• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

Concerned Friends of the Winema v. McKay

Filing Date: 2019
Case Categories:
  • Federal Statutory Claims
    • Endangered Species Act and Other Wildlife Protection Statutes
  • Federal Statutory Claims
    • NEPA
  • Federal Statutory Claims
    • Other Statutes and Regulations
Principal Laws:
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Forest Management Act (NFMA)
Description: Challenge to decisions of the U.S. Forest Service that opened up additional acreage to livestock grazing on the Antelope Allotment in the Fremont-Winema National Forest in south-central Oregon.
  • Concerned Friends of the Winema v. McKay
    Docket number(s): 1:19-cv-00516
    Court/Admin Entity: D. Or.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    07/05/2022 Opinion and Order Download Defendants' motion for summary judgment granted. Federal Court Found Adequate Consideration of Climate Change Impacts in Forest Service Grazing Decisions. The federal district court for the District of Oregon rejected a challenge to decisions of the U.S. Forest Service that opened up additional acreage to livestock grazing on the Antelope Allotment in the Fremont-Winema National Forest in south-central Oregon. The court found the defendants had complied with NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Forest Management Act. Under NEPA and the ESA, the court rejected the argument that the Forest Service failed to take a hard look at how climate change would exacerbate grazing’s effects on Oregon spotted frogs and the claim that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service “virtually ignore[d]” climate change in its biological opinion.

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.