Okanogan Highlands Alliance v. Williams

Bad Law
2001 Daily Journal DAR 31·236 F.3d 468·2000 WL 1879978·31 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20309·2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 33900
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 29, 2000Nos. 99-35537, 99-35538California5,271 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Graber, J.

Plaintiffs Okanogan Highlands Alliance (OHA) and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville) challenge the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) prepared by the United States Forest Service (Forest Service). 1 Plaintiffs make three arguments: (1) The district court and the Regional Forester considered documents that were not part of the administrative record, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-706 ; (2) the EIS contains an inadequate discussion of necessary mitigation measures, in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 -4370d, and the APA; and (3) the Forest Service failed to select the most environmentally preferable, but still profitable, project alternative that it considered, in violation of 16 U.S.C. §§ 478 and 551 (the Organic Act). Colville also contends that the Forest Service violated the trust obligations that federal agencies owe to Native American tribes. We affirm the district court’s ruling that the Forest Service did not violate NEPA, the APA, the Organic Act, or its trust obligations.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL…

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.