The Sierra Club and two other far-out, radical “environmental” groups have scored a minor victory in convincing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to overturn permits issued by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that allows EQT Midstream’s Mountain Valley Pipeline to cross 3.5 miles of Jefferson National Forest in West Virginia and Virginia. The court says USFS and BLM didn’t come to the right conclusion about sedimentation and erosion impacts of MVP. The judges (who don’t know a thing about these issues) say USFS and BLM’s contention that impacts can be adequately mitigated is in error. Ever notice how some judges love to tell other people how to do their jobs? In practical terms, the decision is merely an irritation–affecting maybe 1% of the overall project. But the broader implications are troubling. The Clubbers and their friends have a similar case against MVP at the same court (Fourth Circuit) that asks the court to block construction of MVP throughout Virginia on the theory that a stream crossing permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is faulty (see Army Corps Engrs Reinstates MVP Permits for 4 WV River Crossings). Will the Fourth Circuit judges now tell the Army Corps how to do their job too? That’s the strategy outlined in the Sierra Club’s arrogant, boastful press release following the decision stopping construction of MVP in Jefferson National Forest…
The Sierra Club and two other far-out, radical “environmental” groups have scored a minor victory in convincing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to overturn permits issued by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that allows EQT Midstream’s Mountain Valley Pipeline to cross 3.5 miles of Jefferson National Forest in West Virginia and Virginia. The court says USFS and BLM didn’t come to the right conclusion about sedimentation and erosion impacts of MVP. The judges (who don’t know a thing about these issues) say USFS and BLM’s contention that impacts can be adequately mitigated is in error. Ever notice how some judges love to tell other people how to do their jobs? In practical terms, the decision is merely an irritation–affecting maybe 1% of the overall project. But the broader implications are troubling. The Clubbers and their friends have a similar case against MVP at the same court (Fourth Circuit) that asks the court to block construction of MVP throughout Virginia on the theory that a stream crossing permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is faulty (see 