Cascadia Wildlands v. Bureau of Indian Affairs

Good Law
801 F.3d 1105·2015 WL 5306321·81 ERC (BNA) 1121·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16199
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 11, 201514-35553California4,354 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fisher, J.

Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild and Umpqua Watersheds (collectively, Casca-dia) challenge the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA) approval of the Middle Forks Kokwel timber sale (the Kokwel Project), a plan by the Coquille Indian Tribe (the Tribe) to harvest 268 acres of timber in the Coquille Forest in southwest Oregon. Cascadia argues the BIA violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., because it did not adequately consider the cumulative envi ronmental impact of the Kokwel Project in light of a previously approved harvest, the Alder/Rasler Project, on adjacent and overlapping land. Cascadia also argues the Kokwel Project violates the Coquille Restoration Act (CRA), 25 U.S.C. § 715 et seq., because the project is inconsistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) Recovery Plan for the northern spotted owl.

The district court granted summary judgment to the BIA and the Tribe on both claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. First, the BIA and the Tribe did not violate NEPA by aggregating the Alder/Rasler Project; which had been approved, but not yet completed, as part of the environmental baseline…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.