state certification will not guarantee that water quality impacts will be prevented. The defendant-intervenor asserts similar arguments with regard to the Warm Springs Tribe. They claim that (1) the Tribe has not shown that the treaty rights apply to Camp Creek, (2) there is no connection between issuance of grazing permit without state certification and harm to the treaty rights, and (3) there is no evidence that the harm will cease if the Forest Service orders state certification. The defendant-intervenor’s argument fails. Plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenor satisfy the Lujan standing test, having established an injury in fact because plaintiffs live and recreate in the area of the challenged action. Salmon River Concerned Citizens v. Robertson, 32 F.3d 1346, 1345-55 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs have also adequately established
holding law of case doctrine is procedural and does not go to jurisdiction of court holding that under alabama law the law of the forum applies to procedural matters and that in most instances the statute of limitations is considered to be a procedural rule holding that the declaratory judgment act is a procedural device holding that procedural bar rule does not apply to ineffectiveness claims holding that a procedural challenge does not mean plaintiffs injury is procedural if plaintiff lives or recreates in the area