areas.” (See PI. Mem. at 11.) 1. Purpose and Need a. Lack of Supporting Evidence The Forest Service states that the purpose of Phase 1 is to “protect[ ] local communities from catastrophic wüdfíres and extended exposure to smoke” by “re-ducting] fuels.” (See AR 246.) According to the Forest Service, the Phase 1 project wül reduce the intensity of future wüdfíres by removing the “fuels” that help to spread the fires. Plaintiffs assert that the EIS violates NEPA by faffing to disclose the lack of scientific evidence supporting the Forest Service’s belief that the Phase 1 logging project wül reduce the intensity of future wüdfíres and by faffing to address reports that contradict the Forest Service’s belief. See Seattle Audubon Society v. Lyons, 871 F.Supp. 1291, 1318 (W.D.Wash.1994) (<HOLDING>). In particular, plaintiffs note that the EIS
holding failure to take action may have some bearing on good faith holding that the transaction must be fair and equitable and in good faith holding that a sale must be both fair and reasonable in price and made in good faith holding eis must disclose responsible scientific opinion in opposition to the proposed action and make a good faith reasoned response to it holding that an employee seeking the protection of the opposition clause must demonstrate a good faith reasonable belief that the challenged practice violates title vii