Environmental groups have failed to
convince a federal judge to block two logging and fuels
reduction projects on 8,000 acres of public forestland in
Southern Oregon.
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken has
refused to issue a preliminary injunction against the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management’s Bear Grub and Round Oak projects
because the environmental lawsuit against them probably
won’t succeed.
The Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center,
Oregon Wild and Cascadia Wildlands nonprofits are unlikely
to prevail on their claims that federal wildlife biologists
improperly considered the effects of BLM’s forest treatments
on threatened spotted owls, the judge said.
While the ruling doesn’t end the
lawsuit, Aiken determined the environmental plaintiffs
“failed to show serious questions” regarding their
allegations that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
analysis violated the Endangered Species Act.
“And on this preliminary review, FWS
appears to have considered the relevant factors and
articulated a rational connection between the facts found
and the decisions it made,” as required by federal law, the
ruling said.
In consulting with BLM on the
projects, federal wildlife biologists found that the forest
treatments would probably downgrade habitat in 37 of the
spotted owl’s home ranges within the project areas, Aiken
said.
However, the projects will require
that logging units be dropped from timber sales if they’re
occupied by spotted owls and will include other design
criteria to avoid disturbing the species, Aiken said.
The federal government is unlikely to
jeopardize the owl’s continued existence or otherwise “take”
the threatened species because the vast majority of its
nesting, roosting and foraging habitat won’t be negatively
affected by the forest projects, she said.
“Instead, it found that the majority
of (the habitat) in the action area — 96% in Bear Grub and
83% in Round Oak — would remain untreated and available to
support current and future spotted owl populations,” the
ruling said.
The judge said she cannot substitute
her judgment for that of federal biologists but will allow
the environmental plaintiffs to proceed with the lawsuit
because they have standing to pursue the allegations in
federal court.
The environmental plaintiffs filed the
lawsuit last year, claiming the projects will further
distress vulnerable spotted owl populations. They also
alleged the federal government relied on uncertain or
unenforceable conservation measures in approving the
treatments.
Boise Cascade Wood Products and the
Timber Products Co. have intervened in the lawsuit to defend
the projects, which would generate 38 million board-feet of
timber for their veneer and plywood mills, according to a
court document.
A logging truck typically hauls about
4,000-5,000 board-feet of timber.
“Thus, proposed intervenors have a direct and substantial
interest in being able to harvest the timber offered through
these projects, and a direct and substantial interest in
ensuring sufficient timber supply from the BLM generally,”
they said.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material
herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and
educational purposes only. For more
information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml