Refuge Decision Preserves Principle of Wildlife Management In a major victory for sportsmen and conservationists nationwide, a federal court has ruled to protect hunting and wildlife management on an important parcel of federal land. The ruling reiterates that wildlife management takes precedent over protectionism on the nation’s National Wildlife Refuges. Judge Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. District Court for Arizona decided in favor of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in a case brought by environmentalists seeking to block wildlife management in the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge. The decision preserves the principle of active wildlife management within national wildlife refuges, even those that have had part of their land designated as “wilderness” under the National Wilderness Act The plaintiffs had claimed that FWS violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wilderness Act by constructing and restoring wildlife watering devices on the NWR. While these devices are key for the survival of bighorn sheep and other desert wildlife, the plaintiffs claimed they violated federal law. Last year, the U.S. Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund (U.S. SLDF), the litigation arm of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (USSAF), moved to defend FWS and several sportsmen groups in the case. The U.S. SLDF argued that a “Wilderness” designation does not preclude wildlife conservation. Joining the U.S. SLDF were several other groups including: Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Society, Arizona Deer Association, Arizona Antelope Foundation, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Yuma Valley Rod & Gun Club, Safari Club International and the National Rifle Association. Plaintiffs in the case against the FWS included Wilderness Watch and Arizona Wilderness Coalition.