(Last Revised 10/18/2002)

Since July 1998, MRC has been involved in 11 cases of litigation. Two of those were carry-over cases from the previous ownership related to timber harvest plans (THPs). Two cases involved property line disputes.

With the cases concerning THPs, only two cases have had adverse rulings for MRC. These involved plans that had been originally written and filed by the previous owner.

In one case (1-97-445M), the court found that the California Department of Forestry made an error in approving the plans due to:

1. CDF did not provide opportunity for the public to review Spotted Owl Survey data sheets that had been submitted into the THP's public record, and,
2. The cumulative impacts assessment area used was not in conformance with the Forest Practice Rule 912.0 (too brief)

In the second case (1-89-100M, 1-89-145M, 1-97-352M) where three plans were combined under one case, the ruling found that

1. The THP did not adequately address reasonably foreseeable projects in the Cumulative Impacts analysis.
2. A second finding ruled that the THP did not contain an adequate discussion for the "alternative analysis."

These errors occurred in a process that has been continually evolving since 1973. As a result of these and other ruling MRC's THP evaluation process has changed and the items in the rulings have been addressed.