Bitterroot logging project suspended to evaluate grizzly protection
Laura Lundquist
(Missoula Current) In a rare event, the U.S. Forest Service has agreed to reassess a logging project before groups had to follow up their intent to sue.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service sent a letter to six conservation organizations saying they would reinitiate consultation on whether the Bitterroot Front Project would potentially affect grizzly bears. That means the 135,000-acre Bitterroot Front project is on hold for the time being.
On June 16, the groups — the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Bitterroot, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, WildEarth Guardians, Friends of the Clearwater and Native Ecosystems Council — sent a 60-day notice of intent to sue to the two federal agencies over the Bitterroot Front project, which was approved in mid-May.
Federal law requires potential plaintiffs to give 60 days notice of their intent to sue so agencies have the opportunity to take the suggested action and thus avoid going to court. In most cases, the plaintiffs end up filing a legal complaint. But occasionally, an agency will agree to take a second look, as the Forest Service did here.
The Bitterroot Front Project was a plan for road projects, logging and burning across 144,000 acres or 225 square miles, from the northern boundary with the Lolo National Forest south to the West Fork of the Bitterroot River. The project would be conducted in four phases, with each phase occurring in successive years.
Commercial logging was authorized on almost 44 square miles, noncommercial cutting across 5 square miles, and slashing would be carried out on 28 square miles. Most of the commercial logging was planned for the southern end of the project area and would occur during the first two phases or years.
However, the Bitterroot National Forest provided no other information about the work to be done because it was to be “condition-based.” Conservation organizations questioned how the Forest Service or the Fish and Wildlife Service could say with certainty that the project activities wouldn’t affect threatened grizzly bears or bull trout.
A major issue was that road-building was to be based on the Bitterroot Forest’s 2023 amendment to its Forest Plan, which eliminated road-density limits for elk and reduced secure grizzly habitat to one acre. The best available science has found that grizzlies need at least 2,500 acres for habitat to be secure, that is, without roads and people that would do bears harm.
Missoula federal district judge Dana Christensen has already ruled that the Bitterroot Forest Plan amendment is invalid, because the Forest Service and Fish and Wildlife Service hadn’t analyzed how increasing road densities and dwindling secure habitat would affect grizzly bears. So it’s unlikely that the Bitterroot Forest could have won a lawsuit trying to defend a logging project based upon an invalid Forest Plan amendment.
“The court recently recognized the Bitterroot National Forest's overall Forest Plan doesn't adequately protect grizzly bear habitat,” said Jeff Juel of Friends of the Clearwater. “Therefore, we're urging the Forest Service to prioritize habitat protection by first updating its forest plan in an open public process, which might reveal the folly of the entire Bitterroot Front project altogether.”
In a similar case, Missoula federal district judge Donald Molloy ruled in 2025 that the Fish and Wildlife Service couldn’t say 10 acres qualified as secure habitat without showing scientific evidence that patches that small would protect a bear, particularly a sow with cubs, for 24 hours. That meant the South Plateau Project on the Custer Gallatin National Forest was on hold until the Fish and Wildlife Service justified its patch size.
Contact reporter Laura Lundquist at lundquist@missoulacurrent.com.