Case Law Index Forestry

January 1, 2002 – August 7, 2019

 

This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving Forestry 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.  These listings are for educational purposes only, and are not a substitute for legal counsel.


 

SUPREME COURT

Decker v. Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr., 568 U.S. 597 (2013) (Clean Water Act ldoes 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. United States EPA, 2005 United States Briefs 1120 (U.S. Oct. 24, 2006) (global climate change)

Mining & Minerals Div. of the Energy Minerals & Natural Resources Dep’t Of New Mexico & New Mexico Env’t Dep’t v. Edwina Manning & Dutton, 2006 United States Briefs 242604 (U.S. Aug. 16, 2006) (state-court damages actions under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment)


 

FIRST CIRCUIT

Sierra Club v. Wagner, 555 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2009) (approval of two forest management plans) Text


 

SECOND CIRCUIT

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

Allegheny Def. Project, Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 423 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. 2005) (judicial review under APA of two decisions by USFS) Text


 

FOURTH CIRCUIT

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

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

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

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)

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

Donham v. United States Forest Serv., No. 07-CV-111-MJR, 2008 WL 5221102 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 12, 2008) (FOIA request moot)

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

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

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

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).

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

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

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).

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

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

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

Estate of Guistina v. C.I.R., 586 Fed. App’x 417 (9th Cir. 2014) (Tax Court obligated to detail its reasoning).

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).

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)

Native Ecosystems Council v. Tidwell, 599 F.3d 926 (Ninth Circuit 2010) (Forest Service’s application of the National Forest Management Act) 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)

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)

Native Ecosystems Council v. United States Forest Serv., 54 Fed. Appx. 901 (9th Cir. 2003) (change in timber pricing algorithm)

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.)

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)

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

California State Grange v. National Marine Fisheries Service, 620 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (E.D. Cal. October 27, 2008) (forestry group lacked standing) 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

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

United States v. Park, 536 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2008) (violation of scenic easement)

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)

WildWest Inst. v. Bull, 547 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2008) (decision to pre-mark trees for cutting did not violate NEPA) Text

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

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)

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

Friends of the Columbia Gorge, Inc. v. Elicker, 598 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (D. Or. 2007) (goats) 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)

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)

Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. United States Forest Serv., 465 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2006) (final agency action under the APA) Text

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 Guardians v. Johanns, 450 F.3d 455 (9th Cir. 2006) (agency did not re-initiate consultations under ESA to grazing allotments) 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)

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

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

Ecology Ctr. v. Castaneda, 426 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. October 19, 2005) (percentage of saleable timber on public lands)

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

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)

Native Ecosystems Council v. United States Forest Serv., 418 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. August 11, 2005) (forest plan and plan implementation) 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)

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

Forest Guardians v. Veneman, 392 F. Supp. 2d 1082 (D. Ariz. 2005) (challenging biological opinion under the ESA) Text

Earth Island Inst. v. Pengilly, 376 F. Supp. 2d 994 (D. Cal. 2005) (regulations improperly exempted certain Forest Serv. decisions from appeal) 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

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)

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

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

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) Text

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

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)

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

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)

Cascadia Wildlands Project v. Goodman, 393 F. Supp. 2d 1041 (D. Or. December 20, 2004) (snag retention project) Text

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)

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

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

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)

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

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

Idaho Sporting Congress v. Alexander, 45 Fed. Appx. 788 (9th Cir. September 05, 2002) (group seeking to enjoin sale of timber on federal lands)

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

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)

Riverhawks v. Zepeda, 228 F. Supp. 2d 1173 (D. Or. 2002) (special use permits for commercial motorboats on a wild and scenic river)

Friends of the Clearwater v. McAllister, 214 F. Supp. 2d 1083 (D. Mont. 2002) (decision to forego a supplemental environmental impact statement) Text

Idaho Sporting Cong. v. Rittenhouse, 305 F.3d 957 (9th Cir. 2002) (standard used to assess viability of certain species was invalid) Text


 

TENTH CIRCUIT

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

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

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

Utah Env. Congress v. Russell, 518 F.3d 817 (10th Cir. March 11, 2008) (goshawk habitat timber harvest) 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

Utah v. United States DOI, 535 F.3d 1184 (10th Cir. August 4, 2008) (land management)

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

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)

Ctr. for Native Ecosystems v. Cables, 509 F.3d 1310 (10th Cir. Dec. 17 2007) (USFS authorization of livestock grazing) 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wyoming Sawmills, Inc. v. United States, 90 Fed.Cl. 148 (Fed. Cir. Nov 30, 2009) (exhaustion doctrine applied to extension of timber-harvesting contract)

Blue Lake Forest Prods., Inc. v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 366 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (breach of timber sales contract because of environmental regulations)

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

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 Sept. 3, 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

Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Arizona Dep’t of Water Res., 211 Ariz. 146, 118 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005) (permit to appropriate the waters of a tributary) Text


 

ARKANSAS

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

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

Watterson v. Fritcher, 2018 WL 3965359 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2018) (plaintiff’s complaint does not fit into “Indian forest land” program) 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. 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 ows were temporarily impacted, was adequately supported) 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

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

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection, 232 Cal.App.4th 931 (2014) (Department must consider cumulative impact of logging) 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

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

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

Barnes v. Webb, A123543, 2009 WL 4049152 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 24, 2009) (fatal accident within the project area) Text

Envtl. Prot. & Info. Ctr. v. Cal. Dep’t of Forestry & Fire Prot., 187 P.3d 888 (Cal. 2008) (sustained yield plan)

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

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

Save The Altadena Trails v. Traylor, B183888, 2006 WL 3735518 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2006) (reasonable accommodation of the permitted public access)

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)

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)

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)

Pacific Lumber Co. v. State Water Res. Control Bd., 37 Cal. 4th 921 (Cal. 2006) (timber harvest plan affected state waters)

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)

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)

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)

Big Creek Lumber Co. v. Santa Cruz, 115 Cal. App. 4th 952 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 2004) (zoning regulations)

Rocky Mt. Animal Def. v. Colo. Div. of Wildlife, 100 P.3d 508 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004) (poisoning nontargeted wildlife) Text

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)

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)


 

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

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. 2007) (financial requirements contradicted the state regulation’s financial caps)

Bd. of County Comm’rs v. BDS Int’l, LLC, 159 P.3d 773 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006) (federal preemption inl 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)

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

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

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

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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).

Hazlehurst Lumber Co., Inc. v. Mississippi Forestry Comm’n, 983 So. 2d 309 (Miss. 2008) (misrepresentations regarding number of trees on property)


 

MONTANA

Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, 2018 WL 6046472 (D. Mont. Nov. 19, 2018) (Plaintiff’s claim that no old growth can be removed under HFRA is not consistent with the statute).

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, 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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

Armstrong v. Von Bergen, 2002 ML 977 (Mont. Dist. Ct. 2002) (right to use 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

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).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

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

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)

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

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

State v. Meredith, 184 Ore. App. 523 (Or. Ct. App. 2002) (no evidence of a cognizable privacy interest) 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”)


 

PENNSYLVANIA

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

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

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

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

Gunn v. Riely, 185 Wash. App. 517 (2017) (timber trespass statute applies on non-commercial logging land) Text

Ames v. Ames, 2014 WL 11516296 (E.D. Wash., April 2, 2014) (life tenants retained exclusive right to harvest timber during their lifetimes).

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

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

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)

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

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

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)

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

Woods v. Kittitas County, 174 P.3d 25 (Wash. 2007) (re-zoning forest land to range and rural land) Text

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)

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)

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

Alpental Cmty. Club, Inc. v. Seattle Gymnastics Soc., 111 P.3d 257 (Wash. 2005) (nuisance action against upslope clear-cutting) 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

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)

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

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