(proposed amendments to 2006 grazing regulations on federal land put new limitations on BLM's enforcement powers and increased ranchers' ownership rights to improvements and water on public lands (as a result of BLM's historic loss in the Hage litigation); plaintiff (anti-grazing activist organization) challenged regulations on basis that BLM violated NEPA by failing to take required "hard look" at environmental effects of revised regulations, failed to consult with USFWS as required by ESA, and violated FLMPA in promulgating 2006 regulations; trial court granted summary judgment to plaintiff and defendants appealed; trial court decision affirmed - BLM violated NEPA and ESA in adopting 2006 amendments, and also affirmed trial court's permanent injunction enjoining BLM regulations of 2006; because trial court did not consider plaintiff's FLPMA claim, trial court's grant of summary judgment on that point vacated and case remanded on that point for further consideration).