ELR Citation: ELR 20248
No(s). 03-35995 (9th Cir. Dec 8, 2005)

The court holds that the U.S. Forest Service's (Forest Service's) decision to permit logging in critical old growth forest and post-fire habitats in the Lolo National Forest is arbitrary and capricious. The Forest Service's decision to permit commercial logging in old growth forest stands as a form of rehabilitative treatment violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Forest Management Act. Likewise, the Forest Service's impact analysis of salvage logging in post-fire habitat, particularly with respect to the black-backed woodpecker, a sensitive species, was arbitrary and capricious. And it inadequately assessed the project's impact on soil conditions.