The Michigan Environmental Protection Act (MEPA),¹ long and widely heralded² as one of the most ambitious legislative attempts ever to protect environmental quality, was polished to a new lustre by the Michigan Supreme Court in two decisions handed down earlier this year. In Western Michigan Environmental Action Council, Inc. v. Natural Resources Commission,³ the court seized jurisdiction over the case from the court of appeals prior to decision, and, reversing the trial court, ordered entry of judgment permanently enjoining oil and gas development in the Pigeon River Country State Forest, a large and fragile wilderness area sitting atop massive deposits of petroleum. Michigan Oil Co. v. Natural Resources Commission⁴ also turned on the environmental acceptability of oil development in the Pigeon River Forest. In that decision, a plurality of the court stated that MEPA should be read in concert with all other statutes relating to natural resources, i.e., that the state had the authority and perhaps the obligation to deny permits for activities allowing any pollution, impairment, or destruction of the natural resources of the state. While the aftershocks of the resolution of the intense political controversy involved in these cases continue to be felt, the opinions can be seen to stake out new ground in MEPA's progressive evolution.