Case Law Index Forestry
January 1, 2002 – June 16, 2023
This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving Forestry and associated topics that were decided between the dates listed above. The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion where available. These listings are for educational purposes only and are not a sufficient substitute for legal counsel.
SUPREME COURT
United States Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association, 140 S.Ct. 1837 (U.S. June, 2020) (Forest service had the authority to issue special permit granting pipeline rights-of-way through lands within national forests). Text
Decker v. Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr., 568 U.S. 597 (2013) (Clean Water Act does not require timber companies to obtain NPDES permits to discharge stormwater from ditches alongside logging roads in state forests). Text
Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n. v. United States, 568 U.S. 23 (2012) (Recurrent, temporary flooding induced by the government that restricts access to and degrades timber operations is not automatically exempt from liability under the Takings Clause). Text
Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 129 S.Ct. 1142 (U.S. March 03, 2009) (timber harvesting). Text
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency 1120 (U.S. Oct. 24, 2006) (global climate change) (Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicle). Text
FIRST CIRCUIT
Maine Forest Products Council v. Cormier, 51 F. 4th 1 (1st Cir. 2022) (state preempted from preventing Canadian truck drivers from hauling logs in the state under the federal H-2A visa program) Text
United States v. Moore, 2022 WL 17668440 (D. Me. 2022) (violation for parking truck on a forest road making it difficult for driver of other vehicle to back out from parking space was not dismissed)
GMR Holdings of N.H., LLC v. Town of Lincoln, 2021 WL. 5177720 (D.N.H. 2021) (town mandated to approve special permit for increased height cell phone tower on land owned by forest service)
Strahan v. Sec’y, Massachusetts Exec. Off. of Energy & & Env’t Affs., 519 F. Supp. 3d 65 (D. Mass. 2021) (Entry of preliminary relief pending trial was not warranted in suit alleging Massachusetts’s lobsterpot and gillnet licensing scheme violated Endangered Species Act).
Sierra Club v. Wagner, 555 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2009) (approval of two forest management plans). Text
SECOND CIRCUIT
Acadia Insurance Co. v. WeLog, Inc., 2017 WL 2964805 (D. Vt. July 11, 2017) (because logging operation and majority of defendant’s logging business took place in another state, the laws of that state applied to the interpretation of the insurance policy) Text
Forest Watch v. United States Forest Serv., 410 F.3d 115 (2d Cir. 2005) (Forest Serv. failed to consider best available science standard). Text
Forest Watch v. United States Forest Serv., 322 F. Supp. 2d 522 (D. Vt. 2004) (a timber harvesting project authorization violated NFMA and NEPA). Text
THIRD CIRCUIT
Allegheny Def. Project, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 423 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. Pa. 2005) (improperly selected a harvesting system primarily based upon dollar return). Text
FOURTH CIRCUIT
Appalachian Voices v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 25 F.4th 259, (4th Cir. 2022) (proposed natural gas pipeline stretching from West Virginia to Virginia did not violate ESA) Text
Clinch Coalition v. U.S. Forest Service, 597 F.Supp.3d 916 (W.D. Va. 2022) (Forest Service compelled to complete the administrative record surrounding newly adopted NEPA regulation CEQ’s that expanded reporting exemptions) Text
Wild Virginia v. U.S. Forest Service, 24 F.4th 915 (4th Cir. 2022) (decision of USFS to allow interstate natural gas pipeline system to cross three and a half miles of national forest violated NEPA, NFMA, and MLA, and did not apply its planning rules adequately) Text
People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Tri-State Zoological Park of W. Maryland, Inc., 424 F. Supp. 3d 404 (D. Md. 2019), aff’d, 843 F. App’x 493 (4th Cir. 2021) (Private Zoo subjected its tigers to harassment and harm in violation of the Endangered Species Act). Text
Miller v. Montgomery Cty., Md., 458 Fed. App’x. 304 (4th Cir. 2011) (contract to harvest timber was an expectation of a protected property interest, not an existing protected property interest, because the logger had not yet obtained all permits necessary to harvest the timber when the contract was entered) Text
United States v. Reyes, CRIM.1:08CR98, 2008 WL 5170184 (W.D. N.C. Dec. 9, 2008), aff’d, 340 F. App’x. 868 (4th Cir. 2009) (harvesting galax without a permit). Text
Clinch Coalition v. Damon, 316 F. Supp. 2d 364 (D. Va. 2004) (Forest Serv. violated NEPA by preparing an inadequate environmental analysis for a timber sale)
FIFTH CIRCUIT
Faith Forestry Services, Inc. v. United States Dep’t of Labor, 2018 WL 3650253 (N.D. Miss. Aug. 1, 2018) (H-2B visa program places an obligation to pay forestry workers the wage agreed and contracted upon).
Hollingsworth v. Vilsack, 366 F. Supp. 3d 766 (W.D. La. 2018) (Forest Service’s dog-deer hunting ban on national forest was not arbitrary or capricious). Text
Sierra Club v. Wagner, 2008 DNH 113 (D. N.H. 2008) (USFS properly applied the “best available science” requirement, and adequately considered the wilderness characteristics and values of the sites). Text
Recinos-Recinos v. Express Forestry, Inc., No. Civ.A. 05-1355, 2006 WL 2349459 (E.D. La. Aug. 11, 2006) (violation of Agricultural Worker Protection Act and Fair Labor Standards Act).
Recinos-Recinos v. Express Forestry, Inc., 233 F.R.D. 472 (E.D. La. 2006) (violation of Agricultural Worker Protection Act and Fair Labor Standards Act).
Recinos-Recinos v. Express Forestry, Inc., No. Civ.A. 05-1355, 2006 WL 197030 (E.D. La. Jan. 24, 2006) (violation of Agricultural Worker Protection Act and Fair Labor Standards Act).
Recinos-Recinos v. Express Forestry, Inc., No. Civ.A. 05-1355, 2005 WL 3543722 (E.D. La. Oct. 6, 2005) (violation of Agricultural Worker Protection Act and Fair Labor Standards Act).
SIXTH CIRCUIT
Ohio Env’tal Council v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2712454 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 2023) (Forest Service’s adaptive management plan for the Sunny Oaks Project was insufficiently specific to be acceptable under NEPA standards for timber harvesting but does not violate the challenged endangered species regulation)
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Forest Serv., 444 F. Supp. 3d 832 (S.D. Ohio 2020) (Agencies failed to meaningfully discuss environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing on national forest land regarding water depilation of a river). Text
Klein v. United States Dept. of Energy, 753 F.3d 576 (2014) (Dept. environmental assessment reasonably found there would be no significant environmental impact in plant that would convert lumber into ethanol). Text
Sherwood v. Tenn. Valley Auth., 590 5. App’x 451 (6th Cir. 2014) (Authority must consider environmental consequences of complying with easement rule of removing trees from right-of-way). Text
Roslies-Perez v. Superior Forestry Serv., Inc., No. 1:06-00006, 2009 WL 2254961 (M.D. Tenn. July 28, 2009) (violations of FSLA and AWPA). Text
Heartwood, Inc. v. Agpaoa, 611 F. Supp. 2d 675 (D. Ky. April 27, 2009) (USFS did not violate NEPA or ESA in approving Ice Storm Project and revised forest plan). Text
Burlison v. United States, 533 F.3d 419 (6th Cir. Tenn. 2008) (easement to a field-access road that traversed a national wildlife refuge) Text
Rosiles-Perez v. Superior Forestry Serv., Inc., 250 F.R.D. 332 (M.D. Tenn. 2008) (class certification of AWPA claims).
Rosiles-Perez v. Superior Forestry Serv., Inc., No. 1:06-0006, 2007 WL 325784 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 31, 2007) (class certification of AWPA claims).
Nickell v. Lisowsky, 5:05CV123-R, 2006 WL 2570334 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 31, 2006) (Forest Serv. adequately monitored and surveyed wildlife species).
United States v. Winslow, 116 Fed. Appx. 703 (6th Cir. Mich. 2004) (using and occupying national forest land without a special-use permit).
SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs v. U.S. Forest Service, 595 F.Supp.3d 713 (S.D. Ind. 2022) (vegetation and management project violated NEPA, but complied with ESA in protecting the Indiana bat) Text
Ludwig v. United States, 21 F.4th 929 (7th Cir. 2021) (Oregon’s recreational use statute protects the United States from wrongful death tort claim when hiker drowned in national forest) Text
Boucher v. United States Dep’t of Agric., 934 F.3d 530 (7th Cir. 2019) (USDA’s determination that the plaintiff’s property was ineligible for USDA benefits was arbitrary, capricious, abuse of discretion and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Text
Habitat Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 673 F.3d 518 (7th Cir. 2012) (a federal agency does not act arbitrarily or capriciously by excluding form its final EIS those projects that cannot be meaningfully discussed at the time the agency issues its draft EIS and do not significantly alter the environmental landscape as presented in that draft unless newly discovered information requires supplementation). Text
Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 680 F.Supp.2d 996 (E.D. Wis. 2010) (approval of a timber project did not violate NEPA).
Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 680 F.Supp.2d 1007 (E.D. Wis. 2010) (approval of a timber project did not violate NEPA)
Habitat Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 593 F. Supp. 2d 1019 (E.D. Wis. 2009) (no violations of NEPA and National Forest Management Act).
Donham v. United States Forest Serv., No. 07-CV-111-MJR, 2008 WL 5221102 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 12, 2008) (FOIA request moot)
Glisson v. U.S. Forest Serv., 99-CV-4189-JPG, 2008 WL 5156274 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 8, 2008) (D. Ill. 2008) (special use permits for outfitters and guides). Text
Habitat Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. Bosworth, 381 F. Supp. 2d 842 (D. Wis. 2005) (national forest timber sale was enjoined for failure to comply with NEPA).
Habitat Educ. Ctr., Inc. v. Bosworth, 363 F. Supp. 2d 1090 (D. Wis. 2005) (EIS prepared for a logging project in a national forest violated NEPA).
Shawnee Trail Conservancy v. Nicholas, 343 F. Supp. 2d 687 (D. Ill. 2004) (outdoor enthusiasts lacked standing).
Ind. Forest Alliance, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 325 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2003) (USFS did not act arbitrarily in not preparing an EIS on a forest openings project).
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
United States v. Huseby, 862 F.Supp.2d 951 (D. Minn. 2012) (Development of site with intent of establishing red pine plantation considered a mechanized land clearing that impaired the flow of navigable waters) Text
Sierra Club v. Kimbell, 595 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (D. Minn. 2009) (review of forest management plant). Text
Sierra Club Northstar Chapter v. Kimbell, 07-3160 ADM/RLE, 2008 WL 4287424 (D. Minn. Sept. 15, 2008) (challenging the decision by the Forest Serv. to conduct timber sales and road building). Text
Izaak Walton League of Am., Inc. v. Kimbell, 516 F. Supp. 2d 982 (D. Minn. 2007) (USFS’s decision to construct snowmobile trail was not arbitrary and capricious). Text
Heartwood, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 380 F.3d 428 (8th Cir. Aug. 25, 2004) (impact of logging on bat population). Text
United States v. Nenninger, 351 F.3d 340 (8th Cir. 2003) (requiring special-use authorization for groups were permissible since they protected public health and safety).
Superior Wilderness Action Network & Heartwood v. U.S. Forest Serv., CIV.01-29(MJD/RLE), 2002 WL 171719 (D. Minn. Jan. 30, 2002) (decision regarding implementation of a logging plan in a national forest).
NINTH CIRCUIT
Alliance v. Dep’t of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2023 WL 23622530 (3d D. Cal. 2023) (Cal Fire did not abuse its discretion in approving the biological assessment area to calculate cumulative effects of timber harvesting under the Forest Practice Rules)
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Petrick, 68 F. 4th 475 (9th Cir. 2023) (It is unclear whether the Hanna Flats logging project qualifies for the “wildland-urban interface” exemption to NEPA, so the initial injunction was vacated and the case was remanded)
Bartell Ranch LLC v. McCollough, 2023 WL 1782343 (D. Nev. 2023) (challenge to lithium mine approval remanded)
Brimstone Natural Res’s. v. Haight, et al., 2023 WL 4030191 (9th Cir. 2023) (Oregon Forestry Practice Act not preempted by federal mining law)
Capital Trail Vehicle Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2456445 (D. Mont. 2023) (changes to the Divide Travel Plan did not violate NEPA, the Travel Rule, NFMA, or APA)
Cascadia Wildlands v. Adcock, 2023 WL 3628590 (D. Or. 2023) (claim that BLM violated NEPA in Siuslaw Harvest Assessment permitted to continue to trial)
Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 67 F.4th 1027 (9th Cir. 2023) (USFWS violated APA and ESA in approving proposed mining project)
Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 3052299 (D. Mont. 2023) (commercial logging project in national forest violated NEPA)
Dep’t of Fish and Game v. Federal Subsistence Bd., 62 F.4th 1177 (9th Cir. 2023) (pandemic-related expanded subsistence hunting authorizations and regulations were not arbitrary and capricious) Text
Friends of the Inyo v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2432814 (E.D. Cal. 2023) (approved mining exploration project near Mammoth Lakes was correctly deemed not to have “significant” environmental impacts, so an EIC was not required and NEPA was not violated)
Green v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2254549 (S.D. Cal. 2023) (private owner of ranch located in National Forest permitted to pursue Due Process claim against USFS for downgrading the maintenance level of the road leading to the owner’s property that makes it not suitable for passenger cars)
Murphy Co. v. Biden, 65 F.4th 1122 (9th Cir. 2023) (Presidential proclamation expanding Cascade-Siskiyou Nat’l Monument was a valid exercise of President’s authority under the Antiquities Act)
Schurg v. United States, 63 F.4th 826 (9th Cir. 2023) (Summary judgment against the plaintiff’s actions, which alleged that the Forest Service intended wildfire to come on to her property and was negligent in providing notice or warning, was upheld for policy justifications) Text
Taylor v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 2023 WL 136287 (D. Nev. 2023) (defendant’s motion to transfer to state court denied when a camper fell and was injured in a campground shower room)
United States v. Delvecchio, 2023 WL 1929554 (D. Ariz. 2023) (order to pay restitution damages caused when defendant spray painted rocks and vegetation in national forest upheld)
WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 3987843 (9th Cir. 2023) (USFS did not violate NFMA by failing to consider modification of grazing management to mitigate ongoing wolf-livestock conflicts that result in lethal removal of gray wolves from the forest)
WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2586139 (D. Idaho 2023) (USFS does not exercise sufficient control over states’ regulation of black bear baiting to establish agency action)
Wildlands v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 2023 WL 2647104 (D. Or. 2023) (BLM did not violate rulemaking procedures or FLPMA in timber sale deal)
Alliance for Wild Rockies v. Gassman, 604 F.Supp.3d 1022 (D. Mont. 2022) (environmental groups granted injunctive relief of approval of a commercial logging project in a national forest based on their recreational and aesthetic interests connected to grizzly bear and lynx populations) Text
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Munoz, 590 F.Supp.3d 1308 (D. Mont. 2022) (higher level of timber thinning permitted because it was “incidental to the implementation” of an approved wildfire mitigation plan) Text
Baker Ranches, Inc. v. Zinke, 625 F.Supp.3d 1080 (D. Nev. 2022) (private landowners did not have rights-of-way surrounding pipeline, but were granted relief based on equitable estoppel)
Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Jeffries, 2022 WL 4466928 (D. Or. 2022) (Walton Lake Restoration logging project did not violate NEPA or NFMA)
Cascade Forest Conservancy v. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 10964667 (9th Cir. 2022) (Forest Service’s project-specific amendment, which exempted a project from the retention requirements set forth in the Gifford Pinchot Forest Plan, was not arbitrary and capricious).
Cascadia Wildlands v. Scott Timber Co., 618 F.Supp.3d 1038 (D. Or. 2022) (impairment of essential behavioral patterns of endangered species is sufficient to show harm to prevent implementation of timber harvesting operation) Text
Concerned Friends of the Winema v. McKay, 614 F.Supp.3d 756 (D. Or. 2022) (no violation of NEPA, NFMA, or ESA in implementation of new grazing plan)
Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 584 F.Supp.3d 812 (N.D. Cal. 2022) (final rule removing protections for gray wolf population upheld in part and remanded in part) Text
Donohoe v. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 911376 (D. Mont. 2022) (Bridge Project and Trail Project did approval did not violate NEPA, ESA, or NFMA)
Earth Island Institute v. Muldoon, 2022 WL 4388197 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (injunction to stop tree thinning project denied; party likely to suffer harm, but public interest and policy weighs in favor of denying the injunction)
Earth Island Institute v. Nash, 607 F.Supp.3d 1056 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (defendants’ failure to analyze combined impact of post-wildfire salvage logging project did not violate NEPA or HUD regulations) Text
Earth Island Inst. V. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 4123991 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (Three Creeks Project permitted to proceed)
Estate of Gould v. United States, 2022 WL 2451377 (D. Mont. 2022) (summary judgment for the defendant considering the pending trial deadlines when a charred tree fell on a vehicle traveling a national forest road killing one vehicle occupant and seriously injuring the second)
Evans v. United States, 598 F.Supp.3d 907 (2022 WL 1093522) (E.D. Cal. 2022) (summary judgment for defendants because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction even though there was evidence of negligence when a wildfire damaged the claimant’s property in a national forest)
Friends of Crazy Mountains v. Erickson, 2022 WL 1159433 (D. Mont. 2022) (Forest Service did not mismanage four trails in the Crazy Mountains)
Friends of the Clearwater v. Petrick, 588 F.Supp.3d 1071 (D. Idaho 2022) (approval of 1,700 acre timber harvesting and controlled burning project in National Forest did not violate NFMA) Text
Friends of the Clearwater v. Probert, 2022 WL 2291246 (D. Idaho 2022) (Forest Service project halted while case is remanded because parts of the agency decision violated environmental regulations)
Forest Watch v. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 18356465 (D. Cal. 2022) (summary judgment on a USFS decision to classify 21-inch diameter at breast high trees as “generally small timber” under the Roadless Rule granted for the USFS to continue project)
Idaho Conservation League v. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 1663420 (D. Idaho 2022) (the recently re-approved Kilgore Gold Exploration Project that had been found to violate NEPA in 2018 requires that the plaintiff’s file an entirely new case; the old one cannot be reopened or amended)
International Society for Protection of Mustangs and Burros v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 2022 WL 2702534 (D. Ariz. 2022) (removal and sale of wild horses from national forest land prohibited for violations to NEPA, APA, and Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971)
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. Grantham, 2022 WL 397559 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (challenge to post-wildfire logging and restoration project denied)
KOTAB v. Bureau of Land Management, 595 F.Supp.3d 947 (D. Nev. 2022) (BLM violated FLREA by charging $2 processing fees to access mandatory online reservation system to visit Red Rock Canyon Conservation area during peak season) Text
Los Padres ForestWatch v. U.S. Forest Service, 25 F.4th 649 (9th Cir. 2022) (Determining which timber may be cleared in a roadless area of a national forest is a three-step inquiry; the Forest Service’s decision that trees with a 21-in diameter at breast height qualified was arbitrary and capricious) Text
Mountain Communities for Fire Safety v. Elliott, 25 F.4th 667 (9th Cir. 2022) (commercial thinning project approval was upheld) Text
Nash v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough, 2022 WL 1156198 (D. Alaska 2022) (summary judgment for defendant denying challenge to timber sale and logging plan in national forest)
Native Ecosystems Council v. Lannom, 598 F.Supp.3d 957 (D. Mont. 2022) (reliance by the Forest service on road densities in travel plan was arbitrary and capricious, but the forest thinning portion did not violate the roadless rule) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 2022 WL 17454056 (D. Mont. 2022) (motion to dissolve 2013 permanent injunction granted to defendant’s because they completed the environmental analysis ordered by the court)
Native Ecosystems Council v. Melhoff, 2022 WL 766392 (D. Mont. 2022) (injunctive relief granted against vegetation and grazing allowances in the Iron Musk Planning Area)
Neighbors of Mogollon Rim Inc. v. U.S. Forest Service, 562 F.Supp.3d 343 (D. Ariz. 2022) (no violation of NEPA, NFMA, or ESA in implementation of livestock grazing management plan) Text
North Cascades Conservation Council v. U.S. Forest Service, 2022 WL 1043930 (W.D. Wash. 2022) (temporary project roads do not count toward the “no net increase” rule)
Oregon Natural Desert Ass’n v. Bushue, 2022 WL 17487065 (D. Or. 2022) (BLM unreasonably delayed closure of certain areas to livestock grazing in violation of APA and FLPMA)
Public Timber Purchasers’ Group v. U.S. Dep’t of Ag., 58 F.Supp.3d 863 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (regional forester did not exceed their authority when they modified the recomputation decision that determined the small business hare allocation for small businesses)
Romey v. United States, 2022 WL 2305609 (D. Alaska 2022) (longtime operator of business located partially on national forest land lacked standing because the court could not provide adequate redressability by retroactively dating a special use permit)
Ruffino v. United States, 583 F.Supp.3d 1288 (E.D. Cal. 2022) (United States immune against tort claim when a recreational sledder was injured when his sled ran into a patch of smoldering brush concealed beneath snow that was part of a Forest Service controlled burn) Text
Schurg v. United States, 584 F.Supp.3d 893 (D. Mont. 2022) (Forest Service not liable to private landowner for trespass during fire control operations) Text
White v. United States, 2022 WL 2304233 (Negligence claim against the United States for an ATV accident on National Forest land was dismissed because the United States did not charge a fee for use of the land. State licensing fees for use of the ATV that were distributed to landowners, including the United States did not qualify).
WildEarth Guardians v. Bail, 2022 WL 2057728 (E.D. Wash. 2022) (domestic sheep grazing allotments within National Forest did not violate NFA or NEPA)
Yaak Valley Forest Council v. Perdue, 2022 WL 2463551 (D. Mont. 2022) (attorney fees calculated and awarded to plaintiff based on its success in challenging the USFS’s administration of the Pacific NW National Scenic Trail)
Cascadia Wildlands v. U.S. Forest Service, 2021 WL 6112546 (D. Or. 2021) (injunction granted stopping the forest service from further post-fire salvage logging activities in the Hwy 46 Project area)
Cascadia Wildlands v. Warnack, 570 F.Supp.3d 983 (D. Or. 2021) (injunctive relief granted to stop a project to fell fire-damaged trees until an adequate Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment is conducted and published) Text
Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 33 F.4th 1202 (9th Cir. 2021) (United States Forest Service decision to permit open-pit Copper mining in national forest was held to be arbitrary and capricious) Text
Defenders of Wildlife v. Martin, 2021 WL 5890661 (E.D. Wash. 2021) (permanent injunction against snowmobiling in national forest affirmed)
Esquivel v. United States, 21 F.4th 565 (9th Cir. 2021) (private owner of property in a National Forest lacked jurisdiction in their tort claim against a US Forest Service team for property damage done when the team intentionally burned the owner’s property as part of a fire suppression effort) Text
Garcia v. United States, 2021 WL 5112054 (D. Ariz. 2021) (US granted sovereign immunity for tort claim in Arizona when two people died in a flash flood on national forest land)
Sovereign Inupiat for a Living Arctic v. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 516 F. Supp. 3d 943 (9th Cir. 2021) (Inupiat organization failed to demonstrate that irreparable injury under the ESA to protected polar bear species was likely in absence of injunction) Text
Stop B2H Coal. V. Bureau of Land Mgmt., 2021 WL 3410039 (D. Or. Aug. 4, 2021) (Bureau of Land Management overlooked grazing in cumulative effects analysis, thus rendering final EIS insufficient under NEPA relating to siting of powerline).
United States v. Robertson, 2021 WL 5861280 (9th Cir. 2021) (judgment for the US to remove trespassing property and restore the property to its original condition affirmed)
WildEarth Guardians v. Steele, —F.Supp.3d—-, 2021 WL 2590143 (D. Mont. 2021) (Incidental-take statement as to grizzly bears under revised plan for Flathead National Forest was deficient under the Endangered Species Act)
Yellowstone to Uintas Connection v. Bolling, 2021 WL 5702158 (D. Idaho 2021) (proposed installation of natural gas pipeline that would traverse the Caribou-Targhee National Forest requires more information in the Administrative Record)
2-Bar Ranch Ltd. P’ship v. United States Forest Serv., 996 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2021) (Riparian mitigation measures, rather than allowable use levels, applied to grazing allotments in national forest where ranchers had grazing permits for their cattle) Text
Alaska v. Bernhardt, 500 F. Supp. 3d 889 (D. Alaska 2020), judgment entered sub nom. Alaska v. de la Vega, No. 3:17-CV-00013-SLG, 2021 WL 415123 (D. Alaska Feb. 5, 2021) (Fish and Wildlife Service lacked convincing reasons for finding restriction on firearms discharges along rivers was categorically excluded from NEPA) Text
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Marten, 585 F.Supp.3d 1252 (D. Mont. 2021) (post-decisional information not permitted for consideration in evaluating the Stonewall Project and Forest Plan Amendment #31) Text
Allstate Insurance Co. v. California Edison Co., 2021 WL 5356633 (C.D. Cal. 2021) (California maintains concurrent jurisdiction over enclave in Angeles National Forest because the state regulates utilities there)
Forestkeeper v. U.S. Forest Service, 2021 WL 4553885 (E.D. Cal. 2021) (Plateau Roads Timber Sale authorization challenge upheld; injunctive relief granted)
Yaak Valley Forest Council v. Vilsack, 563 F.Supp.3d 1105 (D. Mont. 2021) (injunctive relief granted imposing deadline for Forest Service to submit a comprehensive plan for trail development under the National Trails System Act; other injunctive relief beyond the scope of the claimant’s injury) Text
All. For the Wild Rockies v. United States Forest Serv., 504 F. Supp. 3d 1162 (E.D. Wash. 2020) (The project did not contravene section of forest plan under National Forest Management Act (NFMA) with goal of sustaining number and habitats in project area) Text
Bitterroot Ridge Runners Snowmobile Club v. United States Forest Serv., 833 F. App’x 89 (9th Cir. 2020) (Forest Service’s prohibition of motorized vehicles in wilderness study areas and recommended wilderness areas was not arbitrary and capricious). Text
Friends of Rapid River v. Probert, 816 F. App’x 59 (9th Cir. 2020) (Forest Service’s method of priority ranking old-growth stands in furtherance of project directed at addressing forest health and hazardous fuel concerns was reasonable). Text
Friends of the Clearwater v. Higgins, 472 F. Supp. 3d 859 (D. Idaho 2020), aff’d sub nom. Friends of Clearwater v. Higgins, 847 F. App’x 394 (9th Cir. 2021) (Forest Service was required to prepare biological assessment prior to beginning road construction in connection with vegetation management project). Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 807 F. App’x 658 (9th Cir. 2020) (Forest Service’s approval of vegetation project did not contravene mandate in Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) regarding retention of old-growth and large trees). Text
Se. Alaska Conservation Council v. United States Forest Serv., 443 F. Supp. 3d 995 (9th Cir. 2020) (Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for 15-year timber harvest project was insufficiently specific to constitute hard look at environmental impact of project, and thus violated NEPA) Text
Conservation Cong. V. United States Forest Serv., 774 F. App’x 364 (9th Cir. 2019) (public interest in taking proactive steps in fire and road maintenance outweighed Forest Service’s failure to properly designate and mark trees for removal).
Conservation Cong. V. United States Forest Serv., 2019 WL2369919 (E.D. Cal. June 5, 2019) (Thinning and fuel break treatment, prescribed fires, and temporary roads to address forest health concerns falls under the HFRA statutory categorical exclusion) Text
Swan View Coalition v. Weber, 2019 WL 3717908 (9th Cir. 2019) (Fish and Wildlife Service’s concurrence that harvest project would not harm wolverine population considered enough for Forest Service’s determination) Text
WildEarth Guardians v. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., 416 F. Supp. 3d 909 (D. Ariz. 2019) (United States Fish and Wildlife Service ‘s (FWS) no-jeopardy determination with respect to forest plan failed to account for recovery of the Mexican Spotted Owl, as required by the Endangered Species Act)
All. For the Wild Rockies v. United States Forest Serv., 907 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2018) (Forest Service did not violate NEPA by incorporating standards and science from Wildlife Conservation Strategy analysis) Text
Friends of the Wild Swan v. Kehr, 321 F.Supp.3d 1179 (D. Mont. 2018) (Forest Service did not act arbitrarily or capriciously when they evaluated a forest restoration project in one single EIS and new information about grizzly bear habitat subunits did not trigger new formal consultation) Text
Greater Hells Canyon Council v. Stein, 2018 WL 3966289 (D. Or. June 11, 2018) (implementation of forest plan allowed for guidance and was not arbitrary or capricious) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Erickson, 330 F.Supp.3d 1218 (D. Mont. 2018) (Forest Service’s conclusion that EIS was not necessary under NEPA when it amended old growth standard as part of clean up amendment to national forest plan was not arbitrary and capricious) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 334 F.Supp.3d 1124 (D. Mont. Nov. 19, 2018) (Plaintiff’s claim that no old growth can be removed under HFRA is not consistent with the statute) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 2018 WL 3630132 (D. Mont. June 6, 2018) (Agency approval of project complies with NEPA, ESA, NFMA, and the Healthy Forest Restoration Act’s “wildland urban interface” designations) Text
Watterson v. Fritcher, 2018 WL 3965359 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2018) (plaintiff’s complaint does not fit into “Indian forest land” program) Text
Cascadia Wildlands v. Scott Timber Co., 715 Fed. App’x. 621 (9th Cir. 2017) (diminished ability to view marbled murrelets, a threatened seabird species, from the logging project was a cognizable recreational and aesthetic injury)
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Ilano, 261 F.Supp.3d 1063 (E.D. Cal. 2017) (Forest Service’s conclusion that the plan to combat disease and beetle infestation in the Tahoe National Forest under HFRA would benefit owls in the long run, even if individual owls were temporarily impacted, was adequately supported) Text
Conservation Cong. V. United States Forest Serv., 686 Fed. App’x. 392 (9th Cir. 2017) (Forest Service satisfied standard of considering alternatives reasonably related to purposes of logging project).
In re Big Thorne Project, 857 F.3d 968 (9th Cir. 2017) (Forest Service had discretion to have objective of forest plan be a “sustainable” wolf population, rather than a “viable one,” and to emphasize expanding timber supply in the service of its multiple-use mandate). Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Weldon, 232 F.Supp.3d 1142 (D. Mont. 2017) (Although “salvage” categorical exclusion from NEPA did not apply, actions were consistent with Forest Plan) Text
Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. Grantham, 642 Fed. App’x. 742 (9th Cir. 2016) (National forest failed to take “hard look” at potential environmental consequences of reinstating cattle grazing in national forest). Text
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Krueger, 2015 WL 6110583 (D. Mont. Oct. 15, 2015) (Forest Service did not arbitrarily find the commercial thinning project would not have adverse impact) Text
Soda Mountain Wilderness Council v. United States Bureau of Land Mgmt., 607 Fed.App’x. 670 (9th Cir. 2015) (BLM did not need to analyze effects of commercial logging project on potential expansion of national monument).
Cascadia Wildlands v. Thrailkill, 806 F.3d 1234 (9th Cir. 2015) (Recovery Project following a forest fire was found to be supported by the best available science and not arbitrary or capricious). Text
Cottonwood Envtl. Law Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 789 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2015) (holding the Forest Service is required to reinitiate consolation when critical habitats are designated in a National Forest). Text
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. Nat’l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin., 99 F. Supp 3d 1033 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (FWS’ failure to adequately evaluate cumulative effects of past, present, and future withdrawal activities in timber harvest EIS was arbitrary and capricious) Text
Ames v. Ames, 2014 WL 11516296 (E.D. Wash., April 2, 2014) (life tenants retained exclusive right to harvest timber during their lifetimes).
Estate of Guistina v. C.I.R., 586 Fed. App’x 417 (9th Cir. 2014) (Tax Court obligated to detail its reasoning).
Navickas v. Conroy, 575 Fed App’x 758 (9th Cir. 2014) (deference to the Forest Service in determining what constitutes a fuel management activity and what project has a “commercial element”). Text
All. For the Wild Rockies v. Krueger, 950 F. Supp. 2d 1196 (D. Mont. 2013) (logging project on national forest temporarily enjoined because of agencies failure to rebut the presumption that the project would irreparably harm lynx critical habitat) Text
Salix v. United States Forest Serv., 944 F.Supp.2d 984 (D. Mont. 2013) (Forest Service must reinitiate consultation when new critical habitat was designated) Text
United States v. Tellstrom, 2013 WL 1499491 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 11, 2013) (Right of way to road in National Forest does not include the right to cut timber, tree, or other forest product, or maintain or construct a road or trail, on national forest system lands without a special use permit) Text
Wilderness Soc. V. United States Forest Serv., 2013 WL 5729056 (D. Idaho Oct. 22, 2013) (Forest Service failed to consider projects impact on water quality) Text
League of Wilderness Defs.-Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. United States Forest Serv., 689 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2012) (EIS considered reasonable range of goals to reduce risk of wildfire and beetle infestation in forest management research project).
Wilderness Watch v. Iwamoto, 853 F.Supp.2d 1063 (W.D. Wash. 2012) (Forest Service must go through NEPA process when preserving structure in wilderness area) Text
Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation v. U.S. Forest Ser., 832 F.Supp.2d 1138 (E.D. Cal. 2011) (Forest Service not required under NEPA to include a “no unauthorized routes” alternative when such an alternative would be unreasonable, but forest plans that fail to disclose routes’ compliance with Forest Plans are arbitrary and capricious, in violation of NFMA ) Text
Wildlands v. U.S. Forest Serv., 791 F.Supp.2d 979 (D. Or. 2011) (timber sale enjoined pending the Forest Service’s preparation of a supplemental environmental assessment to address new information regarding the northern spotted owl) Text
Greenpeace, Inc. v. Cole, No. 3:08-cv-0162-RRB, 2010 WL 1729739 (D. Alaska April 28, 2010) (challenge to timber sale projects under NEPA).
Native Ecosystems Council v. Tidwell, 599 F.3d 926 (Ninth Circuit 2010) (Forest Service’s application of the National Forest Management Act). Text
Oregon Natural Desert Ass’n v. Tidwell, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2246419 (D. Or. 2010) (challenge under the ESA and NFMA for grazing permits).
Sequoia Forestkeeper v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 1:09-cv-00392-LJO-JLT, 2010 WL 2464857 (E.D. Cal. June 12, 2010) (alleged failure to provide an Environmental Impact Statement).
Wilderness Soc’y v. U.S. Forest Serv., CV08-363-E-EJL, 2009 WL 1033711 (D. Idaho Apr. 16, 2009) hearing en banc ordered, 09-35200, 2010 WL 3896203 (9th Cir. Sept. 30, 2010) (designating roads and trails for motorized recreational use in National Forest).
California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep’t Agric., 575 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. August 5, 2009) (Forest Serv. Violated NEPA and ESA).
Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Larson, 641 F. Supp. 2d 1120 (D. Idaho, Aug. 4, 2009) (management indicator species in national forest). Text
Ventana Wilderness Alliance v. Bradford, 313 Fed. Appx. 944 (9th Cir. February 26, 2009) (grazing on land was “established”)
Citizens for Better Forestry v. United States Dep’t of Agric., 567 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2009) (withdrawal of policy by agency did not mean “prevailing party” for EAJA) Text
Sierra Forest Legacy v. United States Forest Serv., 598 F. Supp. 2d 1058 (N.D. Cal. 2009) (claim management plan violated NEPA and ESA)
Cent. Mont. Wildlands Ass’n v. Kimball, No. 06-35938, 2009 WL 117851 (9th Cir. Jan. 9, 2009) (no violations of NEPA by Forest Serv.)
United States v. Concrete, 2009 WL 733881 (C.D. Cal. Mar 16, 2009) (NO. CR 07-767-RCF) (USDA jurisdiction over acts outside federal lands).
United States ex rel. Wilson v. Maxxam, Inc., 2009 WL 691224 (N.D. Cal. Mar 10, 2009) (NO. C 06-7497 CW) (sustained production of timber products).
California ex rel. Lockyer v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 2:05CV00211MCEGGH, 2008 WL 5391233 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2008) (challenging the 2004 Framework as violating APA and NEPA).
California Forestry Ass’n v. Bosworth, 2:05CV00905MCEGGH, 2008 WL 4370074 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 24, 2008) (failure to consider reasonable alternatives required by NEPA).
California State Grange v. National Marine Fisheries Service, 620 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (E.D. Cal. October 27, 2008) (forestry group lacked standing). Text
Citizens for Better Forestry v. United States Dep’t Agric., Nos. C 05-1144 PJH, C 04-4512 PJH, 2008 WL 5210945 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2008) (attorney’s fees under EAJA for successful NEPA challenge).
Cloud Found., Inc. v. Kempthrone, 546 F. Supp. 2d 1003 (D. Mont. 2008) (statute of limitations to challenge forest plant; no violations of Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act). Text
Fence Creek Cattle Co. v. United States Forest Serv., 2008 WL 4610272 (D. Or. Oct 16, 2008) (NO. CIV 06-1236-SU) (cattle grazing permits).
Fence Creek Cattle Co. v. United States Forest Serv., 2008 WL 89622 (D. Or. Jan 07, 2008) (NO. CIV. 06-1236-SU) (cattle grazing permits).
Lands Council v. McNair, 537 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. July 2, 2008, Filed) (case en banc to clarify environmental jurisprudence as to USFS action). Text
League of Wilderness Defenders v. United States Forest Serv., 549 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir. 2008) (NEPA violation in approving selective logging program). Text
Oregon Natural Desert Ass’n v. United States Forest Serv., 550 F.3d 778 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2008) (grazing permits on national forest lands). Text
Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. United States Forest Serv., No. 07-634-AS, 2008 WL 140657 (D. Or. 2008) (grazing runoff is not a point source)
Pac. Rivers Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 2:05CV00953MCEGGH, 2008 WL 4291209 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2008) (challenge of the 2004 framework on grounds that it violates NEPA). Text
United States v. Park, 536 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2008) (violation of scenic easement).
Western Watersheds Projects v. United States Forest Serv., No. C 08-1460 PJH, 2008 WL 2952837 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2008) (denial of intervention; NEPA violations in grazing permits).
WildWest Inst. V. Bull, 547 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2008) (decision to pre-mark trees for cutting did not Friends of the Columbia Gorge, Inc. v. Elicker, 598 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (D. Or. 2007) (goats). Text
Lands Council v. McNair, 494 F.3d 771 (9th Cir. July 2, 2007) (public interest in preserving nature and avoiding irreparable environmental injury outweighed economic concerns). Text
Sierra Nevada Forest Prot. Campaign v. Rey, 205-CV-0205-MCE-GGH, 2007 WL 1701923 (E.D. Cal. June 11, 2007) (risk to cause irreparable harm to old forest habitat and imperiled wildlife).
Stevens County v. United States Dep’t of Interior, 507 F. Supp. 2d 1127 (E.D. Wash. 2007) (review of agency determination to limit grazing in federal forest).
California Oak Found. V. United States Forest Serv., 2006 WL 2454438 (E.D. Cal. Aug 23, 2006) (NO. CV-F-05-1395 OWW SMS) (Forest Serv. Approval of herbicides in Stanislaus National Forest).
Fitzgerald Living Trust v. United States, 460 F.3d 1259 (9th Cir. 2006) (easement by necessity to use an access road in a national forest) Text
Forest Conservation Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 203 F. App’x. 73 (9th Cir. 2006) (USFS authorization of timber harvest projects in several national forests).
Forest Guardians v. Johanns, 450 F.3d 455 (9th Cir. 2006) (agency did not re-initiate consultations under ESA to grazing allotments) Text
Forest Serv. Employees for Env. Ethics v. United States Forest Serv., 408 F. Supp. 2d 916 (N.D. Cal. January 09, 2006) (group seeking to enjoin Forest Serv.’s proposed timber sale) Text
League of Wildnerness Defenders-Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. United States Forest Serv., 445 F. Supp. 2d 1186 (D. Or. August 03, 2006) (forest plan, commercial logging, and connective corridors) Text
Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. United States Forest Serv., 465 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2006) (final agency action under the APA) Text
W. Watersheds Project v. United States Forest Serv., No. CV-05-189-E-BLW, 2006 WL 1697181 (D. Idaho 2006) (permanent injunction to prevent further grazing on allotments till supplemental EIS done)
Alleman v. United States, 372 F. Supp. 2d 1212 (D. Or. April 12, 2005) (statute trumped easement by necessity through forest) Text
Am. Forest Res. Council v. Conroy, 04-6221-HO, 2005 WL 771577 (D. Or. Mar. 2, 2005) (NEPA and OWA claims regarding the wilderness proposal)
Cascadia Wildlands Project v. Conroy, 159 Fed. Appx. 769 (9th Cir. December 16, 2005) (weighing costs and benefits of wet weather harvesting of dead trees)
Earth Island Inst. V. Pengilly, 376 F. Supp. 2d 994 (D. Cal. 2005) (regulations improperly exempted certain Forest Serv. Decisions from appeal) Text
Ecology Ctr. v. Castaneda, 426 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. October 19, 2005) (percentage of saleable timber on public lands)
Forest Guardians v. Veneman, 392 F. Supp. 2d 1082 (D. Ariz. 2005) (challenging biological opinion under the ESA) Text
Karuk Tribe of Cal. V. United States Forest Serv., 379 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (D. Cal. 2005) (mining operations in national forest did not violate NFMA) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. United States Forest Serv., 418 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. August 11, 2005) (forest plan and plan implementation) Text
NRDC v. United States Forest Serv., 421 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2005) (Forest Serv. Mistakenly doubled projected market demand for timber as part of its EIS) Text
Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign v. Weingardt, 376 F. Supp. 2d 984 (E.D. Cal. June 30, 2005) (comment in each of four timber projects) Text
Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Camp. V. United States Forest Serv., 2005 WL 1366507 (E.D. Cal. May 26, 2005) (NO. CIV. S042023MCEGGH) (project approval without NEPA EIS)
Cabinet Res. Group v. U.S. Forest Serv., CV 00-225-M-DWM, 2004 WL 966086 (D. Mont. Mar. 30, 2004) (the Forest Serv. Fulfilled its statutory obligations as to mitigation of damages by the inholder’s access)
Cascadia Wildlands Project v. Goodman, 393 F. Supp. 2d 1041 (D. Or. December 20, 2004) (snag retention project) Text
Forest Guardians v. United States Forest Serv., 370 F. Supp. 2d 978 (D. Ariz. Mar. 23, 2004) (EAS, NEPA, and ditches on National Forest land)
High Sierra Hikers Ass’n v. Blackwell, 390 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 2004) (Forest Serv. Violated NEPA in issuing certain special use permits for commercial packstock operators in wilderness areas) Text
League of Wilderness Defenders v. U.S. Forest Serv., CIV.04-488-HA, 2004 WL 1068787 (D. Or. May 12, 2004) (a habitat database model in “salvage logging” was inapplicable to post-fire projects) Text
Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. United States Forest Serv., 312 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (D. Or. 2004) (duty to manage livestock grazing within wild and scenic river corridors with forest plan standards) Text
Oregon Natural Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., CIV. 03-381-HA, 2004 WL 1592606 (D. Or. July 15, 2004) (injunction prohibiting livestock grazing on public lands of two allotments declined)
Siskiyou Regional Educ. Project v. Goodman, 2004 WL 1737738 (D. Or. Aug 03, 2004) (NO. CIV. 04-3058-CO) (marking of trees and boundaries) Text
United States v. Adams, 388 F.3d 708 (9th Cir. 2004) (illegal use or occupancy of National Forest System land or facilities without special-use authorization)
County of Okanogan v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 79 F. App’x. 350 (9th Cir. 2003) (USFS conditioning of special use permits to require minimum in-stream flows to protect endangered species) Text
County of Okanogan v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 347 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2003) (Forest Serv. Had the authority to restrict the use of the rights-of-way to protect the endangered fish) Text
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Delgado, 61 F. App’x. 381 (9th Cir. 2003) (USFS grazing permits were inconsistent with Wild and Scenic Rivers Act)
Forest Guardians v. United States Forest Serv., 329 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2003) (Forest Serv.’s management of cattle grazing was in accord with federal statutes) Text
Forest Guardians v. Veneman, 305 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (D. Ariz. 2003) (10-year grazing permits should not have been based on three-year environmental impact studies) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. United States Forest Serv., 54 Fed. Appx. 901 (9th Cir. 2003) (change in timber pricing algorithm).
Armstrong v. Von Bergen, 2002 ML 977 (Mont. Dist. Ct. 2002) (right to use a road)
Friends of the Clearwater v. McAllister, 214 F. Supp. 2d 1083 (D. Mont. 2002) (decision to forego a supplemental environmental impact statement) Text
High Sierra Hikers Ass’n v. Powell, C-00-01239-EDL, 2002 WL 240067 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2002), aff’d sub nom., High Sierra Hikers Ass’n v. Blackwell, 390 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 2004 (commercial pack trips in wilderness areas)
Idaho Sporting Congress v. Alexander, 45 Fed. Appx. 788 (9th Cir. September 05, 2002) (group seeking to enjoin sale of timber on federal lands)
Idaho Sporting Cong. V. Rittenhouse, 305 F.3d 957 (9th Cir. 2002) (standard used to assess viability of certain species was invalid) Text
Lands Council v. Vaught, 198 F. Supp. 2d 1211 (E.D. Wash. May 29, 2002) (Forest Serv.’s “net associated risk” figures) Text
Native Ecosystems Council v. Dombeck, 304 F.3d 886 (9th Cir. September 16, 2002) (timber sales on federal land) Text
Neighbors of Cuddy Mountain v. Alexander, 303 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. September 05, 2002) (failure to follow forest management plan) Text
Okanogan School Dist. #105 v. Superintendent of Public Instruction for State of Washington, 291 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. June 3, 2002) (state discretion in distributing forestry income) Text
Riverhawks v. Zepeda, 228 F. Supp. 2d 1173 (D. Or. 2002) (special use permits for commercial motorboats on a wild and scenic river)
TENTH CIRCUIT
Lake Irwin Coalition v. Smith, 2023 WL 3974463 (D. Colo. 2023) (action against private landowner who installed locked gate across forest service road permitted to continue; court does have subject matter jurisdiction)
New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association v. U.S. Forest Service, 2023 WL 2185698 (D.N.M. 2023) (injunctive relief based on public interest factors against a cattle shooting operation conducted via helicopters)
Strawberry Water Users Ass’n v. United States, 2023 WL 2634333 (D. Utah 2023) (tort claims against the Forest Service for not adequately suppressing two wildfires was dismissed based on lack of jurisdiction over the USFS)
Western Watersheds Project v. Haaland, 2023 WL 3637804 (10th Cir. 2023) (Forest Service did not comply with NFMA with respect to forage and cover for migratory birds)
Board of Cty. Comm’rs of San Miguel v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 584 F.Supp.3d 949 (D. Colo. 2022) (oil and gas leases in the Gunnison sage-grouse habitat did not violate NEPA, FLPMA, and the ESA) Text
Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland, 603 F.Supp.3d 1094 (D. Wyo. 2022) (livestock grazing plan did not violate NFMA by failing to meet one objective of forest plan standards) Text
Chevron Mining Inc. v. United States, 609 F.Supp.3d 1202 (D.N.M. 2022) (declaratory judgment for government against company seeking recovery for cleanup costs related to molybdenum mining operation) Text
County Comm’rs of County of Sierra v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 614 F.Supp.3d 944 (D.N.M. 2022) (action of government in translocating two problem wolves was not final so did not impose formal agency duty)
Ortiz v. United States, 2022 WL 16961445 (D.N.M. 2022) (criminal charges and penalties for bighorn sheep hunting in national forest with no permit were upheld)
Rocky Mountain Wild v. Dallas, 2022 WL11733139 (D. Colo. Oct. 20, 2022) (agency decision to grant private landowner an access road to their private property through National Forest found to be arbitrary and capricious under both NEPA and the Endangered Species Act)
Rocky Mountain Wild v. U.S. Forest Service, 56 F.4th 913 (10th Cir. 2022) (USFS search for documents under FOIA request was sufficient) Text
Thiessen v. United States, 2022 WL 1409563 (10th Cir. 2022) (12-year statute of limitations bars a claim against the government)
Upper Green River Alliance v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 598 F.Supp.3d 1303 (D. Wyo. 2022) (BLM’s approval of a project to extract natural gas resources in National Forest was challenged and upheld) Text
United States v. Canyon del Buey, LLC, 2021 WL 6125642 (D.N.M. 2021) (defendants to do not own inherent property rights that allow them to continue grazing cattle in national forest after the permit had been withdrawn)
United States v. Lesh, 2021 WL 4941013 (D. Colo. 2021) (prosecution for illegally operating a snowmobile in national forest land does not require a mens rea)
Western Watersheds Project v. Christiansen, 2021 WL 5711793 (D. Wyo. 2021) (USFS required to conduct further environmental analysis before renewing one-year special permit on elk feeding operations project)
WildEarth Guardians v. Bernhardt, 501 F. Supp. 3d 1192 (D.N.M. 2020) (NEPA did not require use of specific climate change methodologies to assess cumulative environmental impacts and the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) sufficiently accounted for cumulative environmental impacts) Text
Wild Watershed v. Hurlocker, 961 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 2020) (United States Forest Service (USFS) was not required to analyze extraordinary circumstances prior to applying Healthy Forests Restoration Act’s (HFRA) statutory categorical exclusion from NEPA) Text
Wild Watershed v. Hurlocker, 2019 WL 2365912 (D. N.M. June 3, 2019) (Forest Service’s designation of national forest lands as insect and disease treatment areas did not trigger NEPA requirements under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act’s statutory categorial exclusions from NEPA) Text
New Mexico Farm & Livestock Bureau v. United States Dept. of the Interior, 2017 WL 4857444 (D. N.M. Oct. 25, 2017) (ESA does not require knowing whether a species is conserved during the critical habitat designation phase).
Forest Guardians v. United States Forest Serv., 641 F.3d 423 (10th Cir. 2011) (environmental group required to exhaust administrative remedies before bringing action). Text
San Juan Citizens Alliance v. Stiles, 654 F.3d 1038 (10th Cir. 2011) (decision to limit study to Class I areas was not arbitrary and capricious). Text
Colorado Wild v. Vilsack, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 1257988 (D. Colo. 2010) (NEPA action against proposed sale of timber in a nation forest) Text
Wildearth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Serv., CIV.A 08CV02167JLK, 2010 WL 1413112 (D. Colo. Apr. 1, 2010) (authorization of livestock grazing in the Gila National Forest) Text
Lovaas v. U.S. Forest Serv., 374 F. App’x. 689 (9th Cir. 2009) (business carried out under the special use permit, located near of units considered for fuels reduction) Text
Citizens’ Comm. To Save Our Canyons v. Krueger, 513 F.3d 1169 (10th Cir. January 15, 2008) (helicopter skiing in two national forests did not violate NEPA) Text
United States v. Keating, 297 F. App’x. 205 (4th Cir. 2008) (use of National Forest System land without a special use permit or authorization)
Utah v. United States DOI, 535 F.3d 1184 (10th Cir. August 4, 2008) (land management)
Utah Env. Congress v. Russell, 518 F.3d 817 (10th Cir. March 11, 2008) (goshawk habitat timber harvest) Text
Wyoming v. United States Dep’t of Agric., 570 F. Supp. 2d 1309 (D. Wyo. 2008) (Forest Serv. Had usurped Congress’s power by de facto designation of “wilderness”) Text
Ctr. for Native Ecosystems v. Cables, 509 F.3d 1310 (10th Cir. Dec. 17 2007) (USFS authorization of livestock grazing) Text
Forest Guardians v. Forsgren, 478 F.3d 1149 (10th Cir. 2007) (Forest Serv. Had no duty to consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to the ESA) Text
Utah Envtl. Cong. V. Troyer, 479 F.3d 1269 (10th Cir. March 21, 2007) (forest plans properly incorporated the old management indicator species standards, rather than the best available science standard) Text
Ecology Ctr., Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 451 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2006) (failure to consider “best available science” standard in 2000 transition rule) Text
Forest Guardians v. U.S. Forest Serv., CIV.05 0372 JB/DJS, 2006 WL 4109661 (D.N.M. Aug. 22, 2006), aff’d, 579 F.3d 1114 (10th Cir. 2009) (USFS did not violate NFMA’s consistency or substantive provisions)
United States v. Anglin 438 F.3d 1229 (10th Cir. February 28, 2006) (cutting and removing forest product from national forest without authorization) Text
Forest Guardians v. United States Dep’t of Interior, 416 F.3d 1173 (10th Cir. 2005) (FOIA requests) Text
United States v. Fennell, 381 F. Supp. 2d 1300 (D.N.M. 2005) (owners provided no evidence that the subject area was not ceded to the United States through a treaty) Text
Utah Envtl. Cong. V. Bosworth, 370 F. Supp. 2d 1157 (D. Utah 2005) (beetle management project was granted a categorical exclusion from the environmental assessment process) Text
Colorado Wild v. United States Forest Serv., 299 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (D. Colo. January 30, 2004) (group seeking injunction against timber salvage in national forest) Text
Rounds v. United States Forest Serv., 301 F. Supp. 2d 1287 (D. Wyo. 2004) (unreasonable delay in removal of dead trees in Black Hills National Forest) Text
Trout Unlimited v. USDA, 320 F. Supp. 2d 1090 (D. Colo. 2004) (“Alternative B” in land-use authorization was arbitrary)
Utah Env. Congress v. Bosworth, 372 F.3d 1219 (10th Cir. June 23, 2004) (forest management plan duty) Text
Wyo. Sawmills, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 383 F.3d 1241 (10th Cir. 2004) (Forest Serv. Had complete discretion as to whether to offer timber contracts; no standing) Text
Wyoming v. United States Dep’t of Agric, 277 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (D. Wyo. 2003) (Forest Serv. Violated NEPA and the Wilderness Act when it promulgated the Roadless Rule) Text
Biodiversity Assocs. V. United States Forest Serv. Dep’t of Agric., 226 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (D. Wyo. 2002) (Forest Serv. Failed to timely revise the Medicine Bow National Forest Plan)
Utah Envtl. Cong. V. Zieroth, 190 F. Supp. 2d 1265 (D. Utah 2002) (USFS failed to analyze the trend population data for the management indicator species) Text
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Forest Conservation Council v. Jacobs, 374 F. Supp. 2d 1187 (D. Ga. 2005) (USDA and USFS were not obligated to collect data within each project area) Text
D.C. CIRCUIT
Sierra Club v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 68 F.4th 630 (D.C. Cir. 2023) (reinstatement of permits for company to build interstate natural gas pipeline that was previously vacated by another federal court were challenged and dismissed in part, granted in part, and remanded)
Wilderness Workshop v. Harrell, 2023 WL 3879505 (D.D.C. 2023) (transfer of case about access road in national forest from federal to state court denied for both public and private interest factors)
Solenex, LLC v. Haaland, 626 F.Supp.3d 110 (D.D.C. 2022) (Interior Secretary lacks authority to unilaterally cancel oil and gas lease on federal land; U.S. waived any right to cancel the lease)
Alaska v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 17 F.4th 1224 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (on appeal, the state did not have an adequate claim against the Federal Government for regulating timber harvesting in national forests because there was an exception in the regulation for state forests) Text
American Forest Resource Cncl. v. Williams, 2021 WL 4819846 (D.D.C. 2021) (plaintiffs failed to show irreparable harm in connection with decision to delay implementation of two forest management rules)
Alaska v. United States Dep’t of Agric., 273 F.Supp.3d 102 (D.D.C. 2017) (USDA has broad discretion to limit timber harvesting and road construction in national forests) Text
United States Ass’n of Reptile Keepers, Inc. v. Zinke, 852 F.3d 1131 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (The shipment clause of the Lacey Act did not bar shipment of injurious species between the 49 continental United States) Text
Fed. Forest Res. Coal. V. Vilsack, 100 F. Supp. 3d 21 (D.D.C. 2015) (under the 2012 Planning Rule, plaintiffs are required to identify a specific land management plan that threatens to harm a member of the plaintiff organization) Text
Ark Initiative v. Tidwell, 64 F.Supp.3d 81 (D.D.C. 2014) (Forest Service’s act in involving public in decision-making process satisfied their obligations to the plaintiffs and Agency has broad discretion to remove roadless designation of lands falling within ski-area boundaries) Text
Montanans for Multiple Use v. Barbouletos, 568 F.3d 225 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (claims that management of forest violated forest plan precluded) Text
Back Country Horsemen of Am. V. Johanns, 424 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D. D.C. 2006) (USFS complied with NEPA in the new trail classification system) Text
Rock Creek Pack Station, Inc. v. Blackwell, 344 F. Supp. 2d 192 (D. D.C. 2004) (commercial pack stations lacked standing to sue government officials and entities under NEPA regarding an EIS prepared for wilderness areas) Text
Mt. States Legal Found. V. Bush, 306 F.3d 1132 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (presidential proclamations designating national monuments) Text
FEDERAL CIRCUIT
Frères Lumber Co. v. United States, 2023 WL 2316297 (Fed. Cl. 2023) (contract for commercial logging broken due to a wildfire requires further discovery to determine which party is responsible for catastrophic damages because neither party complied by the terms of the contract)
Johnson v. United States, 2023 WL 1428603 (Fed. Cl. 2023) (claim against government for property damage to property sustained in a wildfire dismissed)
Thomas Creek Lumber and Log Co. v. United States, 2023 WL 2056316 (Fed. Cl. 2023) (forest service liable for breached warranty but not breached contract when a road reconstruction estimate for a timber sale project was grossly inaccurate)
Graves v. United States, 160 Fed. Cl. 562 (2022) (unsuccessful land taking claim against the US for Forest Service road offshoot)
Hahnenkamm, LLC v. United States, 159 Fed.Cl. 678 (2022) (Forest Service breached its contractual duty in purchasing private land by influencing the outcome of the independent land appraisal)
McCluskey v. United States, 2022 WL 4008740 (Fed. Cl. 2022) (unlawful taking claims for national forest land were barred by the six-year statute of limitations)
Seneca Sawmill Co. v. United States, 161 Fed. Cl. 619 (2022) (timber contractor not entitled to damages or reimbursement of expenses when their timber contract was terminated)
Pew Forest Prod. V. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 59 (2012) (Forest Service not liable for delay in private forest operations when delay was ordered by a State program).
Scott Timber Co. v. United States, 692 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (federal government did not breach its implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by failing to notify contractor that contracts were at the risk of being suspended due to litigation brought by environmental groups) Text
Timber Products Co. v. United States, 103 Fed. Cl. 225 (2011) (Forest Service acted unreasonably and breached its duties by awarding a timber sale without telling plaintiffs of the risk of injunction and suspension) Text
Blue Lake Forest Prods., Inc. v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 366 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (breach of timber sales contract because of environmental regulations)
Wyoming Sawmills, Inc. v. United States, 90 Fed.Cl. 148 (Fed. Cir. Nov 30, 2009) (exhaustion doctrine applied to extension of timber-harvesting contract)
Heritage Minerals, Inc. v. United States, 71 Fed.Cl. 710, (Fed. Cir. 2006) (groundwater contamination testing as a taking)
Trinity River Lumber Co. v. United States, 66 Fed.Cl. 98 (Fed. Cir. June 20, 2005) (agency contractual duty to consult with timber buyers)
Scott Timber Co. v. United States, 64 Fed.Cl. 130 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (constructive termination of timber contract)
Alpine County, CA v. United States, Fed.Cl.2004, 59 Fed.Cl. 610 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (state/federal revenue sharing in timber sales)
Son Broad., Inc. v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 815 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (special-use permit for broadcasting towers)
ALABAMA
Bruner v. Geneva County Forestry Dep’t, 865 So.2d 1167 (Ala. 2003) (ownership of recovered timber) Text
ALASKA
Galipeau v. Bixby as Trustee of Irrevocable Trust of Rose E. Fong, 476 P.3d 1129 (Alaska 2020) (Neighbor’s breach of subdivision’s restrictive covenants in cutting trees was not independent tort for which he could be liable for punitive damages) Text
Brewer v. Alaska, 341 P.3d 1107 (Alaska 2014) (State Department of Forestry’s action in conducting burnouts on private forestland was an exercise of police power, justified by the doctrine of necessity) Text
Nash v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough, S-13048, 2010 WL 3447841 (Alaska 2010) (breach of contract for sale of timber) Text
ARIZONA
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Water Res., 211 Ariz. 146 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005) (local authority to issue permits to appropriate water for instream flows) Text
ARKANSAS
Bostic v. Stanley, 608 S.W.3d 907 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020) (Proper measure of damages for tenant’s destruction of old oak trees on landowner’s undeveloped land was diminution-of-market-value approach) Text
Douglas v. Shelby Taylor Trucking, 516 S.W.3d 778 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (timber harvest company unjustly enriched when paid for timber harvest but failed to remove the timber because of weather conditions) Text
Lafferty v. Everett, 436 S.W.3d 479 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014) (overgrown fence line not sufficient to put the true owner on notice that the land was being held under adverse possession) Text
McWilliams v. Pope Cty. Bd. of Equalization, 424 S.W.3d 837 (Ark. 2012) (land not suitable for timber use unqualified to be classified as timber land for property tax purposes) Text
Adams v. Atkins, 97 Ark. App. 328, 249 S.W.3d 166 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007) (reliance on Forest Service information for private land ownership dispute) Text
Riddell Flying Serv. v. Callahan, 90 Ark. App. 388, 206 S.W.3d 284 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005) (worker’s compensation benefits for independent contractor of Forestry Commission) Text
CALIFORNIA
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Cnty. of Monterey, 285 Cal. Rptr. 3d 247 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021) (state law regulating land uses preempts county ordinances)
Presbyterian Camp & Conf. Ctr.’s, Inc. v. Superior Court, 501 P.3d 211 (Cal. 2021) (private entity responsible for reimbursement costs of suppressing and investigating a wildfire that was negligently started by the company’s employee) Text
Save the Agoura Cornell Knoll v. City of Agoura Hills, 46 Cal.App.5th 665 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020) (Mitigated negative declaration (MND) was inadequate to address effects of project on sensitive plants, oak tress, and archeological sit, and thus environmental impact report (EIR) was required under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)) Text
Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Protection v. Howell, 18 Cal. App. 5th 154 (2017) (state fire negligence statute does not include vicarious liability) Text
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection, 232 Cal.App.4th 931 (2014) (Department must consider cumulative impact of logging) Text
Earth Island Inst. V. Quinn, 2014 WL 3842912 (E.D. Cal. July 21, 2014) (injunction of timber harvest project denied because delay would cause extensive timber deterioration rates, jeopardizing the entire project, and create permanent economic losses) Text
Avidity Partners, LLC v. State of California, 221 Cal. App. 4th 1180 (2013) (State contract does not guarantee a particular harvest level and the covenants of good faith and fair dealing do not operate to supply a term that an express contract does not otherwise contain) Text
Barnes v. Webb, A123543, 2009 WL 4049152 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 24, 2009) (fatal accident within the project area) Text
Coastside Fishing Club v. Cal. Res. Agency, 158 Cal. App. 4th 1183 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. 2008) (doctrine of separation of powers was not compromised) Text
Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Cal. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., 43 Cal. 4th 936 (Cal. 2008) (timber harvest plans for private land) Text
Envtl. Prot. & Info. Ctr. v. Cal. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., 187 P.3d 888 (Cal. 2008) (sustained yield plan)
Save Round Valley Alliance v. County of Inyo, 157 Cal. App. 4th 1437 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2007) (landowner unwilling to participate in a land exchange) Text
Big Creek Lumber Co. v. County of Santa Cruz, S123659, 2006 WL 3008212 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 24, 2006) (preemptive effect of state forestry law on a local government’s power to regulate land use)
Big Creek Lumber Co. v. County of Santa Cruz, 38 Cal. 4th 1139 (Cal. 2006) (locational zoning provision regarding timber operations)
Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Cal. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., 140 Cal. App. 4th 136 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (timber harvesting plans failure)
Joy Road Area Forest & Watershed Ass’n v. Cal. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., 142 Cal. App. 4th 656 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. 2006) (timber harvest plan challenge) Text
Pacific Lumber Co. v. State Water Res. Control Bd., 37 Cal. 4th 921 (Cal. 2006) (timber harvest plan affected state waters) Text
Save The Altadena Trails v. Traylor, B183888, 2006 WL 3735518 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2006) (reasonable accommodation of the permitted public access)
Citizens for Responsible Forest Mgmt. v. California Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., H026568, 2005 WL 289660 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2005) (parties bear their own costs on appeal)
Sierra Club v. Town of Mammoth Lakes, C044984, 2005 WL 1492006 (Cal. Ct. App. June 23, 2005) (plan to expand airport to accommodate air service using mid-size commercial jets)
Big Creek Lumber Co. v. Santa Cruz, 115 Cal. App. 4th 952 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 2004) (zoning regulations)
Campaign to Restore Jackson State Redwood Forest v. California Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., A102405, 2004 WL 1950312 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 3, 2004) (challenge an award of attorney fees)
Pacific Lumber Co. v. Cal. State Water Res. Control Bd., 116 Cal. App. 4th 1232 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. 2004) (jurisdiction to enforce water quality laws against the lumber company)
Rocky Mt. Animal Def. v. Colo. Div. of Wildlife, 100 P.3d 508 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004) (poisoning nontargeted wildlife) Text
California Oak Found. V. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., A096363, 2002 WL 1970198 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2002) (decision not to list most oaks as commercial species)
Long v. Great Spring Waters of Am., Inc., E030817, 2002 WL 31813096 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 16, 2002) (taking water from the National Forest for resale as bottled water)
COLORADO
Andrew v. Teller Cty. Bd. of Equalization, 284 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012) (size of parcel and residential use disqualified property from agricultural classification based on asserted forestry use) Text
Bd. of County Comm’rs v. BDS Int’l, LLC, 159 P.3d 773 (Colo. 2007) (financial requirements contradicted the state regulation’s financial caps) Text
Tieze v. Killam, 179 P.3d 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007) (private way of necessity over a mining road) Text
Bd. of County Comm’rs v. BDS Int’l, LLC, 159 P.3d 773 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006) (federal preemption in local regulation of oil and gas operations) Text
Friends of the Black Forest Reg’l Park, Inc. v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 80 P.3d 871 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003) (limited subject property’s uses) Text
Wark v. Bd. of County Comm’rs, 47 P.3d 711 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002) (car accident on a road in a national forest) Text
W. Elk Ranch, L.L.C. v. United States (In re Water Rights), 65 P.3d 479 (Colo. 2002) (conditional water right) Text
CONNECTICUT
Kronenberger v. Town of Haddam, 2012 WL 5860320 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 26, 2012) (Shed on property does not declassify acreage as forest land).
Wysocki v. Town of Ellington, 109 Conn. App. 287, 951 A.2d 598 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008) (declassification of land parcels as forest land) Text
Kiesel v. Redding, CV065005855, 2007 WL 3317972 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 24, 2007) (responsibility for maintenance of roads within state forest)
Old Lot No. 30, LLC v. Town of Ellington, CV010076261S, 2006 WL 240532 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 12, 2006) (excessive valuation of forest land)
Sackler v. Inland Wetlands Agency of Town of Woodbridge, CV03041705S, 2006 WL 3316991 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 30, 2006) (cease and desist order issued by Inland Wetland Agency against land developer)
Rocque v. Mellon, 881 A.2d 972 (Conn. 2005) (violation of state Environmental Protection Act for destruction of forestland) Text
Ventres v. Goodspeed Airport, LLC, 881 A.2d 937 (Conn. 2005) (airport’s prescriptive easement over privately-owner adjacent land did not permit it to clear-cut land under state or federal law) Text
Carmel Hollow Associates Ltd. P’ship v. Town of Bethlehem, 848 A.2d 451 (Conn. 2004) (denied application for continuation of forest land classification)
Ventres v. Goodspeed Airport, X07CV010076812S, 2004 WL 1245908 (Conn. Super. Ct. May 21, 2004) (unlawful destruction of forestland)
Williams v. Town of Litchfield, CV030090384S, 2004 WL 1558056 (Conn. Super. Ct. June 18, 2004) (assessment of forest land)
State v. Ball, 796 A.2d 542, 545 (Conn. 2002) (constitutionality of state Hunter Harassment Act, which applies to state parks and forests)
Stepney Pond Estates, Ltd. v. Town of Monroe, 797 A.2d 494, 496 (Conn. 2002) (contesting imposition of conveyance tax on individual who transferred forestland) Text
DELAWARE
Bridgeville Rifle & Pistol Club, Ltd. v. Small, 176 A.3d 632 (Del. 2017) (Regulations effecting a total ban on carrying for self-defense in parks and forests violated Delaware’s constitutional right to bear arms) Text
Miller v. Nat’l Land Partners, LLC, 2014 WL 2601378 (Del. Ch. June 11, 2014) Text
Trustees of Vill. of Arden v. Unity Const. Co., CIV.A. 15025-VCN, 2009 WL 1530711 (Del. Ch. May 27, 2009) (application of “reasonable use” doctrine to management of storm water that causes erosion to woodland) Text
FLORIDA
Lopez-Brignoni v. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 314 So.3d 318 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020) (Proximity of health, noncommercial citrus trees did not preclude inverse condemnation claims arising from tree’s destruction) Text
Palm Beach Polo, Inc. v. Vill. of Wellington, 918 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006) (enforcement of developing plan that required restoration of a forest) Text
GEORGIA
Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products, LP v. Ratner, 812 S.E.2d 120 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018) (recycled paper mill plant was a “forest products” processing plant entitled to nuisance-liability protections of the “right to farm” statute) Text
Cherokee Cty. Bd. of Tax Assessors v. Mason, 798 S.E.2d 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 2017) (rental of residence on property does not preclude qualification for Conservation Use Valuation Assessment) Text
Georgia Forestry Comm’n v. Canady, 617 S.E.2d 569 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005) (discussing liability of state Forestry Commission for injury sustained by driving on smoke-covered highway)
HAWAI’I
State v. Heyer, 173 P.3d 611 (Haw. Ct. App. 2008) (prosecution for illegal feral goat hunt on a public forest reserve) Text
Sierra Club v. Hawai’i Tourism Auth., 100 Haw. 242 (Haw. 2002) (environmental assessment when selecting a contractor to provide tourism marketing services) Text
IDAHO
State v. Murray, 148 P.3d 1278 (Idaho Ct. App. 2006) (violation of road closure order by U.S. Forest Service for the purpose of facilitating legal hunting) Text
ILLINOIS
McElroy v. Forest Pres. Dist. of Lake County, 894 N.E.2d 170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008) (“riding trail” was within the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act) Text
Stahelin v. Forest Pres. Dist. of Du Page County, 768, 877 N.E.2d 1121 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007) (attempted condemnation of forestland for conservation purposes) Text
Mull v. Kane County Forest Pres. Dist., 786 N.E.2d 236 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003) (county forest preserve district has tort immunity for action by bicyclist for injuries sustained on forestland) Text
INDIANA
William J. Huff, II Revocable Tr. Declaration, Dated June 28, 2011 v. Cain, 120 N.E.3d 1029 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019) (injunction prohibiting the harvesting of timber from dominant tenement holders’ landlocked property was overboard) Text
Arnold v. State, 61 N.E.3d 1171 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (Defendant was engaged in the “business of timber buying” and thus needed a license to purchase timber) Text
Dekalb Cty. Assessor v. Chavez, 48 N.E.3d 928 (Ind. T.C. 2016) (Board of Tax Review properly classified 2.72 wooded acres as agricultural, rather than excess residential) Text
Sheek v. Morin Logging, 993 N.E.2d 280 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (Failure to perform logging in workman-like manner without undue disturbance is a temporary, not permanent, damage, allowing for proper measure of damages to be cost of repair) Text
Guingrich v. Allen County Assessor, 49T10-0812-SC-68, 2010 WL 1064372 (Ind. Tax Mar. 24, 2010) (challenge to reclassification of land from woodland to excess residential acreage)
McCall v. State of Indiana Dep’t of Natural Res. Div. of Forestry, 821 N.E.2d 924 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (allegedly-defective seedlings from a state nursery)
IOWA
Sallee v. Stewart, 827 N.W.2d 128 (Iowa 2013) (landowners may not avail themselves of the limited protections of the recreational use statute when a participant is not engaged in a recreational purpose within the scope of the statute) Text
Bushby v. Washington County Conservation Bd., 654 N.W.2d 494 (Iowa 2002) (proactive management of trees in county-owned forested areas was under conservation board’s authority) Text
KANSAS
In re Goddard, 39 Kan. App. 2d 325, 180 P.3d 604 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008) (no exemption from ad valorem tax on equipment utilized in tree harvesting and sawmill operation) Text
KENTUCKY
Energy and Env’t Cabinet v. Shrader, 658 S.W.3d 475 (Ky. Ct. App 2022) (private landowner not entitled to a review of the order that permitted forestry logging operations on his property) Text
Penix v. Delong, 473 S.W.3d 509 (Ky. 2015) (holding that “when a landowner has engaged in an independent contractor to cut timber, there must be some evidence that the landowner – not the logger – intended to ‘convert to his own use timber growing upon the land of another”) Text
King v. Grecco, 111 S.W.3d 877 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002) (civil liability for wrongful cutting of timber by trespasser) Text
LOUISIANA
Sherwood Forest Country Club v. Litchfield, 998 So. 2d 56 (La. 2008) (federal income tax exemption) Text
Sustainable Forests, L.L.C. v. Harrison, 846 So. 2D 1283, 1283 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2003) (right of lessee to make use of easements over forest roads) Text
Merlin B. Smith, Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Cas., 811 So. 2D 1097 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2002) (forestry company denied coverage by insurance company for marking and cutting wrong trees) Text
MAINE
Black v. Bureau of Parks and Lands, 288 A.3d 346 (Me. 2022) (utility transmission line did not frustrate existing land uses)
Maine Forest Products Council v. Cornier, 586 F.Supp.3d 22 (Me. 2022) (Maine statute prohibiting non-residents from transporting forest products within the state preempted) Text
Francis Small Heritage Tr., Inc v. Town of Limington, 98 A.3d 1012 (Me. 2014) (Open space held by “forever-wild” conservation easements, with purpose of conserving natural resources and providing access to those natural resources, were subject to state property tax exemption as a benevolent and charitable organization) Text
Putnam v. Maine Bd. of Licensure for Foresters, CIV.A. AP-0524, 2006 WL 1679717 (Me. Super. Ct. Apr. 28, 2006) (review of suspension of forestry license by the Forestry Board)
State v. Tibbetts, CV-00-43, 2006 WL 367847 (Me. Super. Ct. Jan. 19, 2006) (violation of state consumer protection laws for unlawfully providing forestry services without a license)
Hanson v. Jiorle, RE-01-019, 2002 WL 31360612 (Me. Super. Ct. Sept. 9, 2002) (trespass case for negligent and unintentional removal of timber)
MARYLAND
Matter of Murphy, 2023 WL 2999975 (Md. 2023) (property owners violated forest conservation provisions when they graded their property without permits)
Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Creg Westport I, LLC, 281 A.3d 906 (Md. 2022) (the Forest Conservation Act requires a reight to appeal local decisions, so the planning board’s decision is subject to judicial review) Text
City of Annapolis v. Annapolis Neck Peninsula Fed., 2017 WL 4117877 (Md. Ct. Sp. App. Sep. 15, 2017) (Building Board of Appeals authorized to review decisions under the Forest Conservation Act) Text
Maryland-Nat’l Capital Park & Planning Comm’n v. Mardirossian, 964 A.2d 713 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2009) cert. granted, 409 Md. 44, 972 A.2d 859 (2009), appeal dismissed, 409 Md. 413, 975 A.2d 875 (2009) (forest conservation plans) Text
John Deere Constr. & Forestry Co. v. Reliable Tractor, Inc., 957 A.2d 595 (Md. 2008) (termination of a dealer contract) Text
MASSACHUSETTS
New England Forestry Found., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessors of Hawley, 9 N.E.3d 310 (2014) (nonprofit corporation that owned a parcel of forest land entitled to charitable tax exemption on the parcel) Text
S. St. Nominee Trust v. Bd. of Assessors of Carlisle, 878 N.E.2d 931 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007) (withdrawal of property from forestry classification)
Sierra Club v. Comm’r of Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt., 791 N.E.2d 325 (Mass. 2003) (environmental impact of plan to expand ski facilities on a state reservation) Text
MICHIGAN
Charter Twp. Of Canton v. 44650, Inc., 2023 WL 2938991 (Mich. Ct. App. 2023) (local tree ordinance prohibiting tree removal did not violate the Fourth Amendment or the Eighth Amendment, but did violate the Takings Clause of the state and federal constitutions)
Dep’t of Env’t, Great Lakes, and Energy v. Brotherton, 2023 WL 174818 (Mich. Ct. App. 2023) (logging road was not deemed illegal because it utilized an unused forest road and had minimal adverse environmental impacts)
Keep Michigan Wolves Protected v. State, Dep’t of Nat. Res., No. 328604, 2016 WL 6905923 (Mich. Ct. App. Nov. 22, 2016) (Provision of Scientific Fish and Wildlife Management Act allowing free hunting licenses for military members violated state constitution)
Fawcett v. Estate of Meyer, 253819, 2005 WL 2249499 (Mich. Ct. App. Sept. 15, 2005) (economic value of reforestation efforts on private land)
MINNESOTA
Cty. of Aitkin v. Blandin Paper Co., 883 N.W.2d 803 (Minn. 2016) (County appropriately applied unit-rule method in determining fair market value of property) Text
Minnesota Ctr. for Envtl. Advocacy v. Holsten, A08-2171, 2009 WL 2998037 (Minn. Ct. App. Sept. 22, 2009) (Department of Natural Resources property addressed environmental effects on forests regarding taconite mine project) Text
Minnesotans for Responsible Recreation v. Dep’t of Natural Res., 651 N.W.2d 533 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) (off-highway vehicle plans; environmental assessments) Text
Minn. Ctr. for Envt’l Advocacy v. Minn. Pollution Control Agency, 644 N.W.2d 457 (Minn. 2002) (environmental impact statement) Text
MISSISSIPPI
Mayberry v. Cottonport Hardwoods, 2022 WL 16757644 (Miss. Ct. App. 2022) (trucking company subcontractor who was injured on the job was not qualified to collect from logging company who hired the trucking company that the injured worker was employed by)
Hazlehurst Lumber Co., Inc. v. Mississippi Forestry Comm’n, 983 So. 2d 309 (Miss. 2008) (misrepresentations regarding number of trees on property)
MISSOURI
Ford v. Giovanelli, 660 S.W.3d 467 (Mo. Ct. App. 2023) (injunction prohibiting adjoining property owners from restricting access to private road leading to landlocked parcel upheld) Text
McGibney v. Missouri Dep’t of Natural Resources, 653 S.W.3d 665 (Mo. Ct. App. 2022) (private scenic easement did not preclude state from acquiring land for park purposes, or from permitting public use) Text
MONTANA
Park County Environmental Council v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, 447 P.3d 288 (Mont. 2020) (Statutes prohibiting injunctive relief for violation of Montana Environmental Policy Act violated state constitution’s guarantee of clean environment)
Oberson v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., Forest Serv., 171 P.3d 715 (Mont. 2007) (failing to correct or warn of a dangerous condition on snowmobile trail)
Friends of the Wild Swan v. Dep’t of Natural Res. & Conservation, 330 Mont. 186, 127 P.3d 394 (Mont. 2005) (methodology used in evaluating timber sale transaction on school trust lands) Text
Romans v. Franks, 2003 MT 11N (Mont. 2003) (special use permit for private vehicular access to a road)
NEBRASKA
Scurlocke v. Hansen, 268 Neb. 548, 684 N.W.2d 565 (2004) (private action for damages when adjacent owner removed trees from land) Text
NEW JERSEY
ZRB, LLC v. New Jersey Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., Land Use Regulation, 959 A.2d 866 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2008) (denied permit to fill wetlands based upon presence of threatened species) Text
In re Permit No. 1512-03-0093.1 Issued to Toll Bros., Inc., A-4264-03T5, 2007 WL 1365399 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. May 10, 2007) (permits challenge)
Wilson v. Hopewell Twp., 23 N.J. Tax 240, 247 (N.J. Tax Ct. 2006) (standards for determining when land used for the production of forest products may be deemed agricultural) Text
In re Freshwater Wetlands General Permit Number 16, 878 A.2d 22, (N.J. Super. App. Div. Jul 29, 2005) (freshwater wetlands general permit) Text
Alexandria Twp. v. Orban, 21 N.J. Tax 298 (N.J. Tax Ct. 2004) (assessment of farmland as “woodlot” under the Farmland Assessment Act) Text
Safari Club Int’l v. New Jersey Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 862 A.2d 1152 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2004) (statutory authority to close state lands to bear hunting)
NEW MEXICO
Walker v. United States, 162 P.3d 882 (N.M. 2007) (cancellation of grazing permit on U.S. Forest Service lands) Text
Paragon Found., Inc. v. N.M. Livestock Bd., 126 P.3d 577 (N.M. 2006) (requirement of valid permit for placing livestock on land owned by Forest Service) Text
State v. Quintana, 143 N.M. 538 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006) (motor vehicle accident on a state road) Text
NEW YORK
Protect the Adirondacks! Inc. v. New York State Dep’t of Env’t Conservation, 37 N.Y.3d 73, 170 N.E.3d 424 (N.Y. 2021) (proposed 27 miles of snowmobile trials in state park was unconstitutional under the “forever wild” provision of the constitution) Text
Protect the Adirondacks! Inc. v. New York State Dep’t of Env’t Conservation, 175 A.D.3d 24 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021) (Construction of forest preserve trails, requiring removal of 25,000 trees, violated provision of state constitution prohibiting destruction of timber) Text
Adirondack Wild: Friends of the Forest Pres. v. New York State Adirondack Park Agency, 34 N.Y.3d 184 (N.Y. 2019) (Segment of road was properly determined to be snowmobile connector trail by Department of Environmental Conservation) Text
Backus v. Lyme Adirondack Timberlands II, LLC, 96 A.D.3d 1248 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012) (damages for injury to property for cut down and destroyed trees by timber company was fair market value of the trees) Text
Corvetti v. Winchell, 75 A.D.3d 1013 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (forest land certified as such by the Department of Environmental Conservation is used as forest land for tax purposes) Text
Matter of Residents’ Comm. to Protect the Adirondacks, Inc. v. Adirondack Park Agency, No. 10045-09, 899 N.Y.S.2d 62 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 13, 2009) (construction of new ski trails as part of management plan) Text
Cohen v. State of New York, 2007 NY Slip Op 51135U (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2007) (minimum use of warning signs) Text
State v. Town of Horicon, 46 A.D.3d 1287 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007) (constitutionality of town law which opened routes on state forest lands for use by all-terrain vehicles) Text
Gordon v. Town of Esopus, 31 A.D.3d 981 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006) (comparable sales of other properties designated as forest land)
People v. McCulley, 801 N.Y.S.2d 240 (N.Y. Co. Ct. 2005) (prosecution for unlawfully operating a snowmobile on U.S. Forest Service property)
NORTH CAROLINA
King v. Duke Energy Progress, LLC, 854 S.E.2d 593 (N.C. Ct. App. 2021) (Evidence of replacement cost of the ornamental maple trees created issue for jury in landowner’s statutory action for trespass to timber) Text
Jackson v. Don Jonson Forestry, Inc., 830 S.E.2d 659 (N.C. Ct. App. 2019) (estate beneficiaries entitled to damages when life tenant removed trees) Text
In re Grandfather Mountain Steward’p Found., 762 S.E.2d 364 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014) (Property not entitled to property tax exemption because it was not wholly and exclusively used for scientific purposes) Text
In re Family Tree Farm, LLC, 721 S.E.2d 387 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012) (Commission properly valuated property based on present-use value, rather than true, or market, value) Text
In re McLamb, 721 S.E.2d 285 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012) (State Board of Equalization not statutorily required to consider soil quality in its property evaluation) Text
Myers v. McGrady, 170 N.C. App. 501, 613 S.E.2d 334 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005) rev’d, 628 S.E.2d 761 (N.C. 2006) (“public duty” exception to Tort Claims Act is not applicable to shield Division of Forest Resources from liability for negligently failing to extinguish forest fire)
NORTH DAKOTA
Dixon v. McKenzie County Grazing Ass’n, 675 N.W.2d 414 (N.D. 2004) (dilution of grazing preferences; unauthorized grazing) Text
OHIO
State ex rel. Lakeview Local Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Trumbull County Bd. of Comm’rs, 109 Ohio St. 3d 200 (Ohio 2006) (distribution of money received by the county from the State for federal mineral royalties)
Ferrone v. Medina Cty. Bd. of Revision, 827 N.E.2d 316 (Ohio 2005) (taxable value of forest land)
Buckeye Forest Council v. Div. of Mineral Res. Mgmt., No. 01 BA 18, 2002 WL 1371007 (Ohio Ct. App., Belmont County June 14, 2002) (mining in a forest area)
OREGON
County of Linn v. State, 510 P.3d 962 (Or. Ct. App. 2022) (state not required to maximize revenues on forestlands acquired from county) Text
Eichorn v. Yamill Cnty. Assessor, 2022 WL 4684631 (Or. T.C. 2022) (county estopped from assessing backtaxes on rezoned property)
Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Ctr. v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 2022 WL 856035 (Ore. 2022) (preliminary injunctive relief to protect owl habitat denied because merits of the claim were insufficient)
Bert Brundige, LLC v. Dep’t of Revenue, 485 P.3d 269 (Or. 2021) (Excavators used for logging road work are the only type of equipment qualifying as “logging equipment” eligible for property tax exemption) Text
Blumenkron v. Hallova, 568 F.Supp.3d 1093 (Ore. 2021) (state’s land reserve statute, which provides long-term protection for agriculture and forestry, does not facially violate private property owners’ due process protections) Text
Stedman v. State by and through Department of Forestry, 502 P.3d 234 (Or. Ct. App. 2021) (negligence claim when plaintiff was injured while riding an ATV in National Forest land dismissed) Text
Anantha v. Clarno, 461 P.3d 282 (Or. Ct. App. 2020) (Proposed amendments to forestland statue complied with state constitution’s requirement that a proposed law embrace only a single subject) Text
Cascadia Wildlands v. Oregon Department of State Lands, 452 P.3d 938 (Or. 2019) (Statute that defined duties of State Land Board with respect to a particular state forest not inconsistent with state constitution) Text
Coast Range Ass’n v. Lincoln Cty. Assessor, 2017 WL 129101 (Or. T.C. Jan. 13, 2017) (research center qualifies for property tax exemption as a scientific organization) Text
Kaur v. Clackamas Cty. Assessor, 2017 WL 3895756 (Or. T.C. Sept. 6, 2017) (County assessor must give notice of intent to disqualify property from forestland special assessment) Text
Lance v. Hood River Cty. Assessor, 2016 WL 5647382 (Or. T.C. Sept. 29, 2016) (Forestland special assessment applies because the two contiguous plots meet the minimum acreage requirements for the forestland designation) Text
Angel v. Dep’t of Rev., 2014 WL 3647452 (Or. T.C. July 24, 2014) (Use of property consistent with predominant purpose of harvesting marketable timber and thus forestland for purposes of the Forestland Special Assessment) Text
Goucher v. Multnomah Cty. Assessor, 2012 WL 2196086 (Or. T.C. June 15, 2012) (no evidence land was being held or used for the predominate purpose of growing and harvesting trees and thus not forestland) Text
Rosalie Ridge LLC v. Multnomah City. Assessor, 2012 WL 6194186 (Or. T.C. Dec. 11, 2012) (taxpayer failed to establish the predominant purpose of the property qualified as “forestland” as defined under the tax law) Text
Sarra v. Yamhill County Assessor, TC-MD 091431B, 2010 WL 2565135 (Or. T.C. June 28, 2010) (denial of land from forestland special assessment) Text
State, ex rel. Dep’t of Forestry v. PacifiCorp, 237 P.3d 861 (Or. Ct. App. 2010) opinion adhered to as modified on reconsideration, 042975L3, 2010 WL 3489343 (Or. Ct. App. Sept. 8, 2010) (liability of logging company for causing forest fire by negligently clearing trees)
Friends of Yamhill County v. Yamhill County, 211 P.3d 297 (Or. Ct. App. 2009) (requirements of forest template dwelling) Text
Friends of the Columbia Gorge, Inc. v. Columbia River Gorge Comm’n, 346 Ore. 366 (Or., July 16, 2009) (area management plan provisions did not adequately protect natural and cultural resources)
Tucker v. Lane County Assessor, TC-MD 080902D, 2009 WL 88120 (Or. T.C. Jan. 14, 2009) (denial of land from forestland special assessment)
Hale v. Klemp, 184 P.3d 1185 (Or. Ct. App. 2008) (trespass claim for application of chemical herbicide to trees on forest land) Text
Friends of the Columbia Gorge, Inc. v. Columbia River Gorge Comm’n, 215 Ore. App. 557 (Or. Ct. App. 2007) (expansion of existing industrial uses throughout scenic area)
Birmingham v. Dep’t of Forestry, 149 P.3d 600 (Or. Ct. App. 2006) (approval of land exchange between state Department of Forestry and private landowners)
Birmingham v. Dep’t of Forestry (In re G & N Land Exchange), 209 Ore. App. 736 (Or. Ct. App. 2006) (land exchange between Oregon Department of Forestry and private landowners)
Holland v. Josephine County Assessor, TC-MD 050653B, 2006 WL 3053316 (Or. T.C. Oct. 26, 2006) (tax designation of small tract forestland)
Meyer v. Lane County Assessor, TC-MD 050572E, 2006 WL 1132356 (Or. T.C. Apr. 21, 2006) (denial of application for forestland special tax assessment)
Coast Range Conifers, LLC v. State ex rel. Oregon State Bd. of Forestry, 117 P.3d 990 (Or. 2005) (denial of Board of Forestry to grant permit to logging company) Text
Hoversland v. Washington County Assessor, TC-MD 031070B, 2005 WL 1083700 (Or. T.C. Jan. 27, 2005) (no longer qualified for “Special Assessment as Designated Forestland” because it did not meet stocking requirement)
Sisters Forest Planning Comm. v. Deschutes County, 108 P.3d 1175 (Or. Ct. App. 2005) (county approval of individual’s application to build dwelling on land zoned for forest) Text
Boise Cascade Corp. v. Bd. of Forestry, 63 P.3d 598 (Or. Ct. App. 2003) (denial of logging permit by Board of Forestry’s due to presence of spotted owl) Text
Dep’t of Revenue v. Rankin, 17 OTR 124 (Or. T.C. 2003) (property of taxpayers qualified for forest deferral)
Gambee v. Dep’t of Forestry, 81 P.3d 734 (Or. Ct. App. 2003) (imposition of penalties by Board of Forestry for violations of Forest Practices Act) Text
Thomas Creek Lumber & Log Co. v. Bd. of Forestry, 69 P.3d 1238 (Or. Ct. App. 2003) (civil penalties for violations of timber harvesting provisions) Text
Allen v. Lane County Assessor, 011168C, 2002 WL 902078 (Or. T.C. Apr. 26, 2002) (property is disqualified from forestland special tax assessment)
Rankin v. Lane County Assessor, 010811D, 2002 WL 32732655 (Or. T.C. Aug. 29, 2002) (removal of private property from forest deferral; re-designated as “tidelands”)
State v. Meredith, 184 Ore. App. 523 (Or. Ct. App. 2002) (no evidence of a cognizable privacy interest) Text
PENNSYLVANIA
McNew v. East Marlborough Township, 2023 WL 3081354 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023) (township’s denial of private owner’s application to timber his property was ripe for judicial review; case permitted to proceed)
Sher v. Berks County Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 940 A.2d 629 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008) (tax assessment of forest land under the state Clean and Green Act) Text
Stoltzfus v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Eden Twp., Lancaster County, 937 A.2d 548 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2007) (landowner’s log processing business did not constitute a forestry use) Text
Chrin Bros., Inc. v. Williams Twp. Zoning Hearing Bd., 815 A.2d 1179 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2003) (zoning ordinance prohibiting clear cutting was not unduly restrictive) Text
Wending Creek 3656, LLC v. Potter County Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 885 A.2d 690 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005) (alteration of forest land under the state Farmland and Forest Land Assessment Act) Text
Texas Keystone Inc. v. Pennsylvania Dep’t of Conservation & Natural Res., 851 A.2d 228 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2004) (permits for natural gas on forest land denied)
RHODE ISLAND
Providence Water Supply Bd. v. Beattie, C.A. 02-5166, 2006 WL 270096 (R.I. Super. Feb. 3, 2006) (rejection of application for forest land tax classification) Text
SOUTH CAROLINA
Swanson v. Stratos, 350 S.C. 116, 564 S.E.2d 117 (S.C. Ct. App. 2002) (forester seeks to recover for sale of timber and marking reserved area for woodpecker) Text
SOUTH DAKOTA
Titus v. Chapman, 687 N.W.2d 918 (SD 2004) (reliance on U.S. Forest Service survey for private land dispute) Text
TENNESSEE
Allstate Porperty & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Sevier Cnty. Elec. Sys., 666 S.W.3d 429 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2022) (electrical utility’s vegetation management contractor not liable for wildfire sparked by fall of decaying tree from outside right of way)
W. Exp., Inc. v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson County, M2005-00353-COA-R3CV, 2007 WL 2089744 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 11, 2007) (urban forester’s authority to ensure compliance with local tree density ordinance)
TEXAS
State v. Siller, 01-09-00494-CR, 2010 WL 987748 (Tex. App. Mar. 18, 2010) (criminal liability for unlawful outdoor burning of timber) Text
State v. River Forest Dev. Co., 315 S.W.3d 128 (Tex. App. 2010) (regulation authorizing outdoor burning for land clearing was not unconstitutionally vague) Text
State v. Montgomery County, 262 S.W.3d 439 (Tex. App. 2008) (county exercise of eminent domain power over state forest land) Text
Sullivan v. Smith, 110 S.W.3d 545 (Tex. App. 2003) (commission contracts between forester and timber owners) Text
UTAH
State v. Reber, 171 P.3d 406 (Utah 2007) (attempted wanton destruction of protected wildlife) Text
VERMONT
Sanville v. Town of Albany, 279 A.3d 127 (Vt. 2022) (deed permitting limited uses that included forestry purposes on a property did not prohibit logging operations) Text
Plum Creek Maine Timberlands, LLC v. Vt. Dep’t of Forests, Parks, and Recreation, 155 A.3d 694 (Vt. 2016) (agency deference in determining of residual basal area measurement methodology and with landowner’s compliance with forest-management plan) Text
In re Moore Accessory Structure Permit and Use, 75 A.3d 625 (Vt. 2013) (buildings on farms used to process timber into lumber were farm structures exempt from local zoning regulations) Text
In re Vill. Associates Act 250 Land Use Permit, 998 A.2d 712 (Vt. 2010) (cost of removing trees for housing development).
In re Shaw, 945 A.2d 919 (Vt. 2008) (local zoning protections of forested areas and placement of telecommunications towers) Text
Jones v. Dep’t of Forests, Parks & Recreation, 857 A.2d 271 (Vt. 2004) (violation of forest management plans)
VIRGINIA
Mount Aldie, LLC v. Land Trust of Virginia, 796 S.E.2d 549 (2017) (“New opening or clearing” in an easement agreement means “a newly created area that has been cleared of standing timber and/or brush, and not merely the act of disturbing the earth or doing so while in the act of selective cutting and/or removing dead and diseased trees from an existing clearing or opening”) Text
Campbell v. Com., Dep’t of Forestry, 616 S.E.2d 33 (Va. Ct. App. 2005) (orders issued by Department of Forestry regarding silvicultural activities affecting water quality)
Amstutz v. Everett Jones Lumber Corp., 604 S.E.2d 437 (Va. 2004) (use of private roads for purposes of forestry, timbering, or logging, and prescriptive easements) Text
WASHINGTON
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife, 14 Wash. App. 2d 945 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020) (Timber hunt rule governing use of bait to hunt black bear as part of timber damage program exceeded Department’s statutory authority)
Schulz v. State, 459 P.3d 1090 (Wash. 2020) (the public duty doctrine applied to landowners’ claims against the Department of Natural Resources for fire damage) Text
Gunn v. Riely, 185 Wash. App. 517 (2017) (timber trespass statute applies on non-commercial logging land) Text
Hurley v. Port Blakely Tree Farms L.P., 182 Wash. App. 753 (2014) (logging is not an inherently dangerous activity subject to strict liability) Text
Chuckanut Conservancy v. Washington State Dep’t of Natural Res., 232 P.3d 1154 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010) (reliance on environmental impact statements regarding part of forest set aside) Text
Ruiz v. State, 225 P.3d 458 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010) review denied, 236 P.3d 896 (Wash. 2010) (forest landowner and state are immune under Forest Practices Act to negligence claim) Text
Stafne v. Snohomish County, 234 P.3d 225 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010) (application to rezone property from commercial forest land to low density rural residential land) Text
Westergreen v. Whatcom County, 156 Wash. App. 1032 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010) (right of state Department of Natural Resources to request reconveyance of state forest lands)
Cascade Floral Products, Inc. v. Dep’t of Labor & Indus., 177 P.3d 124 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008) (brush picking companies did not perform forestation) Text
Washington State Dep’t of Natural Res. v. Browning, 147 Wash. App. 1031 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008) (requirement of forest practices permits for timber harvesting)
Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. W. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 199 P.3d 1198 (Wash. 2007) (“no harm” standard can be adequate for critical area protection)
Woods v. Kittitas County, 174 P.3d 25 (Wash. 2007) (re-zoning forest land to range and rural land) Text
Alpine Lakes Prot. Soc’y v. Washington State Dep’t of Ecology, 144 P.3d 385 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006) (rulemaking authority of state Forest Practices Board and state Department of Ecology)
Alpental Cmty. Club, Inc. v. Seattle Gymnastics Soc., 111 P.3d 257 (Wash. 2005) (nuisance action against upslope clear-cutting) Text
Friends of the Col. Gorge v. Forest Prac. Bd., 118 P.3d 354 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005) (permit to convert forest land within a special management area to new agricultural use)
Johnson Forestry Contracting, Inc. v. Washington State Dep’t of Natural Res., 126 P.3d 45 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005) (deviation from forestry and timber harvesting applications and violations of the Forest Practices Act) Text
State Owned Forests v. Sutherland, 101 P.3d 880 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004) (Department of Natural Resources’ decision to extend resource plan is a propriety decision not subject to judicial review) Text
Henderson v. Kittitas County, 100 P.3d 842 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004) (re-zoning land from forest and range land to agricultural land) Text
In re Tortorelli, 66 P.3d 606 (Wash. 2003) (liability for salvaging stray logs and submerged trees; state owned ancient forest remnants and submerged logs) Text
Kettle Range v. Dep’t of Nat. Res., 85 P.3d 894 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003) (determination of nonsignificance and approval of a watershed analysis)
Nw. Ecosystem Alliance v. Washington Forest Practices Bd., 66 P.3d 614 (Wash. 2003) (obligation of state to promulgate regulations under Forest Practices Act and other environmental protection laws) Text
Thornhill v. King County, No. 51277-3-I, 116 Wash. App. 1034 (Wash. Ct. App. April 7, 2003) (clearing and grading private property without a permit)
Holbrook, Inc. v. Clark County, 49 P.3d 142 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (designation of developer’s property as forest resource land under Growth Management Act) Text
WEST VIRGINIA
Penn. Virginia Operating Co. v. Yokum, 829 S.E.2d 747 (W.Va. 2019) (Dept. of Forestry’s ruling that properties were not eligible for valuation as managed timberland, with no actual recourse, violated taxpayer’s due process) Text
Collett v. Eastern Royalty, LLC, 751 S.E.2d 12 (W. Va. 2013) (County assessors excluded from appraising natural resource properties; rather, natural resource property appraisal is in the jurisdiction of only the Tax Commissioner) Text
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
WISCONSIN
SECURA Ins. v. Lyme St. Croix Forest Co., LLC, 918 N.W.2d 885 (WI 2018) (fire considered a “single occurrence,” despite burning several properties) Text
Wisconsin Dep’t of Nat. Res. v. Timber & Wood Products Located in Sawyer Cty., 906 N.W.2d 707 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017) (Dept. of Nat. Res lien did not predate Tribe’s ownership of timber, and enforcement of a lien would invalidate the Tribe’s possession of its own property in contradiction to United States Supreme Court precedent) Text
Sausen v. Town of Black Creek Bd. of Review, 843 N.W.2d 39 (Wis. 2014) (property properly assessed as productive forest land and taxpayer has burden of proving otherwise) Text
Town of Somerset v. Wisc. Dep’t of Nat. Res., 798 N.W.2d 282 (Wis. 2011) (State required to pay withdrawal tax payment back to village after village withdrew village property from state managed forest program)
Heritage Farms, Inc. v. Markel Ins. Co., 762 N.W.2d 652 (Wis. 2008) (liability of campers and campground to property owners who suffered damages from fire) Text
State v. Gustafson, Nos. 2008AP845-FT, 2008AP846-FT, 2008 WL 4684340 (Wis. Ct. App. Aug. 26, 2008) (criminal conviction for harvesting raw forest products without notification; state must prove products were in fact raw forest products)
In re Estate of Warnecke, 713 N.W.2d 109 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006) (grantor not entitled to return of property after death of grantee who failed to continue enrollment of property under the managed forest land program)
Vill. of Lannon v. Wood-Land Contractors, Inc., 672 N.W.2d 275 (Wis. 2003) (tax statute setting forth personal property exemption for logging equipment required use of equipment test) Text
Bill’s Distrib., Ltd. v. Cormican, 647 N.W.2d 908 (Wis. App. 2002) (measure of damages for timber trespass) Text
WYOMING
Billings v. Wyo. Bd. of Outfitters & Prof’l Guides, 88 P.3d 455 (Wyo. 2004) (outfitter’s license revoked) Text
Yeager v. Forbes, 78 P.3d 241 (Wyo. 2003) (no public or private prescriptive easement) Text