- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Forest Service
Collection
Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Forest Service
Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Forest Service ↗
1:21-cv-2992United States District of Colorado (D. Colo.), United States Federal Courts2 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
01/27/2023
Decision
Petition denied.
The federal district court for the District of Colorado denied a petition challenging the biological opinion prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for revisions to the forest plan for the Rio Grande National Forest, which provides habitat for the Canada lynx. The forest plan was revised in response to a beetle epidemic that decimated the largest trees in the forest. The revised plan removed certain restrictions on logging and allowed increased salvage logging. The court found that the petitioner did not show that the FWS had incorrectly concluded that the revised forest plan was not likely to jeopardize the Canada lynx in the contiguous United States. The court concluded that the revised plan was programmatic, did not authorize specific projects, and therefore did not directly jeopardize the lynx. The court also found that extirpation of the lynx in the forest would not significantly affect the lynx’s status across the contiguous United States and that the petitioner did not overcome the presumption of validity that attached to the FWS’s conclusions. Specific arguments rejected by the court included the petitioner’s contention that the FWS did not reconcile “the trend toward lynx extirpation in Colorado” with allowing increased salvage logging in the lynx’s “most important” habitat in Colorado. The court cited uncertainty in projects regarding the lynx’s future, including due to “nuances and caveats based on potential impacts from beetle kill, fire, and climate change.” Although the court also cited the FWS’s statements that “continued climate warming” would reduce lynx habitat in the forest and that the FWS was not aware of management actions that could be expected to abate climate-related threats to the habitat, the court found that the petitioner did not show that the Colorado lynx population “represents a distinct or outsized risk to the distinct population segment” in the contiguous U.S.
11/08/2021
Complaint
Complaint filed.
A lawsuit filed in the federal district court for the District of Colorado challenged the U.S. Forest Service’s authorization of the Rio Grande National Forest Land Management Plan (Revised Forest Plan) and associated actions. In the lawsuit, Defenders of Wildlife (Defenders) focused on impacts on the Canada lynx, for which the Rio Grande National Forest “provides some of [Colorado’s] most important habitat.” Defenders alleged that the Revised Forest Plan rolled back protections for lynx habitat and that the Forest Service had failed to comply with NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Defenders characterized the lynx in the forest as “in dire straits,” citing climate change as one of the threats, and said protecting lynx in the forest was “essential to arresting” the “alarming trend” toward extirpation in Colorado.
Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Forest Service ↗
23-1093United States Federal Courts, United States Tenth Circuit (10th Cir.)1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
03/11/2024
Decision
Dismissal of petition affirmed.
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s rejection of an environmental group’s challenge to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS’s) 2021 Biological Opinion that concluded a revised Land Management Plan for the Rio Grande National Forest in Colorado would not likely jeopardize the Canada lynx’s continued existence in the contiguous United States. The Tenth Circuit held that the FWS did not violate the Endangered Species Act or the Administrative Procedure Act. Among the arguments rejected by the Tenth Circuit were contentions that the FWS did not sufficiently consider the importance of the Colorado subpopulation of the lynx in light of climate change. The Tenth Circuit said these arguments failed to account for an underlying assessment’s recognition of “projected climate-driven losses in habitat quality and quantity” across the lynx’s habitat in the contiguous U.S.