Forest Service rescinds Cooke City logging project after lawsuit challenge

Conservation groups are celebrating a U.S. Forest Service announcement rescinding a December decision to move forward with the Cooke City Fuels and Forest Health Project.

The project would have permitted commercial and non-commercial logging and burning on more than 3,000 acres of the Custer Gallatin National Forest, less than three miles from Yellowstone National Park.

“I thought we were going to court,” said Jesse Logan, a co-plaintiff in a March lawsuit protesting the U.S. Forest Service’s initial decision to greenlight the project. “I was pleasantly surprised when I opened my inbox this morning.”

Logan, and co-plaintiff Mike Garrity, executive director at the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, received notice of the decision via email Tuesday.

The rescission was officially announced Monday by Gardiner District Ranger Clint Kolarich in a one-paragraph memo. The Chronicle reached out to the Forest Service for comment, but agency policy prevents officials from commenting on matters of litigation.

Logan and Garrity said they believe the decision stemmed from the strength of the March lawsuit, which is still pending.

The lawsuit challenged the Forest Service’s claim the project was designed to protect Cooke City from wildfire, pointing out that the proposed treatment units extended well beyond the wildland-urban interface.

Garrity said this point was one of the reasons the Forest Service might have rescinded its decision.

In April, a federal judge in Missoula temporarily halted a 9,000-acre U.S. Forest Service logging project near Whitefish, finding that the agency’s use of the wildland-urban interface in its analysis raised legal concerns about compliance with environmental requirements and wildlife protections.

Garrity believes the ruling may set a precedent for more rigorous review of wildland-urban interface designations in future forest treatment projects.

Additionally, the Forest Service stated that whitebark pine conservation was one of the driving factors behind the Cooke City project.

Logan, a retired Forest Service entomologist whose primary research focused on whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, said some of the proposed whitebark treatments were slated for areas barren of the trees. Treatments proposed in stands containing whitebark lacked “supporting evidence of efficacy and would have documented negative impacts.”

“This was an ill-advised project. It wasn’t going to benefit whitebark pine, and it could potentially harm the beautiful whitebark forest that exists above Cooke City,” Logan said.

While Logan celebrates the decision, he is skeptical of its longevity.

“I would anticipate we’ll see some version of this project down the road,” he said. “But let’s hope they seriously consider the objections raised by concerned citizens when they do that.”

The project offered three opportunities for public comment. According to Logan, the majority of comments voiced opposition.

“The frustrating part is the Forest Service is always saying they want to work with the public and collaborate on their projects, but when we submit comments on what we think they should do, we get ignored, and the only way they’ll pay attention is if we sue,” Garrity said.