Litigation Weekly November 17

Litigation Weekly Nov 17 Wildlands Defense v Seesholtz Temporary restraining order denied for the North and South Pioneer projects on the Boise N. F. approved under an emergency situation determination, and involving bull trout, Canada lynx and forest plan soil condition standards.  (D. Idaho)  (previous summary 10/6 here) WWA v USFS  (update) The lawsuit involves publication of …

Continue reading ‘Litigation Weekly November 17’ »

Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes III: Bringing Knitting to a Knife Fight?

Long time readers are familiar with this post from 2011 which links to an interview with Kieran Suckling of the Center for Biological Diversity. I have appreciated his directness and honesty about what the Center’s lawsuits are really about. The interview was by Ray Ring of the High Country News, and Gina is a friend …

Continue reading ‘Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes III: Bringing Knitting to a Knife Fight?’ »

Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes II: Should Secretary of Agriculture Adopt EPA Transparency Guidelines?

It turns out that other folks have noticed the problem of lack of transparency in government settlements, and also the idea that other people should have time to weigh in to these settlements. These include more powerful entities (compared to FS employees and retirees) like States, specifically in dealing with EPA settlements and the problem …

Continue reading ‘Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes II: Should Secretary of Agriculture Adopt EPA Transparency Guidelines?’ »

Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes: I. Settlements, Policy and Public Comment

In this series of posts, I’m going to talk about what it was like for me to be a Forest Service employee involved in litigation, and how that experience leads me to this claim: that for many, if not most, projects and land management decisions, making decisions via the court system is suboptimal. I’m not …

Continue reading ‘Forest Service Litigation-Behind the Scenes: I. Settlements, Policy and Public Comment’ »

Litigation Weekly Nov. 9

(No new court decisions) Litigation Weekly Nov 9 20171030_LPFW_60DayNotice (1) The Los Padres Forest Watch claims that the Los Padres NF has failed to manage target shooting as required by the forest plan, and failed to reinitiate consultation on the plan (for effects on California condors) and therefore is violating ESA.

Litigation Weekly Nov. 3

Litigation Weekly Nov 3 WestWatershedProj v USFS Annual operating instructions for four grazing allotments on the Salmon-Challis NF complied with the INFISH aquatic strategy in the forest plan.  (D. Idaho) New case WestWatershedsProj NOI Williams Creek The NOI questions compliance by the Sawtooth NF with conditions from previous ESA consultation on livestock grazing in the …

Continue reading ‘Litigation Weekly Nov. 3’ »

Light and Heat and BBER (II): What Do the Numbers Say?

Claim 3. Not just BBER, but other studies have shown that R-1 has an unusually high level of litigation on vegetation management projects. This seems to be due to the activities of a relatively small number of groups. Of the 133 R1 cases in past 11 years, the majority (75) were by repeat litigants, with …

Continue reading ‘Light and Heat and BBER (II): What Do the Numbers Say?’ »

On the BBER Study and R-1 Forest Service Litigation (I): Turning Down the Heat, Turning Up the Light

The University of Montana Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) looked at some Region 1 projects, chose a case study, and tried to quantify the impacts to communities and to the Forest Service in this 2015 study. We have discussed it on the blog before, but it’s of current interest because the findings have …

Continue reading ‘On the BBER Study and R-1 Forest Service Litigation (I): Turning Down the Heat, Turning Up the Light’ »

Litigation weekly Oct. 27

(nothing received for Oct. 20) Litigation Weekly Oct 27 TenLakesSnow v USFS The district court upheld the Kootenai and Idaho Panhandle NF 2015 revised forest plans with regard to management of recommended wilderness areas, but the Kootenai planning process failed to provide for adequate public comments on recommendations to designate two river segments (D. Mont.) Also …

Continue reading ‘Litigation weekly Oct. 27’ »

Case on forest plan wilderness recommendations

Ten Lakes Snowmobile Club v. U. S. Forest Service (Mentioned by Brian Hawthorne here, with links to an article and the opinion.) This case was about the decision in the 2015 revised Kootenai and Idaho Panhandle National Forest plans to recommend (to Congress) areas for wilderness and to manage them to protect their wilderness values.  The …

Continue reading ‘Case on forest plan wilderness recommendations’ »