The initial plan was to perform commercial thinning on 933 acres, prescribed fire and mechanical thinning on 3326 acres, precommercial thinning on 400 acres, and improve wildlife habitat on 1678 acres. Their original Environmental Assessment received a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) in their original NEPA decision.

But before the project could proceed, the U.S. Forest Service—the most frequent agency defendant in NEPA litigation—was hit with a lawsuit from Conservation Congress, a “grass-roots” organization based in Montana, claiming that the project did not comply with NEPA, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). Conservation Congress argued that the project failed to do the due diligence to protect the Northern Spotted Owl, a species listed as “threatened” under the ESA.

The initial lawsuit, first launched in September of 2013, was litigated for almost three-and-a-half years, before the Eastern District Court of California ruled in February of 2017 that the Forest Service and their partners did, indeed, fail to comply with NEPA’s standards by “failing to take a hard look” and “failing to develop a reasonable range of alternatives” in assessing the project’s impact on the Northern Spotted Owl’s habitat. The court ordered an injunction on the project until the Forest Service provided supplementary information clarifying the project.

The Forest Service and their partners obliged and the court ruled in March of 2018 that the Smokey Project was no longer considered in violation of NEPA, thus dissolving the injunction. The Conservation Congress appealed the decision; however, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in June of 2019 that the Forest Service did not violate NEPA.

But before the project could begin in earnest, the August Complex Fire—the largest fire in California’s history—erupted, and burned over the entirety of the Smokey Project’s designated land. The August Complex Fire burned over 1 million acres, likely destroying large swaths of old growth forest, impinging on Northern Spotted Owl habitat, and threatening biodiversity.

The August Complex Fire, along with the number of other fires that burned in California and Oregon in the late summer and fall of 2020, produced a smoke gall that traveled as far as Sweden, and was a key contributor in the “orange skies days” in the Bay Area in early September.

It’s impossible to argue that the delay of the Smokey Project’s 7000 acres of hazardous fuels reduction and habitat restoration meaningfully contributed to the August Complex Fire. But, by delaying the project for years, Conservation Congress likely did more damage to the natural habitat of the Northern Spotted Owl than any amount of Forest Service intervention could have. The fuels reduction steps could have dramatically reduced the impact of the fire, better maintained the ecosystem for more species, and protected the area of the forest designated by the project.

And the Smokey Project was not the only forest management project that Conservation Congress held up in court. In the period of time of our study, Conservation Congress was responsible for 24 NEPA lawsuits related to forest management in California alone—about 37% of all California-based forest management NEPA cases over that time. The organization, led and administered by Denise Boggs of Great Falls, Montana, solely exists to counter U.S. Forest Service projects in court. From 2011 to 2023, the organization spent just under $2.1 million delaying 29 much needed forest management and fuels reduction projects in California and other western states. Boggs has been celebrated as a Grizzly Hero by the Grizzly Bear Times, and is a contributor to the population control group Global Population Speak Out.

Between 2010 and 2024, California endured more than 8000 wildfires a year that burned, in total, more than 16 million acres—about 16 percent of the state’s total landmass.

While these fires are, in part, made worse by increasing air temperature and low humidity and groundwater caused by climate change, the long history of extreme fire suppression and the idea that we must leave forests completely untouched have increased the likelihood and volatility of wildfires in California. Dense vegetation also makes forest fires burn hotter and produce more smoke, while limiting the ability of firefighters to access fires.

In recent years, the U.S. Forest Service, among other state and national agencies, have moved away from fire suppression and begun mechanical thinning, prescribed fires, and other wildfire fuels reduction practices. But, these projects, like broader Forest Service projects, have been met with consistent opposition from conservation and environmental groups who oppose logging and any manipulation of forest and wildlands. These groups claim that fuels reduction projects threaten wildlife habitat and old-growth forests, pointing to specific species that might be harmed by the often relatively small-scale projects.