Environmentalists trying to protect the habitat of the endangered Indiana Bat from logging lost a federal court battle last month.

Environmentalists accused the U.S. Forest Service of not respecting the bat’s habitat when logging. Namely, the case claimed the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the forest service had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” in following the Endangered Species Act.

But a federal judge found otherwise. The court ruled that both agencies have followed necessary procedures of the Endangered Species Act when analyzing the effects of logging.

Environmentalists have filed numerous lawsuits in recent years against the federal government hoping to use the Endangered Species Act and the endangered bat as an excuse to stop logging, and have won some, forcing agencies to alter their logging approach in some cases.

Steve Henson with the Southern Appalachian Multiple-Use Council, a forest products industry group, expressed frustration at the government resources expended in defense of so many environmentalists lawsuits.

“It is unfortunate that the taxpayers have to pay the bill for this senseless litigation. The judge continuously found that the environmental groups had not provided grounds to justify their many allegations. They apparently used the throw-it-up-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks method of litigation,” Henson said. Henson said the environmental groups should have to bear the cost of the lawsuits if they lose.

“The environmentalists request and are usually granted reimbursement for their legal fees when they win a court case. That’s our tax money going to these groups so they can continue to file baseless lawsuits,” Henson said.

Indiana bats hibernate in colonies in specific caves scattered in just a few Midwestern and Eastern states. Upon emergence from hibernating in the spring, they migrate in many different directions, sometimes hundreds of miles away from their caves.

Current conservation efforts are focused on protecting known hibernating caves where they are susceptible to disturbance during hibernation. Environmentalists argued that the forests where the bats live when not in hibernation also need protection, to protect their food sources and breeding habitat. Environmentalists pointed to the fact that the Indiana bat species have continued a precipitous decline over the past two decades, indicating more needs to be done than simply protecting cave sites.

The court’s decision clearly supports the assessment that logging is not harmful to the existence of this imperiled species, according to Henson. Henson said he was not surprised with the ruling considering the hoops that the agencies have to jump through to accommodate environmental laws and analysis.

The Southern Appalachian Biodiversity Project based in Asheville was one of several environmental groups that were a party to the lawsuit.