Argued
and Submitted October 7, 2016 Seattle, Washington
Appeal
from the United States District Court No. 9:13-cv-00199-DLC
for the District of Montana Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge,
Presiding.
Timothy M. Bechtold (argued), Bechtold Law Firm, Missoula,
Montana, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Thekla
Hansen-Young (argued), John P. Tustin, Robert P. Stockman,
and Andrew C. Mergen, Environment & Natural Resources
Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington,
D.C.; Dana Jacobsen, Office of the Regional Solicitor, United
States Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado; Alan
Campbell, Office of the General Counsel, United States
Department of Agriculture, Missoula, Montana; for
Defendants-Appellees.
Julie
A. Weis, Haglund Kelley LLP, Portland, Oregon, for Amicus
Curiae Kootenai Tribe of Idaho.
Before: William A. Fletcher, Raymond C. Fisher, and N. Randy
Smith, Circuit Judges.
SUMMARY[*]
Environmental
Law
The
panel affirmed the district court's judgment in favor of
federal officials and agencies in an action brought by
Alliance for the Wild Rockies under federal environmental
laws seeking to enjoin the U.S. Forest Service from
constructing 4.7 miles of new roads in connection with a
Forest Service project in the Kootenai National Forest.
In
2011, the Kootenai National Forest Plan was amended by the
Forest Plan Amendments for Motorized Access Management within
the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones
("Access Amendments"). Standard II(B) of the Access
Amendments prohibited any net permanent increase in certain
permanent roads.
The
panel held that the 4.7 miles of roads at issue would not
violate the Kootenai National Forest Plan because they would
be blocked to prevent motorized access upon completion of the
Pilgrim Creek Timber Sale Project. The panel held that it was
not arbitrary and capricious for the Forest Service to
conclude that roads closed to motorized access by berms or
barriers do not count toward "linear miles of total
roads" under Standard II(B) of the Access Amendments.
The
panel concluded that because the Forest Service's
interpretation of its own Forest Plan was reasonable,
Alliance for the Wild Rockies could not prevail on its
National Forest Management Act, Endangered Species Act, and
National Environmental Policy Act claims.
OPINION
W.
FLETCHER, Circuit Judge.
Alliance
for the Wild Rockies ("Alliance") brings suit under
the National Forest Management Act ("NFMA"), the
Endangered Species Act ("ESA"), and the National
Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") to enjoin the
U.S. Forest Service ("Forest Service") from
constructing 4.7 miles of new roads in connection with a
Forest Service project in the Kootenai National Forest.
Alliance's claims are premised on the argument that the
new roads will create a "net permanent increase[] in
linear miles of total roads" in violation of the Access
Amendments to the Kootenai National Forest Plan ("Forest
Plan"). We hold that the 4.7 miles of roads at issue
...