The Significance of the Owl Creek Victory
by Kathy Glass, Trees Foundation
A decade of legal intervention to protect the ancient groves of Headwaters peaked with the victorious lawsuit Marbled Murrelet v. Pacific Lumber, finalized in June 1996 when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Owl Creek decision. After the trial in late 1994 and early 1995, US District Court Judge Louis Bechtle ruled unequivocally that a permanent injunction against a PL timber harvest plan in the Owl Creek area of Headwaters Forest was warranted to protect the habitat of the endangered marbled murrelet, which nests in old-growth conifers. Awarding EPIC and its attorneys $1.1 million in fees and costs, Judge Bechtle noted that "EPIC's success in the litigation has substantially contributed to the goals of the ESA [Endangered Species Act] by ensuring the conservation of one of the few remaining marbled murrelet nesting habitats in California."
The Owl Creek case affirmed an important precedent set in the Supreme Court's "Sweet Home" decision: that habitat modification can be considered a "take" of a species under the ESA, even on private lands. Because the endangered murrelet carries out essential activities such as nesting in the contested forestland, destruction of its habitat jeopardizes the species.
This case marked the first time that the citizen suit provision of the ESA was successfully used to obtain a permanent injunction preventing logging on private lands under the ESA. The court's affirmation sends a message that species protection must extend to corporate lands, not just public lands.
Copyright Mendocino Environmental Center 1996
Permission granted to excerpt or use this article if source is cited