U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Appeal Over Forest ‘Roadless Rule’
According to Businessweek:
The U.S. Supreme Court left intact a rule issued in the waning days of Bill Clinton’s presidency to protect 58.5 million acres of forest lands, as the justices turned away arguments from states and industry groups.
The justices today refused to question a federal appeals court’s conclusion that the U.S. Forest Service was within its authority when it issued the so-called Roadless Rule in January 2001, eight days before Clinton left office.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Benedict’s Corner
Recommended Comment Considerations
Recent Comments
| greg nagle on Privatization vs. Insourc… | |
| greg nagle on Privatization vs. Insourc… | |
| Bob Zybach on Poll: widespread support… | |
| Andy Stahl on Privatization vs. Insourc… | |
| Steve Wilent on Poll: widespread support… | |
| Matthew Koehler on Poll: widespread support… | |
| John Marker on Privatization vs. Insourc… | |
| Steve Wilent on Poll: widespread support… | |
| Jon Haber on Public Employees Sue Over ‘Pol… | |
| Larry Harrell Fotowa… on High Quality Research Act, And… | |
| Sharon on High Quality Research Act, And… | |
| Larry Harrell Fotowa… on Spruce Beetle- Beetle Without… | |
| Bob Zybach on Spruce Beetle- Beetle Without… | |
| TreeC123 on Spruce Beetle- Beetle Without… | |
| TreeC123 on Poll: widespread support… |
Recent Posts
- Happy Birthday Michael Frome, Wilderness Hero
- The Ten Year Circle of Life: Malheur Version
- Privatization vs. Insourcing
- Poll: widespread support “ecological forestry” approach, rather than trust management of O&C lands
- Spruce Beetle- Beetle Without Drama and With FS Research
- High Quality Research Act, And Research Duplication
- Public Employees Sue Over ‘Political Deals’ Behind Wolf Delisting
- Toxic Mess: EPA places former Missoula Co papermill on National Priorities List
- House farm bill offers NEPA exclusions to combat beetle infestations
- Wolf Scientists Howl About Wolf Delisting
Contacts
Purpose
Disclaimer
Top Views
Archives
Science Policy Quote of the Month
"In the real world, many risks we face present neither the great certainties we would need to use cost-benefit analysis effectively nor the almost complete uncertainties that would justify radical precautionary approaches. Moreover, neither the precautionary principle nor cost-benefit analysis tell us anything about the role of democracy in making policy decisions.
I am currently working to develop new approaches rooted in deliberative democracy which might move beyond both strict cost-benefit and knee-jerk precaution toward processes that could achieve better public participation and greater political legitimacy on the major environmental threats to our future."
Jonathan Gilligan, Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences on his website here.
On Learning Through Blogging
Tags
Blogroll
Forest Service Miscellany
References
Science Policy
Species Diversity/Viability
The West
Post Categories
- 2012 Planning Rule
- 21st Century Problems
- Access
- Accountability
- adaptive management
- Advice for Administration
- Agency Efficiencies
- Alaska Issues
- All Lands
- Appeals and Objections
- Bark Beetles
- Best available science
- Biomass
- Blog -Workin' It
- Budget
- Building Trust
- Business of Land Management
- Certification
- climate change
- collaboration and public involvement
- Communication
- Community Forest Management
- conflict resolution
- Congress
- Cool Technologies
- CREATE
- District of the Week
- Diversity and species conservation
- Economics and Economic Recovery
- Ecosystem Services
- Energy
- Environmental Organizations
- ESA
- Fire and Fuels
- Forest Products
- Forest Service: Culture, History, Morale, Organization, Future
- Future (Imagining our Mutual)
- GE Trees
- Good Things
- Grasslands
- Grazing
- History
- Humans and the Environment
- Interior West
- Invasives
- Jobs
- Lands
- Landscape Scale
- Law Enforcement
- Law Review
- Litigation
- Meetings of Interest
- Monitoring
- National Reserve Conservation Assocation
- Natural Resources
- Naturalist Interest
- NEPA
- Objections
- Old Growth
- Partizanizing Issues
- People's Database
- Photos
- Place-Based Bills & Agreements
- Planning
- Planning Rule Development Process
- Politics
- Press
- Privatization
- Projects of Interest
- Proposed Rule
- Recreation
- Reform and Enhance Litigation and Appeals
- Renewable energy- wind and solar
- Research
- Responses to NOI
- Restoration
- Roadless
- Role of local and state governments
- Role of science
- Sacred Sites
- Science Process Redesign
- Science- The Business of
- special forest products
- State and Federal Forests
- Stewardship
- Sustainable Rural Economies
- timber
- Travel Management
- Tree diseases and insects
- Trust Managaement
- Uncategorized
- Water
- What Should Plans Do?
- Wilderness
- Wood
- workforce
Whew! Now that’s over.I wonder whether some enterprising group will start another suit saying that the NEPA is stale…if it takes 11 years to settle litigation, it seems like that will always be the case..