Search for: "National Wildlife Federation v. U.S. Forest Service"
Results 1 - 20
of 110
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jan 2013, 3:42 pm
Plaintiffs challenged FWS’s determination, citing National Wildlife Federation v. [read post]
15 Jul 2008, 12:25 am
Instead, the test articulated in National Wildlife Federation v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 2:38 pm
We therefore hold that the Forest Service violated the ESA by not consulting with the appropriate wildlife agencies before approving NOIs to conduct mining activities in coho salmon critical habitat within the Klamath National Forest. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 4:36 pm
Forest Service’s (“Forest Service”) petition for writ of certiorari to review the U.S. [read post]
16 Jun 2013, 6:51 am
In 2011, the plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court alleging that the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service violated the ESA and National Environmental Policy Act. [read post]
11 May 2012, 10:16 pm
Among other things, plaintiffs allege that the Forest Service unlawfully failed to reinitiate consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 6:38 am
The complaint alleged that the Forest Service violated the National Forest Management Act and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 6:22 pm
See Kootenai National Forest. [read post]
6 Jan 2007, 3:43 am
Supreme Court has granted certiorari in National Association of Home Builders v. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 6:10 pm
Forest Service, No. [read post]
31 May 2011, 1:30 pm
May 26: In the U.S. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 1:30 pm
Oct 21: In the U.S. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 1:36 pm
Feb 3: In the U.S. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 1:44 pm
Forest Service must consult with appropriate federal wildlife agencies under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) before allowing mining activities to proceed under a Notice of Intent (NOI) in critical habitat of a listed species. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 1:38 pm
Forest Service and its Chief. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 1:22 pm
The order prohibited further timber harvesting in that region until the Forest Service consulted with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service about the pertinent land resource management plans. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 6:24 am
Great Old Broads sought review in federal court, contending that the Forest Service's approval of the Project violated: (1) the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). because the Project offended the Fisheries and Wildlife Restoration standard FW-2 of the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH), which is incorporated into the Humboldt National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Humboldt Plan); (2) Executive Order… [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 5:32 pm
Sierra Forest Legacy v. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 6:18 pm
Forest Guardians v. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 8:13 am
A question as to what is really going on within this region poses itself.Looking solely at the Hammond situation it has been learned that by the end of 1970’s nearly all the ranches adjacent to the Blitzen Valley in Harney County, Oregon were purchased by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and added to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. [read post]
