Ninth Circuit Finds Mendocino NF Use of NEPA End-Around Illegal, Says EPIC

Judges GavelPress release from EPIC. (Please remember that this is not neutral reporting but a press release from an interested party):

In a major victory, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has sided with the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) in a case impacting fragile post-fire forest in the Mendocino National Forest. The court found that the Forest Service’s use of a “categorical exclusion” to avoid an environmental impact assessment for a timber sale following the 2018 Ranch Fire was likely a violation of the law and that EPIC should have been awarded an injunction by the lower court to stop logging. The Ninth Circuit’s decision is available here.

“The Mendocino National Forest attempted to skirt the National Environmental Policy Act to fast track logging after the 2018 Ranch Fire, despite the many important and significant potential impacts to the environment,” said Tom Wheeler, Executive Director of EPIC. “Today’s ruling is an affirmation of NEPA’s central purpose: a careful study of the potential environmental impacts and the inclusion of the public in management decisions of public land.”

In 2018, the Ranch Fire burned a significant portion of the Mendocino National Forest. In response, the Mendocino National Forest authorized a series of commercial timber sales near roads within the forest. To avoid environmental review required by NEPA, the Mendocino National Forest attempted to shove these timber sales under a “categorical exclusion” to the ordinary requirements to prepare a document. Although a categorical exclusion for post-fire timber operations existed, the Forest Service did not employ this exclusion because they would be limited in the total acreage they could log. Instead, the Forest Service employed a different, ill-fitting categorical exclusion that allowed for “[r]epair and maintenance of road” including “[p]runing vegetation” to authorize these timber sales.

EPIC challenged this project and sought an injunction to ongoing timber operations. The Northern District of California denied EPIC’s injunction and EPIC appealed (with an oral argument by Zoom and livestreamed to Youtube) to the Ninth Circuit. Ultimately, the Ninth Circuit sided with EPIC, with a 2-1 decision finding that EPIC should have been awarded its injunction. The Court ultimately found that “Under no reasonable interpretation of its language does the Project come within the [categorical exclusion] for ‘repair and maintenance’ of roads.”

This ruling has big implications for our National Forests moving forward. Under the Trump Administration, EPIC has seen a widespread abuse of this categorical exclusion to fast track logging projects without environmental review or public participation.

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Willie Bray
Guest
3 years ago

🕯🌳And people wonder why there’s tree huggers. 🌳🌳🌍

Mike
Guest
Mike
3 years ago

The trees were dead. They’re a perishable commodity, if they don’t get them out within the season they’re garbage, especially the pine. it’s a shame that overregulation vastly overshadows common sense.

b.
Guest
b.
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike

Not necessarily were all of the trees dead. I don’t know either way in this particular case. However, in order to sweeten the contracts (minimally) damaged trees are often included and taken when not included. The pre-fire NEPA exclusion process for the Mendocino NF unfortunately has been proceeding slowly. EPIC has been participating along with many community members and Forest Service Employees in a long term planning process to get this worked out both environmentally and for other management needs. Unfortunately for all concerned that process didn’t get as far as would have been ideal before the Ranch Fire. Unfortunately also, fires have been misused in the past as excuses and people are reasonably skeptical and very cautious about work-arounds.
My mechanic had a sign for years: Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.

Erik
Guest
Erik
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike

And guess who’s liable when the hazard trees start coming down on the road. Not epic. But that’s great, with the money they can feather their nest for the real battles, like going after mega-industrial venture capital funded grows that are majorly destructive to the watersheds and neighborhoods they are situated in, but somehow managed to get permitted anyway. I’m waiting.

Trashman
Guest
Trashman
3 years ago

EPIC? I’m sure they have no political axe to grind.