- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- California
- /
- Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. Grantham
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. Grantham
Geography
Year
2018
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2018
Status
Defendants' motion for a stay of the preliminary injunction granted.
Geography
Docket number
2:18-cv-02785
Court/admin entity
United States → United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (E.D. Cal.)United States → United States Federal Courts
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → NEPA (US)Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Other Statutes and Regulations (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)United States → National Forest Management Act (NFMA)
At issue
Lawsuit challenging U.S. Forest Service plan to reduce wildfire risk.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
Search results
05/31/2019
Defendants' motion for a stay of the preliminary injunction granted.
Decision
–
01/25/2019
Motion for preliminary injunction/temporary restraining order granted.
Decision
–
10/16/2018
Complaint filed.
Three environmental groups filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Eastern District of California challenging a U.S. Forest Service plan to reduce risks of wildfire in the Johnny O’Neil Late-Successional Old Growth Forest Reserve. The plaintiffs alleged that the project included clear-cut logging of old forests affected by wildfire, which the plaintiffs said would “increase the future risk of wildfire and compromise ecological integrity of the recovering forest.” The complaint stated that the causes of the increase in wildfires in California and other western states “are complex and include global climate change and past forest management” and that “how forests are managed after wildfire can dictate how forests function in the future: the best available science indicates that future wildfires are made worse by extensive logging that removes all of the largest fire-affected trees from an area.” The plaintiffs asserted violations of the National Forest Management Act, NEPA, and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Complaint
–
Summary
Lawsuit challenging U.S. Forest Service plan to reduce wildfire risk.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Just transition
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance