How much weight may the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Commissioner and Administrative Law Judges give to testimony given by DNR experts in making permit determinations? In the Matter of the Application of the Lac Qui Parle-Yellow Bank Watershed District to Excavate Four Floodways in the Lac Qui Parle River, Lac Qui Parle County, 1995 WL 6419 (Minn.App.) The Lac Qui Parle-Yellow River Watershed District sought public waters work permits from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in order to excavate four floodways on the Lac Qui Parle River. The DNR refused to issue the permits. At a contested hearing, DNR experts presented evidence that the proposed floodways would be "detrimental to significant fish habitat" and that there were two "non-structural alternatives" to the proposed project, and the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruled in the DNR's favor. The DNR Commissioner adopted the ALJ findings and conclusions almost in their entirety, and the watershed district challenged the Commissioner's decision. The watershed district argued that there was not substantial evidence to support either the Commissioner's conclusions that the proposed floodways would substantially affect fish habitat or the Commissioner's decision that there existed other feasible and prudent alternatives to the project. The Minnesota Court of Appeals rejected the watershed district's arguments, holding that the DNR Commissioner, and the ALJ on whose findings and conclusions he based his decision, could "give most weight to [DNR expert's] testimony." Id. at *1, citing Quinn Distributing Co. V. Quast Transfer, 181 N.W.2d 696, 700 (1970).
|
||
 |
||