ELR Citation: ELR 20197
No(s). s. C05-03508, -04038 (N.D. Cal. Sep 20, 2006)

A district court holds that the U.S. Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when it repealed the nationally uniform "roadless area conservation rule" and replaced it with a less protective "state petitions rule." The roadless rule prohibits road construction and reconstruction and timber harvesting, subject to certain limited exceptions, in inventoried roadless areas on a uniform nationwide basis. The state petitions rule eliminates the uniform national protections of roadless areas, reverting to the prior regime of forest-by-forest plans, and adds an optional state-by-state petitioning process to alter the level of protection of roadless areas within individual state borders. In adopting the state petitions rule, the Forest Service failed to conduct any environmental analysis under NEPA. Because the rule does not fit within the categorical exclusion for routine administrative procedures, and because the "no action" alternative included in the 2000 final environmental impact statement for the roadless rule does not satisfy the Forest Service's environmental review obligations under NEPA for the state petitions rule, the Forest Service violated NEPA. Similarly, the Forest Service violated the ESA's consultation requirements because its determination that the repeal of the roadless rule will have no impact on threatened or endangered species was arbitrary and capricious. The court, therefore, reinstates the 2001 roadless rule and enjoins any management activities contrary to that rule. However, the Tongass National Forest will remain exempt from the roadless rule in light of a prior settlement.