← Back to the network
Legal · Grazing and Watersheds

Western Watersheds Project

“To protect and restore western watersheds and wildlife.”

4 live lawsuits, 17 comments to the agencies, 85 cents of every dollar to the work.

Home groundHailey, ID
Founded1993
Tax status501(c)(3)
Led byErik Molvar

Give to them ↗Every way to help ↓

The origin

How they started

Western Watersheds Project exists to get livestock off public land, full stop. Former architect Jon Marvel started it in 1993 as the Idaho Watersheds Project after years of fighting cattle trespass near his own place, and it grew into a regional force with field offices across seven Western states. WWP challenges grazing permits in court using the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act, and fights for sage grouse and damaged streams on BLM and Forest Service ground.

Where the money went, FY2025

The work, and what it cost

Monitoring

$951K, 48% of spending

Identify damaged watersheds and document abusive land management practices. Report the following: - livestock numbers on grazing allotments - turnout times - abusive grazing - degredation of streams and stream banks -…

Read it as they filed it
MONITORING - IDENTIFY DAMAGED WATERSHEDS AND DOCUMENT ABUSIVE LAND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. REPORT THE FOLLOWING: - LIVESTOCK NUMBERS ON GRAZING ALLOTMENTS - TURNOUT TIMES - ABUSIVE GRAZING - DEGREDATION OF STREAMS AND STREAM BANKS - DESTRUCTION OF RIPARIAN AND UPLAND HABITAT - DEGREDATION OF CULTURAL, HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND SCENIS RESOURCES - ILLEGAL DIVERSIONS OF WATER - NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO WILDERNESS VALUES, ROADLESS AREAS, WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS AND DESIGNATED WILDERNESS.

IRS Form 990 Part III, fiscal year 2025, signed under penalty of perjury.

Restoration and Education

$408K, 20% of spending

Western waterheds project successfully brings the organization’s conservation campaign to teh attention of national press and policymakers.

Read it as they filed it
RESTORATION AND EDUCATION - WESTERN WATERHEDS PROJECT SUCCESSFULLY BRINGS THE ORGANIZATION'S CONSERVATION CAMPAIGN TO TEH ATTENTION OF NATIONAL PRESS AND POLICYMAKERS. IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, MORE THAN 450 NEWS STORIES HAVE APPEARED ABOUT THE WORK OF WWP.

IRS Form 990 Part III, fiscal year 2025, signed under penalty of perjury.

Litigation

$340K, 17% of spending

Protect imperiled wildlife, public lands, and western watersheds through vigorous litigation under the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Federal land policy management act, and other statutes that protect the…

Read it as they filed it
LITIGATION - PROTECT IMPERILED WILDLIFE, PUBLIC LANDS, AND WESTERN WATERSHEDS THROUGH VIGOROUS LITIGATION UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT, CLEAN WATER ACT, FEDERAL LAND POLICY MANAGEMENT ACT, AND OTHER STATUTES THAT PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. THE ORGANIZATION HOLDS OVER 4,000 ACREAS OF SCHOOL ENDOWMENT LAND LEASEHOLDS OBTAINED THROUGH COMPETITIVE BIDDING THAT ARE BEING MANAGED FOR WILDLIFE HABITAT AND CONSERVATION PURPOSES.

IRS Form 990 Part III, fiscal year 2025, signed under penalty of perjury.

Follow the dollar

85 cents of every dollar goes to the work

85¢
85¢ the work12¢ keeping the lights on3¢ raising the next dollar

A good sign, not a scorecard: what matters is the extremes, and this is nowhere near one.

$1,698,723 programs, $243,123 management, $59,016 fundraising. Form 990, FY2025.

The people

Who does the work

18paid staff
9board members
Erik MolvarExecutive DirectorComp $104,993, FY2025

Honesty note: leadership comes from each year’s federal filing, so it can run a year behind. If it’s out of date, tell us. Work at the Western Watersheds Project? Claim this page.

The record

The court record

And 12 more in our case database: a selection we track, not their full docket.

Fights alongside Center for Biological Diversity (9 shared cases), WildEarth Guardians (5 shared cases), Sierra Club (3 shared cases), National Parks Conservation Association (2 shared cases) and Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (2 shared cases) and 16 more. Same case, same side, on the federal docket.

The filings

14 years of filings

Total revenue by fiscal year, as filed. Point at or tap the line for any year.

$1M$2M$2.1M FY2520112025
Total revenue by fiscal year
YearRevenue
2011$1,674,971
2012$449,879
2013$619,686
2014$693,185
2015$753,782
2016$718,469
2017$896,311
2018$931,878
2019$1,008,417
2020$1,338,196
2021$1,316,274
2022$1,526,916
2023$1,705,061
2025$2,073,382

From $1.7M in 2011 to $2.1M in FY25, across 14 public filings (none on record for 2024). FY25 is the highest year on file.

The record

On the record with the agencies

17 comments on federal decisions since 2023, each filed under the group’s own name on regulations.gov. The latest on decisions we track:

Year by year

The record, in order

  1. 1993Western Watersheds Project is formed.the return, formation year
  2. 2016Western Watersheds Project v. Schneider: plaintiff, still in court.the docket
  3. 20182018 to 2024: 13 cases filed, all since closed: Powder River Basin Resource Council v. Department of the Interior; Western Watersheds Project v. Debra Haaland and 11 more.
    The other 11
    2022, Dakota Resource Council v. U.S. Department of the Interior, closed; 2022, Garfield County v. Biden, closed; 2024, American Wild Horse Campaign v. Raby, closed; 2024, WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Service, closed; 2020, Western Watersheds Project v. Deb Haaland, closed; 2020, Citizens for a Healthy Community v. United States Bureau of Land Management, closed; 2019, W. Watersheds Project v. Bernhardt, closed; 2023, Friends of the Inyo v. U.S. Forest Service, closed; 2023, Colorado Conservation Alliance v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, lost; 2021, Bartell Ranch LLC v. McCullough, closed; 2018, Western Watersheds Project v. Zinke, closed.
    the docket
  4. 20238 comments, all to the Fish and Wildlife Service, under the group’s own name.regulations.gov
  5. 20244 comments, all to the Fish and Wildlife Service, under the group’s own name.regulations.gov
  6. 2025Western Watersheds Project v. United States Forest Service: plaintiff, still in court.the docket
  7. Western Watersheds Project, et al. v. United States Department of the Interior, et al.: plaintiff, still in court.the docket
  8. 4 comments, all to the Fish and Wildlife Service, under the group’s own name.regulations.gov
  9. 2026Western Watersheds Project v. Bureau of Land Management: plaintiff, still in court.the docket
  10. 1 comment to the Bureau of Land Management, under the group’s own name.regulations.gov

Rust, a case still in court. Hollow, a filing. Every row is a record we hold: 17 federal cases with the group on the docket, 17 comments filed under its own name. Nothing here is written from memory.

Their ground

The places they defend

In the fight · On this place: 1 case in federal court, filed 2026American Prairie

Filed a protest against BLM’s revocation of the bison grazing permits

Who’s defending it
On the ground · Critical threatMcDermitt Caldera

Co-plaintiff in the Thacker Pass litigation that won a 2023 ruling that BLM violated FLPMA in approving the mine’s waste dump.

Who’s defending it
On the ground · Threat developingSonoran Desert National Monument

Sued BLM over monument grazing in 2013 and again in 2021 with Advocates for the West as counsel; the August 2023 ruling halted grazing authorizations, and BLM’s December 2024 plan allows grazing only in years with above-average precipitation and forage.

Who’s defending it
On the ground · On watchAdobe Town WSA

Co-plaintiff in the federal appeal challenging BLM’s plan to cut the Adobe Town herd management area roughly in half as part of the largest wild horse removal ever attempted in the Wyoming checkerboard.

Who’s defending it
On the ground · On watchBruneau-Jarbidge Rivers

Challenging BLM’s grazing management across 1.4 million acres of the Jarbidge and Bruneau river canyonlands, where it won an injunction blocking ranchers from grazing beyond their permit limits.

Who’s defending it
On the ground · On watchCraters of the Moon National Monument

Its 2008 lawsuit produced the U.S. District Court of Idaho order requiring BLM to analyze no-grazing and reduced-grazing alternatives for the monument’s BLM lands, and it later litigated sage-grouse protections covering the Craters plan.

Who’s defending it

Most urgent first: open comment windows, then live federal cases, then the threat level. See every threatened place on one map, and who stands for each.

Where and what
Federal landsBureau of Land Management · U.S. Forest Service
Active inIdaho · Montana · Wyoming · Nevada · Utah · Oregon · Arizona · New Mexico · Colorado
Who writes the rules where they work

Across the 9 states where they work, the congressional delegations average 49 of 100 on public lands. See the full scorecard

More groups in Idaho

Ways in

How to help

Stand with the Western Watersheds Project

The mission is theirs. The backing is yours.

Sources and methodFinancials, headcounts, and program text: IRS Form 990, FY2025 and 13 prior filings via ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, EIN 94-3202140. Leadership and compensation: Form 990 Part VII and the return’s signature block, FY2025 filing. Court record: CourtListener dockets in the MTJP litigation database (5 linked cases: 4 active, 1 lost). Allies: co-litigation edges derived from the same dockets, same case and same side. Agency comments: regulations.gov comments whose submitter organization is the group’s own name, each row linked to the comment itself. Place links: MTJP editorial curation with per-link sources. Org-reported figures are always labeled. Data verified as of 2026-09-23. Nothing on this page is pay-to-play.