[Sculpin]

In 2020, the Washington DNR released its climate strategy doc:

https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/em_climaterresilienceplan_feb2020.pdf?r5qt4w

...which is basically mom and apple pie with no real specifics.

So what happens when a group of citizens attempts to reconcile the DNR's words with it's actions?

https://sustainable-economy.org/washington-department-of-natural-resources-sued-for-failing-to-account-for-the-climate-impacts-of-its-logging-proposals/

The Washington DNR exists solely to maximize revenue for its beneficiaries, its right in the charter in the strongest wording possible ("maintain undivided loyalty to beneficiaries").  Apparently someone decided that greenwashing the organization with fluffy climate rhetoric enhances the profitability, presumably by risk mitigation, in this case the risk that they are accused of doing what they are chartered to do!

[Ski]

well, when the rules aren't acceptable, just move the goalposts! easy peasy!

looking forward to this one going down in flames.

[altasnob]

Looks very similar to the lawsuit filed against DNR by CONSERVATION NORTHWEST; OLYMPIC FOREST COALITION; WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL that was discussed in this thread.

I was curious what was going on with that lawsuit. It appears the Washington Supreme Court grants case arguing state forests must be managed for “all the people.” Oral arguments were heard on October 21, 2021, so a decision should come out shortly.