Skip to the page content
Your donations
Passes our checks

Western Environmental Law Center

EIN 93-1010269 · Eugene, OR

Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.

LegitimacyPassesRegistration and standingFinancial healthStrong100 out of 100GovernanceStrong100 out of 100Impact evidenceDescribes programsHow well its results are evidenced

What it says it does

PUBLIC INTEREST LAW FIRM - THE WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER USES THE POWER OF THE LAW TO FOSTER THRIVING, RESILIENT WESTERN U.S. LANDS, WATERS, WILDLIFE, AND COMMUNITIES IN THE FACE OF A CHANGING CLIMATE. WE ENVISION A THRIVING WEST, ABUNDANT WITH PROTECTED AND INTERCONNECTED ECOSYSTEMS, POWERED BY RENEWABLE ENERGY, AND CARED FOR BY COMMUNITIES BROUGHT TOGETHER IN AN ECOLOGY OF KINSHIP.

Income
$5.4 million
Spending
$4.7 million
Spent on programs
79%
Reserves
13.1 months of spending
Largest source of income
donations and private grants, 74%
Employees
31
Volunteers
8
Highest pay
$184,463, executive di

Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Financial health

Strong: 100 out of 100.

  • Reserves

    35 of 35

    Spendable reserves would cover 13.1 months of spending.

  • Debt

    20 of 20

    It owes 7% of what it owns.

  • Living within its means

    15 of 15

    Income exceeded spending by 13% of income.

  • Income trend

    15 of 15

    Income rose 40% on the year before.

  • Spending floor

    15 of 15

    79% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 11 cents.

Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Governance

Strong: 100 out of 100.

  • Independent board

    25 of 25

    8 of 8 voting board members are independent.

  • Conflict of interest policy

    15 of 15

    Has a written conflict of interest policy.

  • Whistleblower policy

    8 of 8

    Has a written whistleblower policy.

  • Record keeping policy

    7 of 7

    Has a written policy on keeping and destroying records.

  • Board minutes

    5 of 5

    Keeps minutes of board meetings.

  • Board sees the tax return

    10 of 10

    Gave the board a copy of this return before filing it.

  • Pay set independently

    5 of 5

    Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.

  • Independent check of accounts

    15 of 15

    Its accounts were audited by an independent accountant.

  • No reported misuse

    10 of 10

    Reports no diversion of assets, excess benefits or loans to insiders.

Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Impact evidence

Describes programs. Its tax return describes what it does but we have found no measurable results in it.

Programs described in its return (2)
  1. $3.7 million spent. PUBLIC INTEREST LAW FIRM - THE WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER USES THE POWER OF THE LAW TO FOSTER THRIVING, RESILIENT WESTERN U.S. LANDS, WATERS, WILDLIFE, AND COMMUNITIES IN THE FACE OF A CHANGING CLIMATE. WE COMBINE OUR LEGAL SKILLS WITH SOUND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE TO ADDRESS MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN THE WEST IN THE MOST STRATEGIC AND EFFECTIVE MANNER. SEE CASE DESCRIPTIONS ON SCHEDULE O.
  2. MONT. ENV'T INFORMATION CTR. V. MONT. DEP'T OF ENV'T QUALITY; NO. DV 19-34 (MONT. 16TH JUD. DIST. CT.): CHALLENGE TO MT BOARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DECISION UPHOLDING MT DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY'S GRANT OF A MINING PERMIT TO WESTMORELAND AM4 PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF THE ROSEBUD COAL MINE IN ROSEBUD COUNTY, MT PURSUANT TO MONTANA STRIP AND UNDERGROUND MINE RECLAMATION ACT (MSUMRA). MONTANA SUPREME COURT AFFIRMED DISTRICT COURT'S DECISION IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS AND REMANDED TO D.C. FOR CALCULATION OF ATTORNEYS' FEES, WHICH THE PARTIES SETTLED. FEES RECOVERED IN 2024 OF 509,157. HELD V. STATE OF MT, OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST, NO. CDV-2020-307 (MONT. 1ST JUDICIAL DIST. CT.): YOUTH CONSTITUTIONAL CLIMATE CASE FILED IN MARCH 2020 IN A MONTANA STATE DISTRICT COURT. EIGHT-DAY TRIAL WAS HELD IN JUNE 2023. DECISION AND ORDER ISSUED IN FAVOR OF YOUTH PLAINTIFFS ON AUGUST 14, 2023. WON ON APPEAL WITH THE MONT. SUPREME COURT. AWAITING DECISION ON FEE PETITIONS. DIN CARE V. BUREAU OF LAND MGMT.1:22-CV-00804-WJ-KK (D. N.M.): CHALLENGE TO BLM APPROVAL OF OIL AND GAS LEASING DECISIONS AND ASSOCIATED DRILLING PERMIT AUTHORIZATIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF NEPA TO PROTECT PEOPLE AND ENVIRONMENT. A SETTLEMENT WAS REACHED IN 2024. NO FEES WERE RECOVERED FOR THIS CASE. FRIENDS OF TOPPENISH CREEK ET AL., V. WA STATE DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, NO. 23- 002, STATE OF WA POLLUTION CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD: CHALLENGE TO STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY GENERAL NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMITS FOR CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY. THE MATTER IS CLOSED. NO FEES WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED. IN RE CLEAN WATER ACT RULEMAKING NO. C 20-04636 (N.D. CAL.): CHALLENGE TO THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE REVIEW OF FEDERALLY LICENSED OR PERMITTED PROJECTS UNDER SECTION 401 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. CASE DISMISSED AS MOOT IN 2024. NO FEES WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED. KETTLE RANGE CONSERVATION GROUP V. WHITE, 2:23-CV-00147-SAB (E.D. WA): CHALLENGE TO INDUSTRIAL LOGGING PROJECT IN WASHINGTON'S KETTLE RANGE TO PROTECT AN AREA IMPORTANT FOR LYNX RECOVERY IN THE LOWER 48 STATES (AND WHERE COLVILLE TRIBE IS REINTRODUCING LYNX). THIS MATTER WAS RESOLVED, AND FEES RECOVERED OF 149,000 IN 2025. BROOKFIELD WHITE PINE HYDRO LLC V. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION NO. 23-1075 (D.C. CIR.): A DAM OPERATOR CHALLENGED A DECISION BY THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION TO DENY A MOTION TO DECLARE THAT MAINE VIOLATED THE CLEAN WATER ACT WHEN IT DENIED THE FACILITY A SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION. REPRESENTING CONSERVATION GROUPS INTERVENING IN SUPPORT OF FERC'S POSITION TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THIS MATTER IS RESOLVED. NO FEES WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED. COLUMBIA RIVERKEEPER ET AL V. WA DEPT OF ECOLOGY AND FREE FLOW POWER, PCHB NO. 23-025C, STATE OF WA POLLUTION CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD: CHALLENGE TO WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY'S CLEAN WATER ACT 401 CERTIFICATION FOR THE GOLDENDALE PUMPED STORAGE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON THE COLUMBIA RIVER TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. THIS MATTER IS ONGOING. CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY V. U.S. DEPT. OF INTERIOR 1:22-CV-01716-TSC (D.D.C.): CHALLENGE TO BLM OIL AND GAS DRILLING PERMIT APPROVALS IN THE PERMIAN AND POWDER RIVER BASINS FOR FAILING TO TAKE A HARD LOOK UNDER NEPA, FAILING TO CONSULT UNDER THE ESA, AND FOR VIOLATING FLPMA, ALL TO PROTECT PEOPLE AND THE ENVIRONMENT. CASE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF STANDING. NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES V. U.S. EPA, 19-CV-01537 (W.D. WA): CHALLENGE TO THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT TO IDENTIFY WHICH WATERBODIES IN WASHINGTON REQUIRE CLEANUP PLANS AND THEN TO DEVELOP SUCH PLANS AS MECHANISM TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. THIS MATTER IS ONGOING. NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES V. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ET AL., NO. 21-CV-01637 (W.D. WA): CHALLENGE OF THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S FAILURE TO DEVELOP A TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD TO ADDRESS DISSOLVED OXYGEN IMPAIRMENTS IN PUGET SOUND AND THEREBY PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. THE MATTER IS ONGOING. NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES V. U.S. EPA, ET AL. 22-70053 (9TH CIR.): CHALLENGE TO EPA DENIAL OF NWEA PETITION TO WITHDRAW WASHINGTON'S NPDES PERMITTING AUTHORITY OVER WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES DISCHARGING INTO PUGET SOUND BECAUSE OF THE AGENCY'S CONSISTENT FAILURE TO IMPOSE LAWFUL TECHNOLOGY-BASED AND WATER QUALITY-BASED EFFLUENT LIMITS, ALL TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. THIS MATTER IS CLOSED. NO FEES WERE SOUGHT OR RECOVERED. CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY V. U.S. EPA, ET AL. 1:22-CV-00486-BAH (D. D.C.): WELC REPRESENTS CBD IN AN ESA SUIT FOR FAILURE TO CONSULT AND FAILURE TO INITIATE CONSULTATION WITH RESPECT TO WASHINGTON STATE'S AQUATIC CRITERIA FOR CYANIDE AS MECHANISM TO PROTECT WATER RESOURCES. THE CASE SETTLED WITH FEES RECOVERED OF 100,000 IN 2025. MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER ET AL. V. OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR ET AL. 4:22-CV-00029-BMM (D. MONT.): CHALLENGE PERTAINING TO FOIA REQUEST RE. RECORDS RELATING TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 14008, SPECIFICALLY THE REPORT ON THE FEDERAL OIL AND GAS LEASING PROGRAM, TO INFORM EFFORTS TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST FROM OIL AND GAS IMPACTS. THE AGENCIES ARE CONTINUING TO SLOWLY PROVIDE RECORDS. CASE IS ONGOING. DAKOTA RES. COUNCIL V. U.S. DEPT. OF INTERIOR 1:22-CV-01853-CRC (D. D.C.): CHALLENGE TO BLM OIL AND GAS LEASING DECISIONS IN MONTANA, WYOMING, UTAH, NEVADA, NEW MEXICO AND COLORADO FOR FAILING TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT CLIMATE IMPACTS AND FAILING TO PREPARE AN EIS UNDER NEPA, AND FOR VIOLATING FLPMA, ALL TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST. LOST AT DISTRICT COURT. NO APPEAL FILED. SIERRA CLUB V. HOFFMAN ET AL. 4:22-CV-00037-DN (D. UTAH): CHALLENGE TO COAL MINE EXPANSION, SPECIFICALLY DECISION TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF EXISTING MINE'S LEASE AREA, TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC AND ENVIRONMENT FROM COAL MINING HARMS. MOTION BY THE GOVERNMENT TO REMAND IS PENDING BEFORE

Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate

Legitimacy checks

  1. Is it registered with the IRS? Passed.

    Listed in the IRS master file of tax-exempt organizations as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  2. Has the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status? Passed.

    Not on the IRS automatic revocation list.

    Source: Automatic revocation of exemption list, Internal Revenue Service, file dated November 6, 2026.

  3. Are donations tax-deductible? Passed.

    On the IRS list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.

    Source: Publication 78 data: organizations eligible for tax-deductible contributions, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  4. Is it keeping up with its IRS filings? Passed.

    Most recent return on file covers the year ending December 2024.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  5. How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.

    Recognized by the IRS since February 1994.

    Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.

  6. Is it in good standing with state regulators? Passed.

    Not on California's list of charities barred from soliciting. Other states are not yet checked.

    Source: May Not Operate or Solicit for Charitable Purposes list, California Attorney General, Registry of Charities and Fundraisers, file dated November 4, 2026.

Ratings and checks are our reading of public records, using the published method. They are not a statement about anyone's honesty. If you work for this organization, you can send corrections or results, confirm you want gifts through Veridonate, or ask to be removed from giving.