Blm

MEMORANDUM

In this action, local landowners challenge BLM’s “Tioga Bridge Project” on the North Umpqua River in southwestern Oregon, alleging violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4881 et seq.; the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WSRA), 16 U.S.C. § 1271 et seq.; and the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. Plaintiffs Rob and Jana Bowler appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the government. We review agency decisions under the arbitrary and capricious standard of the APA. 5 U.S.C. § 706 (2)(A).

With respect to Plaintiffs’ NEPA claims, we are not persuaded that BLM’s decision not to issue an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Tioga Bridge Project (“Project”) was arbitrary and capricious, nor do we find the review in the Environmental Assessment (EA) to be inadequate. Under the deferential review given to agency decisions, we affirm.

The Administrative Record — particularly the EA — shows that BLM took the requisite “hard look” and adequately disclosed and analyzed the environmental impacts of the Project. The EA discloses the scope of the Project, identifies existing uses in the…