Multiple Oregon wildlife organizations and nonprofits filed federal lawsuits against the United States Forest Service on Aug. 18 for post-wildfire logging in the Willamette National Forest.
The plaintiffs include the nonprofits Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild and Willamette Riverkeeper, as well as Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, an organization of former and current Forest Service employees.
David Warnack, the Willamette National Forest supervisor and defendant in the case, announced that the USFS was considering felling dead and injured trees along around 400 miles of open roads and nearly 140 miles of closed roads in the Willamette National Forest on March 8.
The announcement said the trees pose a danger to the public and wildlife employees, and the project would provide improved safety along the roads within areas burned by the 2020 Holiday Farm, Beachie Creek and Lionshead Fires.
The USFS will implement the project through a series of timber sale contracts, according to the defendants’ combined opposition. Logging activities associated with one of those sales were set to begin on Oct. 22 and 25, according to a Cascadia Wildlands notice sent to the Eugene Division of the Oregon District Court on Oct. 15.
“We knew 2020 was going to be a big fire year,” Nick Cady, legal director for Cascadia Wildlands, said. “We knew there were going to be big post-fire logging proposals.”
Cady said Cascadia Wildlands met with the USFS last winter to discourage it from conducting large salvage logging projects. The USFS assured Cascadia Wildlands that the projects would be limited, Cady said. Then, USFS announced the Willamette Project.
Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild and Willamette Riverkeeper, collectively known as “Cascadia,” submitted a complaint to the court on Aug. 18. The forestry service employees coalition submitted a complaint the same day.
Both lawsuits argue that USFS should have prepared an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment, as required under the National Environmental Policy Act. According to court documents, USFS approved the Willamette Project as a categorical exclusion under road maintenance, which does not require an EIS or EA.
FSEEE argues that logging is not roadside maintenance, and the logging project will have an effect on the ecosystems and species of the Willamette National Forest, such as the threatened northern spotted owl. “The claim that we’re making is that they never did their homework,” FSEEE executive director Andy Stahl said.
Cascadia similarly argues in their complaint that post-fire habitats are inherently fragile, and post-fire logging activities are generally not consistent with efforts to restore ecosystem function. Cascadia estimates that the project will log approximately 20,000 acres of trees, Cady said.
“The scale and scope of it is super intense,” Cady said. “There’s no question, if they did a 20,000 acre logging project, that it would be completely significant. They’d have to do a full environmental impact statement. It would be the largest logging project the state has had in the past 20 years on federal land.”
The defendants’ combined opposition said that the removal of hazardous trees is classified under roadside maintenance as a categorical exclusion in the environmental policy act. It cited a 2003 Federal Register document on categorical exclusions.
“Safety hazard trees associated with roads, trails, recreation facilities and administrative sites may be removed as part of routine maintenance of those facilities,” the document said. “Most agencies already categorically exclude these maintenance activities from further analysis and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.”
The defendants’ combined opposition claimed that the project design features will minimize or avoid adverse impacts to the environment. It also said the USFS examined the potential effects of the project to the northern spotted owl and its habitat and found no extraordinary circumstances warranted further review in an environmental assessment.
FSEEE argues that the USFS has overestimated the threat of dead and injured trees to public safety. Most trees that fall are alive because their branches and leaves act like sails on a ship, Stahl said.
FSEEE’s complaint said falling trees make up less than 1% of fatalities that the visiting public suffer on federal lands. Most of the roads along the logging zones are high-clearance and not meant for regular, passenger vehicles, the complaint said.
“Trees are way, way down there as a public safety hazard — about the same risk of being eaten by a bear,” Stahl said. “Now, we don’t kill bears in the National Forest.”
The defendants’ combined opposition said that the project must continue without any limitation or delay because the current state of the forest poses serious safety concerns.
Cady said Cascadia Wildlands has filed two other lawsuits against the USFS — one for a similar logging project in the Umpqua National Forest and the other for changing restoration thinning projects in the Willamette National Forest to post-fire clearcutting and salvage logging projects without informing the public, the lawsuit alleges.
Oral arguments for Cascadia’s and FSEEE’s lawsuits are set for Wednesday.
