State of Alaska and a group of business organizations and two electric power organizations have commenced a fresh round of the long-running battle over the protection of the environment of the Southeast region of The state’s Tongass National Forest.
On September. 8th the state as well as two other plaintiff groups have filed three separate federal lawsuits in order to challenge the Biden administration policy which prohibits the construction of the construction of new roads in certain areas in the forests, where you can find one of the last American areas of old-growth forests.
Every lawsuit demands U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason to overturn the new rule as well as previous versions.
The Roadless Rule, as it is commonly referred to, was passed (and litigated over) from 2001 by proponents of the logging industry however, the most recent lawsuits add a new twist in that, in more than 100 pages of documents filed in court”logging” is only mentioned once “logging” is only mentioned one time.
Instead, plaintiffs argue that the federal government’s regulations have made clean-energy projects as well as other economic development impossible to finance.
The legal complaint cites potential hydroelectric and geothermal power stations and even possible metal mines whose products could be used to develop green technology.
“You’ve faced real obstacles to extremely attractive projects. These are projects that will to bring cost savings as well as the environment,” said Luke Wake an attorney from Pacific Legal Foundation. Pacific Legal Foundation, which represents in the case of Inside Passage Electric Cooperative and the Alaska Power Association in one of the lawsuits.
Alaska, the state that is Alaska which is the subject of in a second lawsuit in opposition to it’s Tongass Roadless Rule through Democratic, Republican and independent administrations alike.
In a statement in writing in a written statement, Governor. Mike Dunleavy said that “Alaskans have a right to access the resources that Tongass offers including jobs as well as renewable energy resources as well as tourism. Not a policy that treats human beings in a forest as an invading species.”
A third suit which counts plaintiffs from the Alaska Chamber of Commerce and Resource Development Council of Alaska as plaintiffs, is led by former Gov. as well as former U.S. Senator. Frank Murkowski, the father of the current U.S. Senator. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska.
Jim Clark, Frank Murkowski’s former chief of staff, and an attorney involved in the case, said that he recalls representing his client the Alaska Forest Association in a earlier lawsuit over the subject.
“This bottle is old enough to be able to drink at every bar of Alaska,” he said.
Since the first time he worked on the issue the logging industry in Southeast Alaska has virtually disappeared. A pulp mill located in Ketchikan is now a cruise ship terminal Another one in Sitka is a haven for bears.
Reversing the Roadless Rule isn’t about clear-cutting any more, he added. In fact, the focus is on increasing the accessibility of projects that require special approval.
“It’s not that we’re not able to use Biden law. Biden law, in spite of it being a violation of the Roadless Rule, but it can be a hindrance,” he added.
In the legal filings filed with inside Passage Electric Company filed legal papers. Inside Passage Electric Cooperative offered an example: It plans to establish an electric line connecting Kake and Petersburg which will allow these communities to share power at a low cost.
The project was initially expected to run $17.5 million, however due to the Roadless Rule, it would need to be maintained using a helicopters, causing the expected price to rise to $65 million.
“As as a result of these higher costs and increased costs, the Kake-Petersburg intertie project remains in the midst of a stalemate. However, IPEC is willing to restart efforts to advance this project if they could get the road,” claimed Jodi Mitchell IPEC’s CEO in a legal statement.
Clark stated that logging companies aren’t involved in these new lawsuits due to the fact that the logging industry is subject to an updated forest plan, which is separate of the Roadless Rule, and the possibilities of changing the forest plan are slim.
“There’s no way we’ll ever be in a position to alter the forest plan in order to change the situation,” Clark said.
Kate Glover is an attorney working for Earthjustice, an environmental legal firm. Earthjustice that has been involved in the past Roadless Rule lawsuits.
Glover stated that the effort to change area of focus within the Roadless Rule “is certainly noteworthy,” but that the problem “really is about logging” that was actually the main goal of the rule’s original.
Three lawsuits — expected to be joined to form a single case through U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason — will continue a dispute dating back 22 years that concerns the extent to it is the U.S. Forest Service has the power under laws to limit road construction within the forest.
In 2001 the federal government issued an all-over rule that restricted roads construction in certain regions. Roads are required for extensive woodlogging.
Alaska’s state Alaska contests the ruling in court while the Federal government also agreed to exempt a large portion of Alaska from the rule.
This changed in 2011 when a federal judge ruled for environmentalists that had filed a lawsuit to argue they were claiming that they were claiming that the Alaska exemption was illegal.
The state appealed against the decision and was annulled by a three-judge group that was part of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals however, a follow-up appeal before the Full Circuit Court saw the Alaska exemption overturned again.
The state questioned the legality of the rule in general in a separate lawsuit at Washington, D.C., but it was unsuccessful.
Following the election of the President Donald Trump, the state approved a new roadless rule that permits Tongass development. The Trump administration approved the rule, however litigations prevented its implementation as did it was the Biden government’s latest rule adopted in January and enacted in January, replaces that Trump rule.
Although the state and other plaintiffs have been repeatedly unsuccessful in court over this issue, attorneys claim the legal framework has changed over the last few years.
It is expected that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision of 2022 in West Virginia v. EPA could drastically limit the power for federal government agencies to make regulations that haven’t been specifically approved by Congress In summer 2024 it is expected that it is expected that the Supreme Court is expected to interpret a rule called”Chevron doctrine “Chevron principle” and again restrict the power that federal authorities have.
“All of which leads you to think that the Supreme Court is more favorable,” Clark said.
This article was originally published in Alaska Beacon and is republished here with permission.
