. “Now, that I’ve studied this much more, and been more informed by the argument, I feel more convinced than ever that the construction that I’ve given these regs is correct.”

Nearly a year later, Browning ruled that USFS complied with all laws and the livestock groups’ complaint was dismissed with prejudice.

“This sensible ruling validates the Forest Service’s efforts to protect the Gila Wilderness and its remarkable biological diversity,” said Taylor McKinnon of the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s a victory for America’s first wilderness that will lead to a cleaner, healthier Gila River and restored wildlife habitat.”