NFS Litigation Weekly August 24, 2018

Litigation Weekly Aug 24

The Ninth Circuit found that claims against hunting derbies on the Salmon-Challis National Forest in Idaho were moot with regard to past derbies and not yet ripe with respect to future derbies.  (9th Cir.)  (This case was previously discussed here.)

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court and held that the Forest Service violated NFMA for the Lost Creek Project on the Payette National Forest in Idaho by utilizing desired conditions and standards that were inconsistent with the forest plan.  (9th Cir.)  (This holding was discussed in detail here.)

(New case.)  Plaintiffs allege violations of NFMA and ESA for failing to close most of the Los Padres National Forest in California to target shooting as required by the forest plan to protect threatened and endangered species, including the California condor.  (C.D. Cal.)  (This case was discussed when the Notice of Intent to Sue was filed here.)

6 thoughts on “NFS Litigation Weekly August 24, 2018”

  1. Magistrate recommends rejection of plan for Ochoco trails

    A controversial proposal to establish a network of trails for off-highway motorized vehicles in the Ochoco National Forest is in jeopardy, after a federal judge in Pendleton recommended that the project be rejected.

    Earlier this week, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan rejected the U.S. Forest Service’s proposal in a preliminary ruling. In her decision, Sullivan noted that the Ochoco Summit Trail System Project, which would provide a 137-mile network of trails that could be used by ATVs and other motorized vehicles, did not properly account for the needs of vulnerable species, including elk and gray wolves.

    “Here, the Forest Service committed multiple substantive errors, as to multiple statutes, regulations, and rules,” the decision reads.

      • Parts of the Ochoco National Forest appear to be about 40 miles from areas of known (and current) wolf activity in Oregon. Also, isn’t the Ochoco National Forest fully within the part of Oregon where gray wolves are still a federally protected species under the Endangered Species Act?

        • For whatever it’s worth any “multiple use” is most certainly NOT excluded in all “Potential lynx Habitat.” Heck, it’s not even excluded in all “critical lynx habitat.” So whatever….

  2. Here is where wolves are listed as endangered in Oregon: “that portion of OR west of the centerline of Highway 395 and Highway 78 north of Burns Junction and that portion of OR west of the centerline of Highway 95 south of Burns Junction.” It’s listed in 3 of the 4 counties covered by the Ochoco, so in those counties they would be considered “present” and trigger ESA requirements.

    “Potential lynx habitat” is a Forest Service designation of where the lynx management direction applies (and it is further limited to national forests considered “occupied”).


Leave a Comment

Discover more from The Smokey Wire : National Forest News and Views

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading