Wyoming Roadless Case Draws Attention

Wyoming's second court bid to shoot down a Clinton-era ban on development on millions of acres of national forest land around the country is drawing a crowd.

CHEYENNE -- Wyoming's second court bid to shoot down a Clinton-era ban on development on millions of acres of national forest land around the country is drawing a crowd.

The state of Idaho together with groups representing off-road vehicle enthusiasts, mining companies and a conservative legal foundation all recently have filed papers in federal court in Cheyenne supporting Wyoming's position.

Meanwhile, the federal government, the states of California, Montana, New Mexico and Oregon and a coalition of environmental groups have all weighed in on the other side. They oppose Wyoming's request that a federal judge find the roadless rule invalid.

The four states opposing Wyoming's position argue that even if U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer decides the roadless rule is void, he should limit his order overturning the rule to Wyoming.

The rule, enacted in the final days of the Clinton administration, placed more than 50 million acres of federal land off-limits to new road construction and other development. In 2003, Brimmer ruled that the Clinton roadless rule was invalid nationwide.

Environmental groups appealed Brimmer's ruling to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver. But before the appeals court issued a decision, the Bush administration released a new rule replacing the Clinton rule.

The Clinton rule came back into effect again last fall when a federal judge in California rejected the Bush administration roadless rule.

The Denver appeals court has refused to make a ruling on Brimmer's original decision. That has prompted the Wyoming attorney general's office to push a second lawsuit again challenging the roadless rule in Brimmer's court.

Tim Preso, a lawyer with the Earthjustice group in Bozeman, Mont., represents conservation groups in the lawsuit interested in preserving the roadless rule. He said Thursday that it has been standard in lawsuits challenging the roadless rule for various groups to file "friend of the court" briefs to argue for their positions.

Preso last month said his clients believe that leaving areas undeveloped still allows the option of authorizing development in the future. But, he said, "Once it's developed, you can't go back and make it roadless."

On the other side, the Colorado Mining Association is seeking to intervene in the lawsuit to side with Wyoming.

The association states that U.S. Forest Service lands play an important role in the nation's mineral production, providing necessary silver, gold, molybdenum and others. "The Roadless Rule directly threatens the ability to access these important minerals," it states.

The Mountain States Legal Foundation, a Colorado-based group, also supports Wyoming's position. The foundation argues that the roadless rule would in effect illegally create wilderness areas without following the federal Wilderness Act.

The state of Idaho argues that its interests in having locally based forest planning would be harmed if the roadless rule stands.

Idaho is also asking that if Brimmer fines the roadless rule invalid, that his ruling should extend to all national forests in the country.

Cheyenne lawyer Harriet M. Hageman filed a brief on behalf of several groups representing four-wheel-drive vehicle and snowmobile enthusiasts. She said Thursday that she represented the state of Wyoming in its original lawsuit that resulted in the injunction against the roadless rule.

Hageman said she hopes the current lawsuit results in final defeat for the roadless rule.

"I hope that it goes away; I hope that we can go back to local and regional management of our forests," Hageman said. She said increasing fires and beetle damage to forests in the West have resulted from improper management.

Brimmer has scheduled a hearing in the case for Oct. 19 in Cheyenne.