Skip to comments.CA: Forest Service sees management plans struck down in court (SoCal plan in limbo)
Posted on 07/04/2009 9:16:48 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Southern California's forest plan is in limbo following a recent court order declaring that it violates federal law, a finding that could impact measures being taken to manage the region's vast forestland and reduce the perennial danger of catastrophic fire.
Last month, federal court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel in San Francisco said the plan governing operations and recreation on the San Bernardino, Cleveland, Angeles and Los Padres national forests lacks specifics about how activities such as off-road vehicle use and brush clearing might impact endangered plants and animals.
The case remains open and the government is working to craft a response to the order. For now, forest operations and policies remain unchanged.
Developed over several years, the plan was completed in 2005 and was meant to guide management strategies and operations involving the four forests for 10 to 15 years.
The order comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity and other environmental groups who say the plan violates the federal Endangered Species Act because it fails to estimate the number of threatened animals or acres of sensitive habitat that could be harmed.
The U.S. Forest Service, listed as the defendant in the lawsuit, contends that the plan does contain general estimates of the impacts of operations, and that more detailed estimates would be created as individual projects moved forward.
"Defendants' position appears to be that the forest plans do not 'do' anything in and of themselves," Patel wrote in a 16-page memorandum issued June 8. "The plan is merely a piece of paper until site-specific projects are implemented."
'Does have effect'
Patel disputed that argument, holding that the forest plan "does have an effect upon subsequent land use decisions and therefore upon the land itself."
(Excerpt) Read more at pe.com ...
Well, when the forests burn down the animals will definitely be endangered.
Doesn’t atter. Within a month of enactment of the Crap&Tax bill private individuals working alone will have clearcut the entirity of California’s forests for the sole purpose of storing up firewood against the loss of electricity, gas, coal and oil.
This "judge" needs to try to get out more. If she comes to where I live, she can see the "impact" FIRE has on the "plants and animals." It's not pretty. The forest is gone. "Judges" need to keep their noses out of this kind of stuff and leave it to the professionals. "Judges" are not trained in forest management.
Yep, just makes the burning of the forests more complete.
We had 200,000 acres burn in my county alone last year. The environmentalists are sue happy. They (EPIC, Siskiyou Wildlands and KFA) have appealed one project that is clearing fire-dead trees from around a community that is needed only for safety purposes. There is NO harvest, NO salvage in the project. The community even worked with the Forest Service to design the project under their Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
These environmental groups are routinely stopping any management of the six national forests in our area and endangering tens of thousands of lives and the courts let them get away with it. This cannot be tolerated. There are lives and property being put in danger, the health of the forests are severely impacted and we are stuck with 20% unemployment because there are no jobs in the woods - not even stewardship jobs.
The "professionals" are not much better. This spring I and a handful of guys from the church thought we would purchase 10 or 12 standing trees in the local national forest. Cut them down, haul them home, mill them to size and make a timber frame facade on a part of the church building. Twenty-five years ago I did something similar.
This time the "Piss-fir Willy" I spoke with told me that I would need to identify the trees, then the "timber sale" (a dozen trees out of thousands and thousands of acres of trees) would need to be let out for bid. Might take two years, might not get the trees in the end.
Mr Ranger could tell we were diverging, philosophically. The conversation sputtered to a conclusion when he told me that everything that the USFS allows to happen in the forest must be justified as beneficial to the forest. Yes, everything as beneficial to the forest. No longer are the plants there for mankind's benefit. Now mankind, living in and around, the national forest exist to benefit the plants.
The Great Cathedral of Trees, Gaia's tresses, is served by the USFS priesthood. I believe that in my lifetime we will see the end of even firewood taken from federal lands.
I repeat, the "professionals" are not much better, from where I sit, than judges.
You’ve got to understand that the purpose of these ‘environmental’ groups isn’t about saving the ‘trees and birds and bees’, it’s about reducing the population of MAN!
They all think that man is the cause of everything bad in the world and the world would be better off without us.