Sierra logging projects won’t be halted while lawsuit is decided about endangered animal
A request to temporarily halt many logging projects in Sierra, Sequoia and Stanislaus national forests while a lawsuit against the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is being decided was denied by a federal judge in Fresno.
In addition to rejecting that motion for a preliminary injunction, U.S. District Court Judge Dale Drozd on Friday also denied a request from the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service to strike allegations against them.
The complaint, filed March 26 by conservation groups Unite the Parks, Sequoia Forestkeeper and Earth Island, alleges those federal agencies failed to adequately study and protect the federally-endangered Southern Sierra Nevada distinct population of Pacific fisher, a tree-dwelling mammal in the weasel family.
“In a nutshell, the logging can continue unabated due to his ruling,” Unite the Parks Director Deanna Wulff said Wednesday about Drozd’s decision to deny the motion for a preliminary injunction, “which means we’re going to lose those old growth trees, needed by the female fisher and the forest for fire resilience.”
Critics of the lawsuit include loggers and Fresno County Supervisor Nathan Magsig, who started a letter-writing campaign a few days before Drozd’s decision.
“The USFS can continue to add fuel breaks, vegetation management, and various other projects to protect our forest,” Magsig wrote on his Facebook page Tuesday in sharing a video of a conversation he had with Wulff about the lawsuit.
Spokespeople for the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service said in April that they are unable to comment about pending litigation. Requests for comment on Wednesday were not returned.
Wulff said she is now consulting with attorneys about possible next steps.
“We are puzzling through the fastest, most immediate action,” Wulff said. “But as far as I understand it, that leaves the forest unprotected for most of the rest of the logging and fire season.”
A new court date was not shared. An attorney for the plaintiffs said in April that it can sometimes take the court a year or two to reach a final decision in cases like this.
The lawsuit: Protecting endangered species vs. logging
The lawsuit alleges the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service failed to “adequately evaluate, protect, and conserve” the endangered fisher as required by the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. The complaint aims to protect large trees in old-growth forests and states that will also keep adjacent communities safer from wildfires.
“We are asking that the judge halt 45 logging projects in Pacific fisher habitat, until the fisher population and forest conditions can be fully reassessed in light of drastic changed conditions,” Wulff said in April. That request changed to 31 projects, according to court documents – almost all in Sierra and Sequoia national forests.
The Southern Sierra Nevada distinct population of Pacific fisher became a federally endangered species a few months before the massive Creek Fire – what became the largest single wildfire in California’s history – ignited in eastern Fresno County last summer and destroyed more of the fishers’ dwindling habitat. The lawsuit states scientists estimated there were between 100 and 500 of these fishers in 2012.
Fresno judge not halting forest projects while case being decided
Drozd detailed his reasons for not granting the preliminary injunction in a 34-page decision filed Friday.
A virtual court hearing was held 10 days prior. Drozd started that hearing by cautioning both sides that his understanding of the case was still at a “very elementary level” and that he had hundreds of other cases pending before him.
In his decision to deny a preliminary injunction, Drozd wrote that the plaintiffs didn’t describe what “better scientific evidence” existed in 2020 or 2021 that federal agencies should have relied upon in their decision making.
The judge addressed the plaintiffs’ criticism of federal land managers’ plans that state some endangered fishers could be killed while doing vegetation projects.
“Plaintiffs have not identified the best available data evincing what the minimum viable population size of the SSN fisher is – and indeed, it appears no such data or study exists,” Drozd wrote.
He also said the plaintiffs didn’t demonstrate they’d have success regarding their NEPA violation claims.
“Because plaintiffs have not made the required showing as to the merits of their claim at this time, a preliminary injunction cannot issue. ... In light of this conclusion, the court need not address plaintiffs’ showing with respect to irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and whether the granting of an injunction is in the public interest.”
This story was originally published June 3, 2021 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Sierra logging projects won’t be halted while lawsuit is decided about endangered animal."
