forest plan? why, our plan is to cut em down...

[Guest guest]

Forest Service Says No More Environmental Analysis of Forest Plans

 

December 13, 2006 — By Jeff Barnard, Associated Press

GRANTS PASS, Ore. -- Long-term management plans for national forests will no

longer go through a formal environmental impact statement, the U.S. Forest

Service announced Tuesday.

 

The Forest Service said writing the 15-year plans has no effect on the

environment, making the impact statements unnecessary. That conclusion was based

on changes to forest planning rules made last year and a past U.S. Supreme Court

ruling that says a plan is a statement of intent and does not cause anything to

happen.

 

Individual projects, such as logging, were cut out of forest management plans in

last year's rule changes. Those projects will still have to go through a formal

analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act, known as NEPA, said Fred

Norbury, associate deputy chief for the national forest system.

 

Norbury said cutting the environmental impact statement process out of the

management plans should shorten the time to produce them to about three years,

he said.

 

Plans now take five to seven years to write, at a cost of $5 million to $7

million.

 

Rep. Nick J. Rahall, D-W.Va., the incoming House Resources Committee chairman,

said the new rules are part of a continuing effort by the Bush administration to

reduce wildlife and watershed protections and make it harder for the public to

challenge illegal logging.

 

Conservation groups accused the Bush administration of trying to undercut NEPA,

which requires agencies to take a hard look at environmental impacts of their

projects and include the public in the decisions.

 

Tuesday's decision ignores " that forest plans make real decisions, " Marty Haden,

legislative director for Earthjustice, said from Washington, D.C. " Forest plans

zone the forests _ what areas are open to or closed to logging, what areas are

open to off-road vehicle use, what areas are open to back-country recreation,

and lots of other issues. "

 

Haden said a court challenge of the new forest planning rules was likely.

 

Chris West, vice president of the American Forest Resource Council, a timber

industry group, said he thought the new rule was overdue.

 

" Wasting time and money, especially court time, on a broad general plan is not

in the public interest, " West said.

 

NEPA has been a powerful law for conservation groups challenging Bush

administration forest policy. A recent federal court ruling that overturned

changes to rules banning most logging in inventoried roadless areas cited the

lack of environmental impact statement as required by NEPA.

 

There are 125 national forests and national grasslands, all of which prepare

15-year management plans.

 

Until last year, they were a list of 15 years' worth of projects, and an

environmental impact statement analyzing them. Then the Bush administration made

the forest plans more broad-based, focusing on how to improve forest health and

restore forests burned by wildfire, and took out the individual projects,

Norbury said.

 

Source: Associated Press

 

 

As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances,

there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in

such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest

we become unwitting victims of the darkness.

William O. Douglas