Pit River Tribe v. United States Forest Service, 9th Cir. 2006

by Brad Jolly, Partner
Nov 9, 2006

The Pit River Tribe and other plaintiffs won a significant victory in the Ninth Circuit for Indian religious freedom. On November 6, 2006, the Ninth Circuit reversed the Eastern District of California's summary judgment in favor of the government that would allow, once again, the destruction of sacred lands.

The Pit River Tribe brought suit to stop the development of a geothermal plant on federal forest land that includes the sacred Medicine Lake. In a unanimous decision, the 9th Circuit rejected the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management's ("BLM") extension of leases that would have allowed Calpine Corporation to develop the geothermal plant. The Court reasoned that the agencies did not fully comply with applicable federal environmental and historic preservation laws, concluding that the agencies "never took the requisite 'hard look' at whether the Medicine Lake Highlands should be developed for energy at all." BLM had "unilaterally" lifted an existing moratorium on development in the Medicine Lake Highlands without even allowing for public comment. The BLM later also granted Calpine another extension of its leases in the area without undertaking any additional environmental analysis. The Court held that the agencies' violation of environmental and historic preservation laws, at a minimum, was a shirking of the agencies' fiduciary obligations to the tribe. However, the Court seemed to refuse to establish or confirm a broader obligation to tribal nations under the trust relationship.

The actions of the Forest Service and BLM are yet another demonstration of the United States' failure or refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of Indian religions, especially when dealing with sacred sites. In the majority of cases, courts have always set aside Indian religious freedom in the area of sacred sites when placed against the wants of non-Indians. As Gene Preston, a Pit River council member, testified before the Indian Affairs Committee, "Where is the equation that says trading our culture is worth the [minimal] gain [in electric power]? . . . The profit is privatized while the impacts become the burden of Native Americans, society, animals and future generations." Although the case does not necessarily provide additional protection or consideration of Indian religious freedom, the victory is well worth celebrating.

Read the court's opinion here.