Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Forest Service

Geography
Year
2024
Document Type
Litigation
Part of

About this case

Filing year
2024
Status
Biological opinion vacated and remanded.
Docket number
1:24-cv-00118
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (W.D.N.C.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Endangered Species Act and Other Wildlife Protection Statutes (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → Endangered Species Act (ESA)
At issue
Challenge to the Endangered Species Act consultation process for the 2023 revised land management plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests.
Topics
, ,  

Documents

Each case in our database can contain one or more documents.

Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
03/31/2026
Biological opinion vacated and remanded.
Challenge to the Endangered Species Act consultation process for the 2023 revised land management plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests.
Decision
04/18/2024
Complaint filed.
Conservation organizations filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Western District of North Carolina asserting that the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act and Administrative Procedure Act in the consultation process for the Forest Service’s 2023 revised land management plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests. The forests provide habitat for four endangered bat species. The organizations alleged that the consultation process was flawed, including because the Forest Service failed to supply the FWS with the best available scientific data. The data provided by the Forest Service included information based on a model that “severely underestimated the effect of natural disturbances on forest age and bat habitat,” including by assuming natural disturbance would decrease during the life of the 2023 plan even though data showed that natural disturbance was “increasing due in large part to climate change.” The plaintiffs also asserted that the FWS’s biological opinion failed to analyze cumulative effects, including climate change. In addition, the organizations claimed, among other things, that the biological opinion did not adequately consider “the important role the Forests may play in a climate-stressed future,” such as by serving as “refugia for climate-stressed bats.”
Complaint

Summary

Challenge to the Endangered Species Act consultation process for the 2023 revised land management plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests.

 Topics mentioned most in this case

See how often Topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document.

Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Fossil fuel
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience