Latest briefs Browse latest →
Court Clears Montana Forest Project
A Montana federal court rules the Forest Service’s Mud Creek wildfire-risk project can proceed in Bitterroot National Forest
Briefing view
Visual briefing
1 / 6
Three things to know
- What happened
- A Montana federal court rules the Forest Service’s Mud Creek wildfire-risk project can proceed in Bitterroot National Forest.
- Why it matters
- The plan combines prescribed burns, noncommercial fuel reduction, and up to 13,700 acres of commercial timber harvest.
- What to watch
- The next pressure point is whether opponents appeal to the Ninth Circuit as federal timber policy accelerates.
Follow the story
Sources & verification
Reporting behind this brief, checked before publication.
Brief text
The U.S. District Court for the District of Montana upheld the Forest Service’s Mud Creek Project in the Bitterroot National Forest. The multi-year plan uses prescribed burns, noncommercial fuel reduction, and up to 13,700 acres of commercial timber harvest to reduce wildfire risk near southwest Montana communities. The ruling found compliance with NEPA, NFMA, and ESA and is subject to appeal in the Ninth Circuit.
- Frame 1A Montana federal court rules the Forest Service’s Mud Creek wildfire-risk project can proceed in Bitterroot National Forest.
- Frame 2The plan combines prescribed burns, noncommercial fuel reduction, and up to 13,700 acres of commercial timber harvest.
- Frame 3Justice officials say the work targets catastrophic wildfire risk for nearby southwest Montana communities over several years.
- Frame 4The court ruled the project complied with NEPA, NFMA, and ESA after environmental-review challenges.
- Frame 5The decision addressed carbon-stock analysis, old-growth claims, and mitigation for species listed under the ESA.
- Frame 6The next pressure point is whether opponents appeal to the Ninth Circuit as federal timber policy accelerates.
How this was checked
- Reporting
- Checked against the primary source
- Claims
- We checked the names, dates, numbers, and core facts against the reporting linked above
- Artwork
- This is an editorial illustration based on the reporting, not source photography
- Published
- Jun 1, 3:17 PM EDT
- Our standards
- Editorial standards and corrections