Preview:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 39297

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs-Respondents, ) v. ) ) IDAHO FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT, ) ) an agency of the STATE OF IDAHO, and ) VIRGIL MOORE, Director of the IDAHO ) FISH AND GAME DEPARTMENT, ) Defendants-Appellants. ) ______________________________________ )

CITIZENS AGAINST RANGE EXPANSION, an unincorporated non-profit association; JEANNE J. HOM, a single woman, EUGENE and KATHLEEN RILEY, husband and wife, LAMBERT and DENISE RILEY, husband and wife, GABRIELLE GROTH-MARNAT, a single woman, GERALD PRICE, a single man, RONALD ELDRIDGE and DOROTHY ELDRIDGE, husband and wife, GLENN and LUCY CHAPIN, husband and wife, SHERYL PUCKETT, a single woman, CHARLES and CYNTHIA MURRAY, husband and wife, DAVE VIG a single man,

Coeur d'Alene, September 2012 Term 2012 Opinion No. 137 Filed: November 15, 2012 Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District of the State of Idaho, Kootenai County. Hon. John T. Mitchell, District Judge. The post-judgment orders of the district court are reversed and the case is remanded. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General, Boise, for appellants. Kathleen E. Trever argued. Scott W. Reed, Coeur d'Alene, and Harvey Richman, Athol, for respondents. Harvey Richman argued. _____________________

1

J. JONES, Justice. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) appeals the district court's post-judgment orders (1) refusing to lift a portion of an injunction and (2) declaring the Idaho Outdoor Sport Shooting Range Act unconstitutional. We reverse both orders and remand the case for further proceedings. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Farragut Shooting Range, near Bayview, Idaho, has been owned and operated by IDFG since World War II. It sits on approximately 160 acres and is surrounded by a residential neighborhood, a public road, and hiking trails. Public use of the range has been expanding, from some 176 shooters in 2002, to at least 509 shooters in 2005. In 2004, IDFG made a public proposal to renovate the range, based on the "Vargas Master Plan," authored by range design expert Clark Vargas. The plan was designed to improve access, noise control, and range management. Citizens Against Range Expansion (CARE), an unincorporated non-profit association comprised of individuals who reside near the range, contended that the plan would greatly increase range usage, and harm the community. CARE sued IDFG in 2005 for nuisance and other related causes of action regarding the range's operation. CARE's claims were grounded in both safety and noise concerns regarding the increased use of the range, and its proposed expansion. Among other relief, CARE sought to enjoin IDFG's operation of the range. The case proceeded to a court trial in December of 2006 and in February of 2007 the court issued its memorandum decision wherein it determined that CARE was entitled to relief enjoining further operation of the Farragut Range until IDFG completed certain safety improvements. The court laid out two separate components for lifting the injunction. The first component was for up to 500 shooters per year (the 500-shooter component). This component provided that the Farragut Range would remain closed "to all persons with pistols, rifles and firearms using or intending to use live ammunition until a baffle is installed over every firing position." The court's judgment specified: [Each] baffle must be placed and be of sufficient size that the shooter, in any position (standing, kneeling, prone), cannot fire his or her weapon above the berm behind the target. Either the parties shall agree that the baffles have been adequately installed or that issue shall be submitted for view of the premises by the Court. . . .
2

[A]t such time as baffles are installed over every firing position and approved in the manner set forth, [IDFG] may operate the Farragut Shooting Range in the same manner in which it historically has (i.e., without any site supervision), for up to 500 shooters per year. The second component of the injunction was for opening the Farragut Range to more than 500 shooters per year (the 501-shooter component). This part of the judgment had two concernsnoise and safety. It stated: [U]se level shall not exceed 500 shooters per year until and unless [IDFG] has constructed and installed safety measures adequate to prevent bullet escapement beyond the boundaries owned and controlled by [IDFG] and constructed and installed noise abatement measures to reduce noise to a decibel level agreed upon by the parties in the first instance, or, if the parties are unable to agree, to be set by the Court following further evidence. Neither party appealed the judgment. Rather, IDFG began work on addressing the requirements of the injunction. Specifically, it constructed a partially contained 100-yard shooting range, in which it installed baffles "sufficient to prevent shooters from `directly' firing above the berm behind the target from any of the 12 shooting positions (from prone to standing)." Although the district court discussed noise standards in its memorandum decision, it did not incorporate any standards in the judgment. During the following legislative session, the Idaho Legislature took action on this subject. In 2008, the Legislature enacted the Idaho Outdoor Sport Shooting Range Act. 2008 Idaho Sess. Laws 322

Download 39297.pdf

Idaho Law