Seattle Audubon Soc. v. Moseley, Nos. 95-35052
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 80 F.3d 1401 |
| Parties | , 26 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,980, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2449, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4131 SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY; Washington Environmental Council; Washington Native Plants Society; Save the West; The Sierra Club, a non-profit corporation, Plaintiffs, and Native Forest Council, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James R. MOSELEY, in his official capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture; James Lyons, in his official capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment; United States Forest Service, an agency of the United States; Bureau of Land Management, an agency of the United States; Michael Espy, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture; Bruce Babbitt, in his capacity as Secretary of the Interior, Defendants-Appellees, and Washington Contract Loggers Assoc.; Burgess Logging Co.; Lone Rock Timber Company, Inc.; Jackie Bryan Cox; Freres Lumber Company, Inc.; Norman V. Persons; A. Troy Reinhart; Gregory A. Miller; Northwest Forest Resource Council, Defendants-Intervenors. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY; Washington Environmental Council; The Sierra Club, a non-profit corporation; Native Forest Council, Plaintiffs, and Save The West; Forest Conservation Council, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. James R. MOSELEY, in his official capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture; James Lyons, in his official capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment; United States Forest Service, an agency of the United States; Bureau Of Land Management, Medford District, an agency of the United States; Michael Espy, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture; Bruce Babbitt, in his capacity as Secretary of the Interior, Defendants-Appellees, and Washington Contract Loggers Assoc.; Burgess Logging Co.; Lone Rock Timber Company, Inc.; Jackie Bryan Cox; Freres Lumber Company, Inc.; Norman V. Persons; A. Troy Reinhart; Gregory A. Miller; Northwest Forest Resource Council, Defendants-Intervenors. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY; Washington En |
| Docket Number | 95-35214 and 95-35215,Nos. 95-35052 |
| Decision Date | 10 April 1996 |
Page 1401
96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2449,
96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4131
Washington Native Plants Society; Save the West;
The Sierra Club, a non-profit
corporation, Plaintiffs,
and
Native Forest Council, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
James R. MOSELEY, in his official capacity as Asst.
Secretary of Agriculture; James Lyons, in his official
capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture for Natural
Resources and Environment; United States Forest Service, an
agency of the United States; Bureau of Land Management, an
agency of the United States; Michael Espy, in his official
capacity as Secretary of Agriculture; Bruce Babbitt, in his
capacity as Secretary of the Interior, Defendants-Appellees,
and
Washington Contract Loggers Assoc.; Burgess Logging Co.;
Lone Rock Timber Company, Inc.; Jackie Bryan Cox; Freres
Lumber Company, Inc.; Norman V. Persons; A. Troy Reinhart;
Gregory A. Miller; Northwest Forest Resource Council,
Defendants-Intervenors.
SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY; Washington Environmental Council;
The Sierra Club, a non-profit corporation; Native
Forest Council, Plaintiffs,
and
Save The West; Forest Conservation Council, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
James R. MOSELEY, in his official capacity as Asst.
Secretary of Agriculture; James Lyons, in his official
capacity as Asst. Secretary of Agriculture for Natural
Resources and Environment; United States Forest Service, an
agency of the United States; Bureau Of Land Management,
Medford District, an agency of the United States; Michael
Espy, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture;
Bruce Babbitt, in his capacity as Secretary of the Interior,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
Washington Contract Loggers Assoc.; Burgess Logging Co.;
Lone Rock Timber Company, Inc.; Jackie Bryan Cox; Freres
Lumber Company, Inc.; Norman V. Persons; A. Troy Reinhart;
Gregory A. Miller; Northwest Forest Resource Council,
Defendants-Intervenors.
SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY; Washington Environmental Council;
Save The West; The Sierra Club, a non-profit
corporation; Native Forest Council,
Forest Conservation Council,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
James R. MOSELEY, in his official capacity as Asst.
Secretary of Agriculture; Bruce Babbitt, in his capacity as
Secretary of the Interior; United States Forest Service, an
agency of the United States; Bureau of Land Management,
Medford District, an agency of the United States; Michael
Espy, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture, Defendants,
Washington Contract Loggers Assoc.; Burgess Logging Co.;
Lone Rock Timber Company, Inc.; Jackie Bryan Cox; Freres
Lumber Company, Inc.; Norman V. Persons; A. Troy Reinhart;
Gregory A. Miller; Defendants-Intervenors,
and
James Lyons, in his official capacity as Asst. Secretary of
Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment,
Defendant-Appellee,
Northwest Forest Resource Council, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellant.
Ninth Circuit.
Decided April 10, 1996.
Page 1403
Stephen M. Truitt, Washington, D.C., and John S. Karpinski, Vancouver, Washington, for plaintiff-appellant-cross-appellee Native Forest Council.
Peggy Hennessy, Reeves, Kahn & Eder, Portland, Oregon, for plaintiffs-appellants-cross-appellees Forest Conservation Council and Save the West.
Mark C. Rutzick, Mark C. Rutzick Law Firm, Portland, Oregon, for defendants-intervenors-appellants Northwest Forest Resource Council.
David C. Shilton, Environmental and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendants-appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; William L. Dwyer, District Judge, Presiding. No. CV-92-479-WLD.
Before: GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
All three of these appeals arise from challenges to the April 13, 1994 decision by the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to approve a plan to manage federal land with spotted owl habitat in the Pacific Northwest.
I.
In appeals nos. 95-35052 and 95-35214, Native Forest Council, Forest Conservation Council and Save the West ("the environmental plaintiffs") appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment upholding the United States Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management's ("the federal defendants") Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within Range of the Northern Spotted Owl ("ROD"), adopted April 13, 1994. The district court's opinion is published at Seattle Audubon Society v. Lyons, 871 F.Supp. 1291 (W.D.Wash.1994) ("SAS"). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.
The lengthy procedural history underlying these appeals is discussed at length in, inter alia, Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Evans, 952 F.2d 297 (9th Cir.1991) and Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Espy, 998 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.1993). District Judge Dwyer discusses fully the history and procedure underlying the appeals at issue here in his opinions. We need not repeat them in detail here, but will summarize briefly.
After our earlier opinions in cases in which environmental groups had sought to preserve
Page 1404
the habitat of the northern spotted owl, President Clinton in April 1993 established the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team ("FEMAT") to examine options and make recommendations to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior in aid of their joint development of a forest management plan to cover federal lands in...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc. v. Trout Unlimited, No. CV02-365-C-EJL.
...litigation." Biodiversity Legal Foundation v. Badgley, 309 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.2002) (citing Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996) (per The Declaratory Judgment Act, however, does not provide an independent basis for of federal subject matter jurisdiction......
-
Oceana v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Mgmt., Civil Action No.: 12-0981 (RC)
...v. Andrus, 486 F. Supp. 326, 330 (D.D.C. 1979); see also Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Lyons, 871 F. Supp. 1291, 1318 (W.D. Wash. 1994), aff'd, 80 F.3d 1401 (9th Cir. 1996) ("It is not required . . . that action be deferred until all studies have been done that might be done."). The administrati......
-
Curry v. U.S. Forest Service, No. Civ.A. 97-1081.
...Inland Empire Public Lands Council v. United States Forest Service, 88 F.3d 754, 759-63 (9th Cir.1996); Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir.1996). (footnote omitted). Congress intended that the Forest Service follow the NFMA's regulatory process, rather than the MB......
-
Sierra Club v. Glickman, No. 9:85-CV-69.
...(a)(2), (a)(6); see also Swanson v. United States Forest Service, 87 F.3d 339, 344 (9th Cir.1996); Seattle Audubon Soc. v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir.1996); Sierra Club v. United States Forest Service, 878 F.Supp. 1295, 1317 (D.S.D. 1993), aff'd, 46 F.3d 835 (8th Cir.1995); Krichb......
-
Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc. v. Trout Unlimited, No. CV02-365-C-EJL.
...litigation." Biodiversity Legal Foundation v. Badgley, 309 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.2002) (citing Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996) (per The Declaratory Judgment Act, however, does not provide an independent basis for of federal subject matter jurisdiction......
-
Oceana v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Mgmt., Civil Action No.: 12-0981 (RC)
...v. Andrus, 486 F. Supp. 326, 330 (D.D.C. 1979); see also Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Lyons, 871 F. Supp. 1291, 1318 (W.D. Wash. 1994), aff'd, 80 F.3d 1401 (9th Cir. 1996) ("It is not required . . . that action be deferred until all studies have been done that might be done."). The administrati......
-
Curry v. U.S. Forest Service, No. Civ.A. 97-1081.
...Inland Empire Public Lands Council v. United States Forest Service, 88 F.3d 754, 759-63 (9th Cir.1996); Seattle Audubon Soc'y v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir.1996). (footnote omitted). Congress intended that the Forest Service follow the NFMA's regulatory process, rather than the MB......
-
Sierra Club v. Glickman, No. 9:85-CV-69.
...(a)(2), (a)(6); see also Swanson v. United States Forest Service, 87 F.3d 339, 344 (9th Cir.1996); Seattle Audubon Soc. v. Moseley, 80 F.3d 1401, 1404 (9th Cir.1996); Sierra Club v. United States Forest Service, 878 F.Supp. 1295, 1317 (D.S.D. 1993), aff'd, 46 F.3d 835 (8th Cir.1995); Krichb......