Federal judge sympathizes with evicted China Hat homeless but says need to curb fire danger carries greater weight

Barney Lerten

EUGENE, Ore. (KTVZ) — A federal judge who refused to grant an emergency court order to block the removal of dozens of homeless residents from the Deschutes National Forest south of Bend explained his reasoning in a ruling filed Thursday, offering sympathy for their plight but saying the forest health and fuels-reduction project is crucial for the broader public’s safety.

U.S. District Judge Michael McShane, who denied the requested court order to block the closure two days earlier, filed his six-page written opinion Thursday, the very day the U.S. Forest Service closed the gate on China Hat Road and authorities began efforts to remove any remaining homeless people.

“The court is sympathetic to the circumstances faced by Plaintiffs and the dozens of others who have called China Hat home and will need to employ significant efforts to relocate,” McShane wrote.

“As Plaintiffs note, the majority of China Hat residents are not there by choice, but because of personal disabilities, wide-ranging policy choices, and costs of living that are outside of their control,” the judge said.

While the Forest Service apparently complied with federal environmental regulations, McShane said that “does not diminish the community’s need to provide better support to houseless and disabled people.”

“Despite Plaintiffs’ very real struggles, the balance of equities does not tip sharply in Plaintiffs’ favor, nor is an injunction in the public interest,” the judge wrote.

“This Project will serve the public by preventing ‘uncharacteristic large-scale loss of forest habitat’ and increasing public and firefighter safety,'” he added, quoting Deschutes National Forest Supervisor Holly Jewkes.

“The public’s significant interest in restoring natural habitat, preventing catastrophic wildfires, and preserving the overall health of Deschutes National Forest is not outweighed by the interest of 150 or so individuals in residing on this particular plot of land,” McShane concluded.

TRO rulingDownload

Click here to follow the original article.