Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUSFS Answer AWR v USFS BMW project 7 11 12 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES AND NATIVE ECOSYSTEMS COUNCIL, Plaintiffs, v. FAYE KRUEGER, Regional Forester of Region One of the Forest Service, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOREST SERVICE, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, an agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Defendants. ________________________________ Case No. 9:12-cv-0055- DLC FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT Defendants Faye Krueger1, in her official capacity as Regional Forester for Region One of the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, by their undersigned counsel, hereby Answer and assert their Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ Complaint (the “Complaint”). 1 Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Faye Krueger, in her official capacity as Regional Forester for Region One of the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, is substituted for Vicki Christensen as a defendant in this case. Ms. Krueger was named to the Regional Forester position on May 4, 2012. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 1 of 71 2 INTRODUCTION2 1. The first sentence of paragraph 1 of the Complaint contains Plaintiffs’ description of the case which does not require a response. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 1 of the Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 1. 2. In response to paragraph 2 of the Complaint, Defendants deny that the Decision Notice for the East Boulder Project authorizes 650 acres of commercial logging and thinning and admit that it approves 2.1 miles of temporary road construction and one-half mile of road maintenance. Defendants aver that the Decision Notice authorizes 510 acres of commercial harvest and 140 acres of hand treatments consisting of limbing, removal of ladder fuels and thinning of small diameter trees. 3. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 3 of the Complaint. 4. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 4 of the Complaint. 5. The allegations in paragraph 5 characterize Plaintiffs’ Complaint and request for relief to which no response is required. To the extent a response is 2 The section headings and subheadings used in this Answer follow the headings and subheadings used in Plaintiffs’ Complaint and are included solely for the purpose of organizational convenience in matching the answers provided herein with the allegations made in the Complaint. The headings are not part of Defendants’ answer to the allegations. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 2 of 71 3 required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. 6. The allegations in paragraph 6 characterize Plaintiffs’ Complaint and request for relief to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. 7. The allegations in paragraph 7 characterize Plaintiffs’ Complaint and request for relief to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. JURISDICTION 8. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 8 of the Complaint. The second sentence of paragraph 8 contains a statement of jurisdiction that requires no response. 9. The first sentence of paragraph 9 of the Complaint contains a statement of jurisdiction to which no response is required. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 9 and therefore they are denied. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 3 of 71 4 10. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Complaint and therefore they are denied. 11. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 11 of the Complaint and therefore they are denied. 12. Defendants deny the allegations in the first and second sentences of paragraph 12 of the Complaint. The third sentence of paragraph 12 contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in the third sentence. 13. Defendants admit that Plaintiffs have submitted comments and administrative appeals of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects and deny the remainder of the first two clauses of paragraph 13 of the Complaint. The third clause contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in the third clause. 14. With respect to the first clause of paragraph 14 of the Complaint, Defendants admit that Plaintiffs have sent notices concerning the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects more than 60 days before filing their Complaint, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Any allegations Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 4 of 71 5 contrary to the notices’ plain language, meaning, or context are denied. The second clause of paragraph 14 of the Complaint, alleging that Plaintiffs have exhausted statutory requirements, contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in the second clause. 15. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 15 of the Complaint. With respect to the allegations in the second sentence, Defendants admit that Plaintiffs’ administrative appeal of the East Boulder Project decision was denied on October 26, 2011 by Forest Supervisor Mary Erickson and aver that her decision was the agency’s final decision with respect to the East Boulder Project. The remainder of the second sentence contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the remaining allegations in the second sentence. 16. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 16 of the Complaint. With respect to the allegations in the second sentence, Defendants admit that Plaintiffs’ administrative appeal of the Bozeman Project decision was denied on March 5, 2012 by Deputy Regional Forester Jane L. Cottrell. The remainder of the second sentence contains Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the remaining allegations in the second sentence. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 5 of 71 6 VENUE 17. The first sentence of paragraph 17 of the Complaint contains statements regarding venue to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence and aver that Faye Krueger is the Regional Forester for Region One of the Forest Service. Defendants admit the third sentence of paragraph 17. PARTIES 18. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 18 of the Complaint and therefore they are denied. Defendants deny that any of the Plaintiffs’ members are adversely affected by the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects. 19. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in the first through third and fifth sentences of paragraph 19 of the Complaint and therefore they are denied. Defendants deny the allegations in the fourth sentence. Defendants also deny that any of the Plaintiffs’ members are adversely affected by the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects. 20. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 20 of the Complaint that Defendant Christensen was the acting Regional Forester at Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 6 of 71 7 the time the Complaint was filed but aver she has now been replaced by new Regional Forester Faye Krueger. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence. 21. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 21 of the Complaint. 22. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 22 of the Complaint. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. East Boulder Project 23. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 23 of the Complaint. 24. Defendants admit the Plaintiffs issued comments on the original EA for the East Boulder Project. The remaining allegations in paragraph 24 of the Complaint constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 25. Defendants admit that on or about June 4, 2010, District Ranger Avey signed the Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact authorizing the East Boulder Project. 26. Defendants admit that on or about July 19, 2010, Plaintiffs filed an administrative appeal of the East Boulder Project decision. The remaining allegations in paragraph 26 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 27. Defendants admit that on or about August 27, 2010, District Ranger Archuleta withdrew the East Boulder Project Decision Notice. The remainder of Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 7 of 71 8 the allegations of paragraph 27 contains Plaintiffs’ characterization of District Ranger Archuleta’s withdrawal notice, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to the notice’s plain language, meaning, and context. 28. Defendants admit that on or about April 25, 2011, District Ranger Archuleta posted legal notice of a Revised Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project beginning another 30-day public comment period on that document. 29. Defendants admit that on or about May 24, 2011, Plaintiffs submitted public comments on the Revised Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project. The remaining allegations in paragraph 29 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 30. Defendants admit that on or about July 29, 2011, Acting District Ranger Oswald posted legal notice of the 2011 Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the East Boulder Project beginning a 45 day administrative appeal period. 31. Defendants admit that Plaintiffs submitted administrative appeals of the East Boulder Decision Notice. The remaining allegations in paragraph 31 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 8 of 71 9 32. Defendants admit that on or about October 26, 2011, Forest Supervisor Mary Erickson denied Plaintiffs’ administrative appeals of the East Boulder Project and authorized Project implementation. 33. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 33 of the Complaint. 34. Defendants admit that Plaintiffs sent a letter dated September 23, 2011 to the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture and Interior and the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Any allegations contrary to that letter’s plain language, meaning and context are denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 34 of the Complaint. II. Bozeman Project 35. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 35 of the Complaint. 36. Defendants admit the Plaintiffs issued comments on the DEIS for the Bozeman Project. The remaining allegations in paragraph 36 of the Complaint constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 37. Defendants admit that on or about March 26, 2010, the Forest Service published legal notice of the Record of Decision and availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (“Final EIS”) for the Bozeman Project. 38. Defendants admit that on or about May 11, 2010, Plaintiff Native Ecosystems Council submitted an appeal of the Bozeman Project Final EIS. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 9 of 71 10 Defendants aver that on May 10, 2010 Plaintiff Alliance for the Wild Rockies submitted its appeal of the Bozeman Project Final EIS. The remaining allegations in paragraph 38 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 39. Defendants admit that on or about February 21, 2011, the Forest Service released a Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (“Supplemental Final EIS”) and Record of Decision for the Bozeman Project. 40. Defendants admit that Plaintiff Alliance for the Wild Rockies submitted an appeal of the Bozeman Project Supplemental Final EIS and on or about April 07, 2011. Defendants aver that Plaintiff Native Ecosystems Council submitted its appeal of the Bozeman Project Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision on or about April 1, 2011. The remaining allegations in paragraph 40 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 41. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 41 of the Complaint. 42. Defendants admit that the Bozeman Project Record of Decision was signed on or about November 29, 2011, that the Notice of Availability was published in the Federal Register for the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (“Final Supplemental Final EIS”) on December 2, 2011, and that the Forest Service published the Legal Notice for the Record of Decision on December 5, 2011. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 10 of 71 11 43. Defendants deny the allegation of paragraph 43 of the Complaint and aver that on or about January 16, 2012, Plaintiff Alliance for the Wild Rockies submitted an administrative appeal of the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision; on January 18, 2012, Plaintiff Alliance for the Wild Rockies with Montana Ecosystem Defense Council submitted an administrative appeal of the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision; and on or about January 20, 2012, Plaintiff Native Ecosystems Council submitted an administrative appeal of the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision. The remaining allegations in paragraph 43 constitute Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. 44. Defendants admit that on or about March 5, 2012, Deputy Regional Forester Cottrell denied Plaintiffs’ administrative appeals of the Bozeman Project and authorized project implementation. 45. Defendants admit that Plaintiffs sent a letter dated April 27, 2011 to the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture and Interior, Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, and Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter “FWS”) which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Any allegations contrary to that letter’s plain language, meaning and context are denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 45 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 11 of 71 12 46. Defendants admit that Plaintiffs sent a letter dated January 23, 2012, 2011 to the Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture and Interior, Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, Director of the FWS, Forest Supervisor for the Gallatin National Forest, Regional Forester for the U.S. Forest Service Region One, and the Montana Field Supervisor for the FWS which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Any allegations contrary to that letter’s plain language, meaning and context are denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 46 of the Complaint. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS I. Description of the Gallatin National Forest 47. With respect to the first sentence of paragraph 47, Defendants admit that the Gallatin National Forest (the “Forest”) provides habitat for a range of species including wolverines, moose, elk, marten, black-backed woodpeckers, and goshawks. Defendants deny the remainder of the first sentence of paragraph 47. With respect to the second sentence, Defendants admit that the Forest provides habitat for the grizzly bear, gray wolves, and the Canada lynx, and admit that the grizzly bear and Canada lynx are listed under the ESA, but Defendants deny that the gray wolf is listed under the ESA. 48. The allegations in paragraph 48 of the Complaint characterize the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS and Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 12 of 71 13 Final Supplemental FEIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 49. The allegations in paragraph 49 of the Complaint characterize the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 50. The allegations in paragraph 50 of the Complaint characterize the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 51. The allegations in paragraph 51 of the Complaint characterize the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 52. The allegations in paragraph 52 of the Complaint characterize the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 13 of 71 14 evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 53. The allegations in paragraph 53 of the Complaint characterize the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 54. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 54 of the Complaint. 55. Paragraph 55 of the Complaint characterizes the Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction (“Lynx Direction”) Record of Decision signed on March 21, 2007, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 56. Defendants admit the FWS issued a Biological Opinion in March, 2007 on the effects of the Lynx Direction on the distinct population segment of Canada lynx in the contiguous United States (the “March 2007 Biological Opinion”). The remaining allegations in paragraph 56 characterize the March 2007 Biological Opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 14 of 71 15 57. The allegations in paragraph 57 characterize the March 2007 Biological Opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 58. The allegations in paragraph 58 characterize the March 2007 Biological Opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 59. The allegations in paragraph 59 characterize the March 2007 Biological Opinion and 2006 Lynx critical habitat rule, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 60. The allegations in paragraph 60 characterize a 2009 rule on critical habitat for the Canada lynx issued by the FWS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 61. The allegations in paragraph 61 purport to characterize the decision and proceedings in Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Lyder, 728 F.Supp.2d 1126 (D. Mont. 2010) as documented in the Court’s docket, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 15 of 71 16 to the plain language, meaning, and context of the opinion and Court docket. Defendants admit that the 2009 rule is currently in effect, but deny the remainder of the allegations in paragraph 61. 62. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 62 of the Complaint. 63. Defendants admit that the grizzly bear is an ESA-listed threatened species that inhabits the Forest and deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 63 of the Complaint. 64. Paragraph 64 of the Complaint appears to characterize FWS’ 2004 Biological Opinion for the Grizzly Bear, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 65. Paragraph 65 of the Complaint appears to characterize FWS’ 2004 Biological Opinion for the Grizzly Bear, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 66. Paragraph 66 of the Complaint appears to characterize FWS’ 2004 Biological Opinion for the Grizzly Bear, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 16 of 71 17 67. The allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 67 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. The allegations in the second sentence of Paragraph 67 characterize an unidentified document, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 68. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 68. 69. The allegations in Paragraph 69 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 70. The allegations in Paragraph 70 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 71. Paragraph 71 of the Complaint appears to characterize the Service’s Rule published in 1975 listing the grizzly bear under the ESA, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 72. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 72. 73. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 73. 74. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 74. 75. The allegations in the first and second sentences of Paragraph 75 purport to characterize the judicial proceedings and decision in Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Inc. v. Servheen, 665 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2011) which Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 17 of 71 18 speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Federal Defendants deny any allegations contrary to the plain language, meaning, and context of the opinion and Court docket. As to the third sentence of Paragraph 75, Defendants admit that the grizzly bear, including individuals of the species in the Greater Yellowstone Area, is currently listed as a threatened species under the ESA. Defendants deny any remaining allegations in Paragraph 75. 76. The allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 76 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. The second sentence characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and the Bozeman Project Biological Assessment, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 77. Defendants deny the allegations of paragraph 77 of the Complaint. 78. Paragraph 78 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan Biological Opinion which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 79. Defendants deny the allegations of paragraph 79 of the Complaint. 80. Paragraph 80 of the Complaint characterizes the Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy (“Conservation Strategy”), which speaks for itself and is the Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 18 of 71 19 best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 81. Paragraph 81 of the Complaint characterizes the Conservation Strategy, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 82. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 82 of the Complaint. 83. Paragraph 83 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan Biological Opinion which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 84. Paragraph 84 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 85. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 85 of the Complaint and aver that the Bozeman Project is located outside the Greater Yellowstone Recovery Area, in the Gallatin Mountain Range. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 19 of 71 20 86. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 86 of the Complaint and aver that the East Boulder Project is located outside the Greater Yellowstone Recovery Area. 87. Paragraph 87 of the Complaint characterizes the Incidental Take Statement Terms and Conditions for the 2006 Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 88. Paragraph 88 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan Incidental Take Statement, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver that the annual report referenced in paragraph 88 is now due April 15. 89. Paragraph 89 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan for the Gallatin National Forest (“the Forest Plan”), which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 90. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 90 of the Complaint. 91. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 91 of the Complaint. 92. The allegations in Paragraph 92 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 20 of 71 21 93. Paragraph 93 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 94. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 94 of the Complaint. 95. The allegations in Paragraph 95 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 96. Paragraph 96 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 97. Paragraph 97 of the Complaint characterizes amendment 15 to the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. II. Description of the East Boulder Project Area 98. Defendants admit the allegation in paragraph 98 of the Complaint. 99. Defendants admit the allegation in paragraph 99 of the Complaint. 100. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 100 of the Complaint. 101. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 101 of the Complaint. 102. Paragraph 102 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 21 of 71 22 of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 103. Paragraph 103 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 104. Paragraph 104 of the Complaint characterizes snag field surveys, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 105. Paragraph 105 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 106. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 106 of the Complaint. 107. Paragraph 107 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 108. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 108 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 22 of 71 23 109. Paragraph 109 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 110. Paragraph 110 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 111. Paragraph 111 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 112. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 112 of the Complaint. 113. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 113 of the Complaint. 114. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 114 of the Complaint. 115. Paragraph 115 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 23 of 71 24 116. Paragraph 116 of the Complaint characterizes “project records” related to the East Boulder Project, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 117. Paragraph 117 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 118. Paragraph 118 of the Complaint characterizes the flammulated owl surveys, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Moreover, Defendants aver that flammulated owls are strongly associated with open ponderosa pine habitat, which is not found in the East Boulder Project area. 119. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 119 of the Complaint. 120. Paragraph 120 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 24 of 71 25 121. Paragraph 121 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 122. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 122 of the Complaint. 123. Paragraph 123 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 124. Paragraph 124 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Biological Assessment and USFWS’ concurrence to that Biological Assessment, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 125. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 125 of the Complaint. 126. Paragraph 126 of the Complaint characterizes the biological assessment and the Record of Decision for the Lynx Direction, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 25 of 71 26 127. Paragraph 127 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 128. Paragraph 128 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 129. Paragraph 129 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 130. Paragraph 130 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 131. Paragraph 131 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 26 of 71 27 132. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 132 of the Complaint. 133. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 133 of the Complaint. 134. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 134 of the Complaint. 135. Paragraph 135 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 136. Paragraph 136 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan and the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver that there is no Forest Plan standard in the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan for secure habitat for grizzly bear. 137. Paragraph 137 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver that there is no restrictive management direction for grizzly bears in the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee guidelines. 138. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 138 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 27 of 71 28 139. Paragraph 139 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 140. Paragraph 140 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 141. Paragraph 141 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 142. Paragraph 142 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 143. Paragraph 143 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 144. Paragraph 144 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 28 of 71 29 145. Paragraph 145 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 146. Paragraph 146 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 147. Paragraph 147 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 148. Paragraph 148 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 149. Paragraph 149 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 29 of 71 30 150. Paragraph 150 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 151. Paragraph 151 of the Complaint characterizes a report prepared by the Montana Fish Wildlife Parks department entitled Hunting District 560 2011 Annual Flight Report for Mule Deer, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 152. Paragraph 152 of the Complaint characterizes a report prepared by the Montana Fish Wildlife Parks department entitled Hunting District 560 2011 Annual Flight Report for Mule Deer, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 153. Paragraph 153 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 154. Paragraph 154 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Decision Notice, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 30 of 71 31 contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 155. Paragraph 155 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 156. Paragraph 156 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 157. Paragraph 157 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 158. The allegations in Paragraph 158 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 159. The allegations in Paragraph 159 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 160. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 160 of the Complaint. 161. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 161 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 31 of 71 32 162. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 162 of the Complaint. 163. Paragraph 163 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 164. Paragraph 164 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 165. Paragraph 165 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver that they have coordinated with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. 166. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 166 of the Complaint. III. Description of the Bozeman Project 167. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 167 of the Complaint. 168. Paragraph 168 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Record of Decision, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 32 of 71 33 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 169. Paragraph 169 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Record of Decision, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 170. Paragraph 170 of the Complaint characterizes the 2001 Roadless Rule, 36 C.F.R. § 294, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 171. Paragraph 171 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 172. Paragraph 172 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Record of Decision, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 173. Paragraph 173 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 33 of 71 34 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 174. Defendants admit that the Bozeman Project is located within designated critical habitat for the Canada lynx. 175. Defendants admit that the Bozeman Project is located within the North Gallatin Lynx Analysis Unit. 176. Paragraph 176 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 177. Paragraph 177 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 178. Paragraph 178 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 179. Paragraph 179 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 34 of 71 35 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 180. Paragraph 180 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 181. Paragraph 181 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 182. Paragraph 182 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 183. Paragraph 183 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 184. Paragraph 184 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 35 of 71 36 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 185. Paragraph 185 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Record of Decision, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 186. Paragraph 186 of the Complaint characterizes the Lynx Direction, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver there is no Forest Plan standard contained in the Lynx Direction, only a guideline. 187. Paragraph 187 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Lynx Direction, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 188. Paragraph 188 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 36 of 71 37 189. Paragraph 189 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and the November, 2009 Biological Opinion on effects of the Bozeman Project on Designated Critical Habitat for Canada Lynx, which speaks for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 190. Defendants deny Paragraph 190 of the Complaint. 191. Defendants deny Paragraph 191 of the Complaint. 192. Paragraph 192 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 193. Paragraph 193 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 194. Paragraph 194 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 37 of 71 38 195. Paragraph 195 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Final Supplemental Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 196. The allegations in Paragraph 196 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 197. Paragraph 197 of the Complaint characterizes the State of Montana’s Grizzly Bear Management Plan for Southwestern Montana 2002-2012, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 198. Paragraph 198 of the Complaint appears to characterize federal Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee Guidelines and/or Task Force Reports, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 199. Paragraph 199 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan for the Kootenai National Forest which is irrelevant to the claims alleged in the Complaint and speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 200. Paragraph 200 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 38 of 71 39 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 201. Defendants deny Paragraph 201 of the Complaint. 202. The first sentence of paragraph 202 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan and the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants admit the allegations in the second sentence that the Bozeman Project is located in the Gallatin/Madison area. Defendants aver that the Bozeman Project is located outside of the Greater Yellowstone Recovery Area, in the Gallatin Mountain Range. 203. Paragraph 203 of the Complaint appears to characterize the Gallatin Motorized Vehicle Travel Management Plan Biological Opinion and the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver the Travel Plan Biological Opinion contains no Forest Plan standard for secure habitat outside of the recovery zone. 204. Paragraph 204 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 39 of 71 40 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 205. Paragraph 205 of the Complaint characterizes a 1992 publication by Waller regarding grizzly bears, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 206. Paragraph 206 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 207. Paragraph 207 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 208. Paragraph 208 of the Complaint characterizes a 2010 publication by Schwartz et al. regarding grizzly bears, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 209. Paragraph 209 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 40 of 71 41 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 210. Paragraph 210 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 211. Paragraph 211 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion and the Incidental Take Statement for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 212. Paragraph 212 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 213. Paragraph 213 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 41 of 71 42 214. Paragraph 214 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 215. Paragraph 215 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 216. Paragraph 216 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 217. Paragraph 217 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project biological opinion, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 218. The allegations in paragraph 218 are too vague to permit a response and on that basis, the allegations are denied. 219. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 219 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 42 of 71 43 220. Paragraph 220 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 221. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 221 of the Complaint. To the extent that paragraph 221 seeks to characterize the Bozeman Project Final EIS, the Final EIS speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 222. Paragraph 222 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 223. Paragraph 223 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 224. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 224 of the Complaint. 225. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 225 of the Complaint. 226. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 226 of the Complaint. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 43 of 71 44 227. Paragraph 227 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 228. Paragraph 228 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 229. Paragraph 229 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 230. Paragraph 230 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and the surveys, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 231. Paragraph 231 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and the surveys, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 44 of 71 45 232. Paragraph 232 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and the referenced personal communication, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 233. Paragraph 233 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 234. Paragraph 234 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 235. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 235 of the Complaint. 236. Paragraph 236 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 237. Paragraph 237 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 45 of 71 46 and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 238. Paragraph 238 of the Complaint appears to characterize the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants aver that they have coordinated with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. 239. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 239 of the Complaint. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF The 2007 Lynx Direction Record of Decision, EIS, Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement violate the ESA and NEPA. 240. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 239 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 241. Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph 241. The remaining allegations in Paragraph 241 characterize the Service’s 2006 and 2009 rules designating critical habitat for Canada lynx, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 46 of 71 47 242. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 242 of the Complaint. 243. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 243 of the Complaint. 244. The allegations in paragraph 244 of the Complaint contain Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations. 245. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 245 of the Complaint. 246. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 246 of the Complaint. 247. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 247 of the Complaint. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF The Agencies’ site-specific project determinations of no adverse modification to lynx critical habitat are arbitrary, capricious, and violate the ESA and NEPA. 248. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 247 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 249. Paragraph 249 of the Complaint characterizes the Endangered Species Act, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 250. Paragraph 250 of the Complaint characterizes the Endangered Species Act and its regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 47 of 71 48 of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 251. The allegations in paragraph 251 of the Complaint contain Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions and characterizations of the Endangered Species Act to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations and aver that the Endangered Species Act speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. 252. Paragraph 252 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinions and other agency analyses of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 253. Paragraph 253 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinions and other agency analyses of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 254. Paragraph 254 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the Lynx Direction, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 48 of 71 49 255. Paragraph 255 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinions and other agency analyses of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 256. Paragraph 256 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinions and other agency analyses of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants deny any remaining allegations in paragraph 256. 257. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 257 of the Complaint. 258. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 258 of the Complaint. 259. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 259 of the Complaint. 260. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 260 of the Complaint. 261. The allegations in paragraph 261 of the Complaint contain Plaintiffs’ legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations. 262. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 262 of the Complaint. 263. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 263 of the Complaint and deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested in paragraph 263 or to any relief whatsoever. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 49 of 71 50 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF The absence and/or inadequacy of a biological opinion and incidental take statement for the Gallatin Forest Plan for grizzly bears on the Gallatin National Forest outside of the recovery zone violates the ESA and NEPA. 264. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 263 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 265. Paragraph 265 of the Complaint appears to characterize a 2010 publication regarding grizzly bears by Schwartz, et al., which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 266. Paragraph 266 of the Complaint characterizes the Endangered Species Act and its regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 267. Paragraph 267 of the Complaint characterizes the Endangered Species Act and its regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 268. Paragraph 268 of the Complaint characterizes the Endangered Species Act and its regulations, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 50 of 71 51 of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 269. Paragraph 269 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan for the Gallatin National Forest and its biological opinion, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 270. Paragraph 270 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 271. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 271 of the Complaint. 272. Paragraph 272 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 273. Paragraph 273 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 51 of 71 52 274. The first sentence of paragraph 274 of the Complaint characterizes the Interagency Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 274. 275. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 275 of the Complaint. 276. Paragraph 276 of the Complaint characterizes the Interagency Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 277. Defendants admit that the Endangered Species Act requires that “each agency shall use the best scientific and commercial data available” in fulfilling the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Defendants deny the remainder of paragraph 277 of the Complaint. The remaining allegations of paragraph 277 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the Endangered Species Act, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 278. Paragraph 278 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan and its biological opinion, which Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 52 of 71 53 speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 279. Paragraph 279 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 280. Paragraph 280 of the Complaint characterizes the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 281. Paragraph 281 of the Complaint characterizes the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project and other agency analyses, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants deny that they failed to apply applicable standards. 282. Paragraph 282 of the Complaint characterizes the Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 53 of 71 54 contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 283. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 283 of the Complaint. 284. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 284 of the Complaint. 285. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 285 of the Complaint. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF The Agencies’ site-specific Project analyses regarding impacts on grizzly bears are arbitrary and capricious and violate the ESA, NFMA, and NEPA. 286. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 285 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 287. Paragraph 287 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the Bozeman Project, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 288. Paragraph 288 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion and Final Supplemental Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, and the biological opinion and Environmental Assessment for the East Boulder Project, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 54 of 71 55 289. Paragraph 289 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion and Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, the Environmental Assessment, biological assessment, and Service’s concurrence for the East Boulder Project, and the biological opinion for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 290. Paragraph 290 of the Complaint characterizes the biological opinion for the 2006 Gallatin National Forest Motorized Vehicle Travel Plan, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 291. Paragraph 291 of the Complaint characterizes the Environmental Assessment and the Service’s concurrence for the East Boulder Project and the biological opinion and Final EIS for the Bozeman Project, which speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 292. Paragraph 292 of the Complaint characterizes a biological opinion for the Bozeman Project, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 55 of 71 56 293. Paragraph 293 of the Complaint characterizes a biological opinion for the Bozeman Project, which speaks for itself and provides the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 294. The first sentence of paragraph 294 of the Complaint characterizes the Environmental Assessment, Biological Assessment, and Service concurrence letter for the East Boulder Project and the Final EIS, Biological Assessment, and Biological Opinion for the Bozeman Project. The second sentence characterizes the Biological Opinion for the Bozeman Project. These documents speak for themselves and provide the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 295. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 295 of the Complaint. 296. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 296 of the Complaint. 297. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 297 of the Complaint. 298. Defendants deny that they have failed to adequately analyze and disclose Project impacts on the grizzly bear and deny that the analyses of the East Boulder and Bozeman Projects violates NEPA. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF The Forest Service is failing to ensure, and take a hard look at, the viability of old-growth and snag dependent, Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 56 of 71 57 sensitive, and management indicator species in violation of NEPA and NFMA. 299. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 298 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 300. Paragraph 300 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the National Forest Management Act, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 301. Paragraph 301 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 302. Paragraph 302 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 303. Paragraph 303 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 304. Paragraph 304 of the Complaint characterizes amendment 15 of the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 57 of 71 58 Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 305. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 305 of the Complaint. 306. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 306 of the Complaint. 307. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 307 of the Complaint. East Boulder Project 308. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 308 of the Complaint. 309. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 309 of the Complaint. 310. The first sentence of paragraph 310 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence. 311. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 311 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the National Forest Management Act. 312. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 312 of the Complaint. 313. Paragraph 313 of the Complaint characterizes amendment 15 of the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 58 of 71 59 314. The first sentence in paragraph 314 of the Complaint characterizes field data surveys, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 315. Paragraph 315 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 316. Paragraph 316 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 317. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 317 of the Complaint. 318. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 318 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the National Forest Management Act. Bozeman Project 319. Paragraph 319 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 59 of 71 60 320. Defendants deny the allegations of paragraph 320 of the Complaint. 321. Paragraph 321 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 322. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 322 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the National Forest Management Act. 323. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 323 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the National Forest Management Act. NEPA Violations 324. Paragraph 324 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 325. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 325 of the Complaint. 326. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 326 of the Complaint. 327. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 327 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the National Environmental Policy Act. SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 60 of 71 61 The East Boulder Project violates Forest Plan big game winter range standards, Wildlife Standard 3 and Standard MA 11, and the analysis fails to adequately disclose Project impacts on big game habitat, in violation of NEPA and NFMA. 328. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 327 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 329. Paragraph 329 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 330. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 330 of the Complaint. 331. Paragraph 331 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 332. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 332 of the Complaint. 333. Paragraph 333 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 61 of 71 62 334. The first sentence of paragraph 334 of the Complaint characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. The second sentence characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to these documents’ plain language, meaning, and context. 335. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 335 of the Complaint. 336. Paragraph 336 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 337. Paragraph 337 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 338. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 338 of the Complaint. 339. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 339 of the Complaint. 340. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 340 of the Complaint and deny any violations of the Forest Plan, the National Forest Management Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 62 of 71 63 The Forest Service’s failure to consult with Montana Department of Environmental Quality regarding National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit compliance and failure to inform the public whether the Projects comply with Montana requirements violate NEPA. 341. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 340 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 342. Paragraph 342 of the Complaint characterizes an un-named decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 343. Paragraph 343 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 344. Paragraph 344 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 63 of 71 64 345. Paragraph 345 of the Complaint characterizes the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act regulations, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 346. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 346 of the Complaint. 347. Paragraph 347 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice, and the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 348. Defendants deny that they did not request comments from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and therefore deny the allegations of paragraph 348 of the Complaint. 349. The first sentence in paragraph 349 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and Decision Notice, and the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 350. Paragraph 350 of the Complaint characterizes the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 64 of 71 65 Final EIS, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 350. 351. Defendants deny the allegation in paragraph 351 of the Complaint. 352. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 352 of the Complaint. Furthermore, Defendants deny that the East Boulder Project Environmental Assessment and Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS violate NEPA. 353. Defendants deny that they have failed to seek comments from Montana Department of Environmental Quality and deny that the East Boulder Project EA and Bozemen Project FSFEIS violate NEPA. EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF The Bozeman Project violates the Roadless Rule and NEPA by allowing logging in the Gallatin Fringe Inventoried Roadless Area. 354. Defendants incorporate their responses to Paragraphs 1 through 353 of the Complaint as if fully restated herein. 355. Paragraph 355 of the Complaint characterizes an unidentified document describing the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 65 of 71 66 356. Paragraph 356 of the Complaint characterizes the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 357. Paragraph 357 of the Complaint characterizes the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 358. Defendants admit that there has been no road construction or timber harvesting within the Mount Ellis portion of the Gallatin Fringe Inventoried Roadless Area since the adoption of the Forest Plan for the Gallatin National Forest. 359. Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 359 of the Complaint. The second sentence characterizes the Forest Plan, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 360. Paragraph 360 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS and Record of Decision, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 361. Paragraph 361 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Record of Decision and Final EIS, which speak for themselves and are the best Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 66 of 71 67 evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 362. Paragraph 362 of the Complaint characterizes the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to its plain language, meaning, and context. 363. Paragraph 363 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final Supplemental Final EIS, Record of Decision, and unidentified Region 1 data, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 364. Paragraph 364 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, as well as the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. 365. Paragraph 365 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, Final Supplemental Final EIS and Record of Decision, as well as the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 67 of 71 68 366. Paragraph 366 of the Complaint characterizes the Bozeman Project Final EIS, as well as the 2001 Roadless Rule, which speak for themselves and are the best evidence of their contents. Defendants deny any allegations contrary to their plain language, meaning, and context. Defendants also deny that the Bozeman Project violates the 2001 Roadless Rule. 367. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 367 of the Complaint and deny any violation of the 2001 Roadless Rule. REQUEST FOR RELIEF The remainder of the Complaint constitutes Plaintiffs’ request for relief, to which no response is required. To the extent a further response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested or to any relief whatsoever. GENERAL DENIAL Defendants deny any allegations of the Complaint, whether express or implied, that are not specifically admitted, denied, or qualified herein. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendants assert the following defenses to the claims made in Plaintiffs’ Complaint: 1. Some or all of Plaintiffs’ claims are barred due to lack of standing. Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 68 of 71 69 2. Some or all of Plaintiffs’ claims are barred due to their failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 3. Some or all of Plaintiffs’ claims fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. WHEREFORE, the Defendants request that the Court dismiss the Complaint in its entirety, render judgment for the Defendants and against the Plaintiffs, and grant the Defendants such other and further relief that the nature of the case and justice requires. DATED this 11th day of July, 2012. Respectfully submitted, IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment & Natural Resources Division By: /s/ John H. Martin JOHN H. MARTIN Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Division Wildlife and Marine Resources Section 999 18th Street, South Terrace, Suite 370 Denver, CO 80202 303.844.1383 303.844.1350 (fax) john.h.martin@usdoj.gov PAUL D. BARKER, JR. Senior Attorney United States Department of Justice Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 69 of 71 70 Environment & Natural Resources Division Natural Resources Section P.O. Box 7611 Washington, D.C. 20044-7611 (202) 305-0434 (202) 305-0506 (fax) paul.barker@usdoj.gov MICHAEL COTTER United States Attorney MARK STEGER SMITH Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney’s Office P.O. Box 1478 Billings, MT 59103 2929 Third Avenue, North, Suite 400 Billings, MT 59101 (406) 247-4667 Attorneys for Defendants Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 70 of 71 71 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 11th day of July, 2012, I filed a copy of this document electronically through the CM/ESF system, which caused all parties or counsel to be served by electronic means as reflected on the Notice of Electronic Filing. _/s/ John H. Martin________ John H. Martin Case 9:12-cv-00055-DLC Document 16 Filed 07/11/12 Page 71 of 71