North Dakota is appealing a judge's ruling in a dispute with a private wildlife preserve developer, saying the decision could open loopholes in a state law restricting corporate ownership of farmland.

Southeast District Judge James Bekken's June ruling concluded Crosslands Inc. could keep 848 of 1,749 acres the nonprofit owns in three North Dakota counties. Charles Carvell, an assistant attorney general, argues that Crosslands is entitled to keep only 320 acres.

North Dakota law generally bars corporations from owning agricultural land, unless the property is controlled by a farm family.

Nonprofit corporations may buy farmland for conservation and wildlife habitat if the deal is approved by the governor. Crosslands did not obtain that approval, court records say.

Carvell said Friday that the appeal challenges Bekken's conclusions that highly erodible farmland and property considered necessary for wetlands management are not subject to the law's restrictions. The North Dakota Supreme Court will consider the case later.

Crosslands was founded by James Cook, a Minneapolis dealer in gold, silver and other precious metals. Cook said Friday the state's appeal was disappointing.

"We had a partial victory there, and they don't even want us to have that," he said Friday. "Our motivation is to try to secure some areas for wildlife, and restore wetlands. It's a real kick in the teeth when you're trying to do something good, and you get such enormous rejection."

Crosslands has acquired property in Ward, Griggs and Cavalier counties over 25 years.

Bekken decided Crosslands could keep its 320 acres in Ward County because the land was donated to the nonprofit, not purchased. The state is not appealing that conclusion, Carvell said.

The judge ruled that Crosslands must sell its 480 acres in Cavalier County and 421 of its 949 acres in Griggs County by Feb. 1. Cook said Friday that none of the land has been sold.

Bekken decided the nonprofit could keep wetlands, farmland vulnerable to erosion and property that offers nesting cover for ducks and other wildlife.

The state's appeal argues Crosslands should be required to sell all its property in Griggs County.

"Crosslands didn't just buy a wetland," Carvell said. "It bought a large tract that had wetlands on it."