## Facts

- Conservation groups and forest users sued the Secretary of Agriculture and Forest Service officials over three proposed timber sales in the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia.
- The sales covered 1,077 acres: 649 acres for selective cutting (with marked trees) and 428 acres for clearcutting in units of 5 to 25 acres.
- In the clearcut units, contracts required cutting “all merchantable timber,” with no individual tree marking; only unit boundaries were marked.
- The sales would remove trees that were not dead, physiologically mature, or large.
- Plaintiffs alleged the sales violated § 476 of the Organic Act of 1897, which authorizes sale of only “dead, matured or large growth of trees” and requires timber to be “marked and designated” before sale.
- The district court granted summary judgment for plaintiffs and enjoined the proposed sales and similar sales that violated § 476.
- The government appealed, arguing the district court misconstrued § 476 and that modern forestry practice supported the Forest Service’s approach.

## Issues

1. Whether § 476 authorizes timber sales using clearcutting that includes removal of trees not “dead, matured or large growth.”
2. Whether § 476’s requirement that timber “shall be marked and designated” is satisfied by marking only clearcut unit boundaries rather than individually marking trees.
3. Whether long-standing Forest Service practice and modern forestry methods can expand or modify § 476’s statutory limits.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for plaintiffs and affirmed the injunction.
- The court held § 476 limits sales to dead, matured, or large trees and does not permit clearcutting contracts requiring removal of all merchantable timber, including nonqualifying trees.
- The court held § 476 requires individual trees to be marked and designated before sale; boundary-only marking is insufficient.
- The court rejected reliance on administrative practice to override clear statutory text; any broader authority must come from Congress.

## Legal Principles

- When statutory text is clear, agency practice and policy considerations cannot contradict or effectively revise the statute.
- Organic Act § 476 limits national forest timber sales to “dead, matured or large growth of trees,” read as a substantive constraint on the Secretary’s authority.
- Organic Act § 476’s “marked and designated” requirement contemplates identifying specific trees to be cut and sold, not merely delineating a harvest area for blanket removal.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit enforced the Organic Act’s textual limits on national forest timber sales by prohibiting clearcutting contracts that (1) remove trees beyond the statute’s “dead, matured or large growth” categories and (2) omit individual tree marking required before sale.


W. Va. Div. of Izaak Walton League of Am., Inc. v. Butz, 522 F.2d 945 (4th Cir. 1975)