Sierra Club, Inc. v. Austin

Good Law
82 F. App'x 570
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 2, 2003Nos. 03-35419, 03-35537, 03-35550; D.C. No. CV-03-00022-DWMCalifornia2,134 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requires the Forest Service to take a “hard look” at the environmental impact of a proposed major federal action. See 42 U.S.C. § 4332 . The Forest Service’s assessment of the Lolo Post Burn Project’s effect on water quality satisfied NEPA’s requirements and was not arbitrary and capricious. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) included extensive discussion of the project’s effects on water quality. The Forest Service analyzed the environmental impact of sedimentation estimates for each of the proposed alternatives, including the no-action alternative, in comparative form by using the water quality model LOLOSED. See 40 C.F.R. § 1502.14 (requiring the EIS to present the environmental impacts of proposed alternatives in comparative form). The Forest Service’s analysis clearly indicates that the project’s overall impact on water quality will be positive. Compared to the no-action alternative, the project will significantly reduce sedimentation in the affected streams after the first few years.

The Sierra Club’s argument that the Forest Service was required to determine how much sediment the streams could assimilate…

Dissenting Opinion

Kozinski, J.

dissenting in part.

After the 2000 wildfires tore through the Lolo National Forest, burning 74,000 acres, the Forest Service was confronted with the daunting task of devising a response to this devastating natural disaster. The agency selected a project that would deal with the disaster on two fronts: restoration and recovery of watersheds and restoration and recovery of land. The project would include, among other things, planting 12,000 acres in areas where natural regrowth is absent due to the severity of the fires; commercially thinning 10,000 acres of unburned timber and timber burned by low-intensity fires; salvaging 5,000 acres of fire-damaged, dead and dying timber; salvaging 100 acres of insect-killed timber; constructing three miles of temporary roads to access the treatment areas; and closing 140 miles of unneeded roads. Lolo Nat’l Forest Post Burn Final Envtl. Impact Statement S-2. The need to undertake such measures promptly should be particularly obvious to those of us who live in Southern California.

As commanded by NEPA, 42 U.S.C. § 4332 , the agency prepared a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement rife with detailed analysis of the project’s impact on the…

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.