The Buffalo River Watershed Alliance (“BRWA”) filed a February 21st Complaint for Vacatur of Illegal Agency Decision, Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (“Complaint”) against the United States Forest Service (“Forest Service”)...more
The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”), in a February 22nd appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho (“District Court”) addressed an issue arising out of United States...more
An agency must prepare an environmental impact statement when it fails to address expert scientific evidence that undermines its conclusions about a project’s environmental effects. An agency also must prepare an EIS when...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Court”) addressed in a June 4th Order whether the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”) and the United States Forest Service (“USFS”) approval of the...more
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (“9th Circuit”) addressed issues associated with two United States Forest Service (“Forest Service”) fire salvage and restoration projects. See Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Mary...more
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the U.S. Forest Service could validly rely on proxy approaches in determining whether a forest restoration project would adversely impact pine marten and fisher populations in the...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (“Court”) addressed in an October 23rd opinion Plaintiffs-Appellants Central Oregon LandWatch and WaterWatch of Oregon (collectively “Plaintiffs”) challenge to the United...more
On September 20, 2012, the Ninth Circuit rejected a challenge mounted under both NFMA and NEPA to the validity of the Angora Fire Restoration Project. See Earth Island Institute v. U.S. Forest Service, No. 11-16718, slip op....more