ELR Citation: ELR 20064
No(s). 85-2226 (D.D.C. Jan 14, 1987)

The court rules that where the Secretary of Agriculture takes actions within wilderness areas that are solely for the benefit of outside private interests, the Wilderness Act requires him to demonstrate that the action is necessary to effectively control threatened outside harm. The court first holds that the Secretary's initiation of a program to control infestations of the southern pine beetle within designated wilderness areas in three states is not a "management decision" within the Secretary's broad discretion under §4(d)(1) of the Act. The sole purpose of the infestation control program is to protect commercial timber interests and private property outside the infested wilderness areas, as opposed to furthering wilderness interests or national wilderness policy. The court rules that where the Secretary is acting solely for the benefit of outside private interests and contrary to wilderness policy, §4(d)(1) requires him to demonstrate that the action is necessary to effectively control the threatened harm. The court holds that the Secretary's actions are contrary to wilderness policy, since the destruction of trees, chemical spraying, and the continued presence of noise and humans are not consistent with concepts of wilderness preservation. The court holds that the Secretary has not demonstrated that the program is necessary to control the southern pine beetle in neighboring forests or that it has been effective. There is little evidence concerning either the tendency of the beetle to migrate out of the wilderness areas or the weighing of alternatives. Moreover, the Secretary's approach has been extremely general even though the infestation problem in different regions affected may require different solutions. As a result of these unanswered questions, the court declines to issue a final judgment pending the issuance of the environmental impact statement currently being prepared.

[A previous decision in this litigation is published at 15 ELR 20775. A related decision is published at 16 ELR 20049.]

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Douglas L. Honnold
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Inc.
727 Walnut, Boulder CO 80302
(303) 449-5591

Counsel for Defendant
Charles W. Brooks
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 633-2000