Appeals court blocks timber project

Environmentalists are calling a Friday court ruling against a proposed timber harvest and restoration project “the most comprehensive condemnation” of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests practices ever.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday quashed the Forest Service’s Iron Honey Project. The plan called for harvesting 17.5 million board feet of lumber from the Idaho Panhandle National Forests to fund restoration in the drainage of the Little North Fork of the Coeur d’Alene River.

“It’s a major ruling,” said Barry Rosenberg, executive director of the Kootenai Environmental Alliance, one of four groups that filed the appeal. Rosenberg said Friday’s decision addressed issues the environmental groups have been raising for 15 years, as long as they’ve monitored and challenged management of the National Forest.

The Iron Honey Project was pitched as a restoration project – a fix for damage done to the watershed by years of intense logging, according to the court decision. The Lands Council, Kootenai Environmental Alliance, The Ecology Center and Idaho Sporting Congress objected to the additional logging that would be done to fund the project, and charged that the Forest Service’s Environmental Impact Statement was incomplete.

“We have always asked the Forest Service how they expect to restore the watershed and fisheries by clearcutting 1,500 acres and more road-building in an already heavily logged and roaded watershed,” said Jeff Juel of The Ecology Center in a statement released Friday.

The court ruled that the Forest Service “failed to take its required ‘hard look’ ” in regards to prior timber harvests in the area, and the impact the project would have on West Slope cutthroat trout. The court also questioned data reported in the Environmental Impact Statement. In the case of the effects on the trout habitat, the court said the Forest Service used “stale” data.

The Forest Service’s methodology to obtain that, and other data, was challenged.

“We’re obviously pretty disappointed in the ruling,” Forest Service spokesman Dave O’Brien said. “We just think the merits of the project remain very strong.”

O’Brien defended the Forest Service’s data and sampling techniques. The court decision came down to “technicalities,” he said.

“The judge felt there were some things we had to look at in more detail,” he said.

Following Friday’s decision, O’Brien said the Forest Service will have to reevaluate its restoration plans. Though the project is dead now, O’Brien said the issue may resurface.

It’s a worthwhile project, he said.