Blaming environmentalists for recent wildfires, Bush introduced a new plan that purports to be intended to improve forest health and reduce the risk of fire on public lands. However, this so-called "Healthy Forests Initiative" is a transparent attempt to gut environmental laws and limit public participation in the management of our National Forests.
Bush's plan has nothing to do with "healthy forests" - just increased logging and expanded corporate welfare. The focus of the plan is to suspend environmental laws for commercial timber sales disguised as "fuel reduction projects," these being aimed at ancient forests and roadless areas that are miles away from any community. Bush's plan would also eliminate the public's right to appeal harmful logging projects or challenge them in court, leaving the Forest Service and logging industry unconstrained to log our public lands with little or no accountability.
Bush is claiming that conservationists use appeals and litigation to block logging operations that would reduce the risk of catastrophic fires, but nothing could be further from the truth. For example, a recent report from the Government Accounting Office (GAO) found that only 1% of the Forest Service's fuel reduction projects were appealed in 2001 and none were litigated.
Additionally, the GAO has found that the Forest Service misused funds allocated under the National Fire Plan. The Forest Service has not used these funds to target areas that are at the highest risk of fire and has failed to effectively protect homes and communities. The agency's failure to implement the National Fire Plan demonstrates that our environmental laws, the appeals process, and public oversight are essential to keeping the agency in line.
Experts say that irresponsible logging practices are actually to blame for the fire-prone conditions on our public land. The Forest Service has removed the largest, most fire-resistant trees and left slash, brush, and dense young stands of forests behind, essentially stoking the nation's wildfires.
Bush's plan would perpetuate and intensify this problem. It would not invest funds in removing small diameter trees and underbrush, which scientific evidence shows is the most effective means to reduce fire risks. Instead, the plan would allow the Forest Service to enter into long-term contracts with logging companies to log large, fire-resistant trees in remote areas to pay for hazardous fuel work.
Bush's plan also proposes to weaken the Northwest Forest Plan to allow more logging of ancient forests by "removing needless administrative obstacles," including provisions intended to protect sensitive and imperiled species, key salmon watersheds, and old-growth forests. This part of the plan is not limited to fuel reduction projects, and suggests that Bush is only interested in cutting more ancient forests in the region.
Bush's plan was drafted by former logging industry lobbyist and current Undersecretary of Agriculture Mark Rey, who was also primary author of the infamous 1995 "logging without laws" salvage rider. Under the 1995 rider, the Forest Service destroyed millions of acres of ancient forests and endangered species habitat that had previously been protected, generating tremendous public controversy. The same can be expected to occur under Bush's proposal.
The stage was set for Bush by Senate majority leader Tom Daschle (D-SD), who pushed a rider through Congress last month that uses the rubric of fire protection to suspend environmental laws and judicial review for a timber sale in South Dakota. The constitutionality of this rider is now being challenged in court. However, it provided Bush and Republican lawmakers the perfect opportunity to push for the rider to apply to the rest of the nation as well.
Senators Larry Craig (R-ID) and Pete Domenici (R-NM) took immediate advantage of the opportunity and introduced an amendment to the 2003 Interior Appropriations Bill that includes most of the provisions in Bush's plan. A few Senators, including Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV), have lobbied hard against the Craig/Domenici amendment, and have so far prevented a vote from being taken on the bill. However, Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced a "compromise" amendment they hoped would satisfy both political parties.
While not as extreme as Bush's plan or the Craig/Domenici amendment, the Feinstein/Wyden alternative still severely undermines environmental protection laws and citizen rights. It would allow commercial logging projects on 7 million acres of National Forest lands without environmental analysis required by the National Environmental Policy Act. It would also prevent citizens from appealing harmful timber sales and would limit the ability of the courts to halt destructive logging activities while they are being challenged. Further, the Feinstein/Wyden amendment would subsidize the logging industry by paying for commercial timber sales with hazardous fuels funding.
Several Representatives have introduced amendments in the House that mirror the Craig/Domenici and Feinstein/Wyden proposals. The fate of fire legislation in Congress is unclear, but is certainly headed in the wrong direction with increasing pressure on lawmakers to reach an agreement. Meanwhile, the Bush Regime took the offensive again, announcing in mid-September that it was simply going to issue new administrative rules that suspend environmental laws and citizen appeals to allow logging to proceed without delay, bypassing Congress altogether.
What You Can Do
The assault on environmental protection laws and the rights of citizens to participate in the management of public lands must be stopped! Unless citizens speak out, Congress will pass legislation that compromises forests and the ability of concerned citizens to protect them. Ask your senators and representatives to:
- Oppose the Craig/Domenici and Feinstein/Wyden amendments.
- Oppose any legislation that suspends environmental laws or judicial review.
- Oppose any legislation that limits judicial review.
- Oppose any legislation that allows the agencies to ignore cumulative impacts.
- Support legislation that focuses fuel reduction activities close to homes and communities.
- Support legislation that adequately funds legitimate fuels reduction projects that do not rely on logging large, fire-resistant trees.
