Anaconda Commission in Timber Project Lawsuit

The commission, along with County Attorney Ben Krakowka and others, voiced concerns that the lawsuit, if successful, would have negative regional economic impacts and thwart work they believe would improve forest health and reduce wildfire risk in lodgepole stands rife with beetle-killed timber.   

Krakowka said Monday that Anaconda-Deer Lodge County will basically step in as a co-defendant in the lawsuit “because of the likely effect on our local economy” if plaintiffs prevail.

If that happens, the city-county will not be on the hook for paying the plaintiffs’ legal and attorneys’ fees. The federal government would have to pay those costs under provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Equal Access to Justice Act.  

According to one legal definition, “intervening is entry into a lawsuit by a third party into an existing civil case who was not named as an original party but has a personal stake in the outcome.”

Krakowka said Anaconda-Deer Lodge County’s stake is significant. Timber jobs and revenues could be affected and wildfire burning in the proposed timber sale area could affect commerce and tourism, he said.

The city-county is not hiring an attorney for the case, Krakowka said.

“We are being represented by Christopher Griffith with Haglund Kelley LLP,” he said, a law firm based in Oregon. “His representation is being paid for by the timber industry who also has an interest in seeing the project go forward.”

Krakowka said he will organize information from Anaconda-Deer Lodge County and continue to advise the county commission.  

The U.S. Forest Service, a defendant in the case, reports that the Pintler Face project area is 73,624 acres and located about 10 miles northwest of Wise River on the south face of the Anaconda Range on the Wisdom Ranger District of the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest.

The project would involve logging, burning or other “vegetation treatments” on about 11,224 acres roughly paralleling sections of the Mill Creek Highway and Montana 43. About 11 miles of new, temporary roads would be constructed. Many existing roads would be decommissioned, according to the Pintler Face plan.

As first reported by The Anaconda Leader, commissioners also heard last week from Sean Steinebach, an outreach forester for Sun Mountain Lumber, and from Chris Marchion, an inductee into the Montana Outdoor Hall of Fame, a longtime advocate for wildlife and public lands access and a member of the Anaconda Sportsman’s Club.

Both men have previously expressed support for the Pintler Face project, saying it could improve forest health, reduce fuel loads and benefit timber jobs in the region.

The lawsuit targeting the Pintler Face project was filed in U.S. District Court in Missoula in February by the Yellowstone to Uintas Connection, Native Ecosystems Council and Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

The litigation was filed well after the Forest Service project decision was released in September 2021. Logging had already begun.

At the time of the filing, Michael Garrity, executive director for the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, said the lag was due to not finding a lawyer earlier to take the case.

The lawsuit contends that the Forest Service’s analysis for the Pintler Face project was inadequate — especially when considering potential impacts on grizzly bears, Canada lynx and wolverines. The litigation also alleges that the Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act when remapping lynx habitat on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge in 2020 by failing to complete either an environmental assessment, EA, or environmental impact statement, EIS.

In addition, the plaintiffs allege that the Forest Service should have completed an EIS instead of a less comprehensive EA for the Pintler Face project and faults the biological opinion contributed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The plaintiffs’ lawsuit asked the court to either reject the project decision or block its implementation.

More recently, on May 17, the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking either a preliminary injunction…