A permanent injunction that prohibited timber harvest on 50 acres of private Oregon forestland was justified to protect threatened marbled murrelets, according to a federal appeals court.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld an earlier ruling that blocked logging on private property that was once part of Oregon’s Elliott State Forest.

The Scott Timber Co. bought the 355-acre “Benson Tract” of the forest from the state government a decade ago, but Cascadia Wildlands and other environmental nonprofits filed a lawsuit opposing its plan to harvest 50 acres of the parcel.

After about six years of litigation, a federal judge issued a permanent injunction in 2022 against logging within that “Benson Snake Unit,” finding the removal of large trees would harm murrelets in violation of the Endangered Species Act — even if the birds were absent during harvest.

The 9th Circuit has now rejected Scott Timber’s challenge to that decision, ruling the environmental plaintiffs sufficiently proved that logging would unlawfully eliminate the bird’s breeding habitat in the unit.

“The evidence more than supports the district court’s conclusion that Cascadia Wildlands had met its burden in demonstrating that proposed timber harvest would specifically cause injury to the marbled murrelets,” the 9th Circuit said.

The appellate court rejected Scott Timber’s argument the 50-acre unit isn’t “essential” to the survival of individual birds, since cutting down the trees wouldn’t amount to unlawful “take” in light of the thousands of acres of suitable nesting habitat nearby.

“We have never imposed a heightened ‘essential’ requirement for actual injury under the ESA, and Scott Timber does not persuade us why we should switch course now,” the 9th Circuit said. “Although Scott Timber seeks to insert this descriptor in order to tip the scales in its favor, an ‘essential’ habitat requirement would upend our long-held approach.”

The 9th Circuit discounted a comparison between the timber lawsuit and a legal precedent involving the dangers posed to bald eagles from lead bullets.

In that case, another appellate court determined there wasn’t a sufficiently direct link between hunting and harm to bald eagles, since it wasn’t proven the birds actually consumed bullets left in deer carcasses.

The “chain of events” between Scott Timber’s logging plans and injury to marbled murrelets isn’t similarly “attenuated,” however, because tree removal “would directly remove and fragment” the habitat they need for breeding, the 9th Circuit said.

Scott Timber’s procedural argument against the lawsuit was also unsuccessful, as the 9th Circuit determined the environmental plaintiffs provided adequate notice of their intention to file a federal complaint, as required by ESA.

According to Scott Timber, an “anticipatory” letter warning of species impacts didn’t meet notice requirements because the company hadn’t yet bought the property, let alone proposed a specific logging plan.

The purpose of the notice requirement is to allow defendants to revise their plans to comply with the federal law rather than face litigation, the appellate court said.

Under the circumstances, the environmental plaintiffs met ESA’s notice requirements because their letter “mirrored” allegations later included in the complaint and related to property that encompassed the eventual logging site, the ruling said.

“Thus, Scott Timber was on notice that any logging operation on the Benson Tract that was ‘reasonably likely to occur’ — even if not specifically planned when the notice was sent — would be alleged to be an ESA violation,” according to the 9th Circuit.