Skip to comments.
Obama Administration's Forest Rule May End Up Back in Court
Courthouse News Service ^
| February 18, 2011
| SONYA ANGELICA DIEHN
Posted on 02/22/2011 7:37:17 AM PST by epithermal
(CN) - Environmentalists say the federal government's new forest planning rules fail to protect species and habitat and put too much power in the hands of forest managers who have abused their discretion. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, citing a need for efficiency and flexibility, unveiled new rules intended to replace regulations established in the 1980s for nearly 200 million federal acres. The proposal, which the U.S. Forest Service released last week, would cover 193 million acres in 155 forests and 20 grasslands in the National Forest system. The Forest Service is an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. - SNIP- The Associated Press reported that lawsuits to protect habitat for threatened and endangered species in past decades have slashed logging in National Forests by three-quarters from its peak.
(Excerpt) Read more at courthousenews.com ...
TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: environment; envirowackos
"There are plenty of good intentions in the regulations, Fink said, including a mention of climate change for the first time."
BWAHAHAHAHA
To: epithermal
This regime feels like it cannot be bound by the courts. Hopefully the GOP will succeed in forcing the executive branch to submit to the rule of law by cutting the fund for all of the illegal activities engaged in by the regime.
2
posted on
02/22/2011 7:39:14 AM PST
by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: steelyourfaith
3
posted on
02/22/2011 7:56:23 AM PST
by
Amagi
(ObamaCare proposed a tax on Tanning Salons. That is RACISM STRAIGHT UP!)
To: epithermal
This is sucha buncha BS!
The US Forest Service should be defunded completely and the management of land turned over to the states.
4
posted on
02/22/2011 8:12:43 AM PST
by
upchuck
(When excerpting please use the entire 300 words we are allowed. No more one or two sentence posts!)
To: pnh102
Perhaps we should think of impeachment as a cure for over- reaching, ignoring the law, ignoring the Constitution and a few other improprieties by our president.
5
posted on
02/22/2011 8:30:44 AM PST
by
ANGGAPO
(Layte Gulf Beach Club)
To: epithermal
6
posted on
02/22/2011 8:35:33 AM PST
by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: epithermal
I don’t trust the government.
7
posted on
02/22/2011 8:54:11 AM PST
by
CPT Clay
(Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
To: ANGGAPO
Perhaps we should think of impeachment as a cure for over- reaching, ignoring the law, ignoring the Constitution and a few other improprieties by our president.I would agree only if there were 67 senators willing to remove the president. Since there are not, impeachment won't do anything. Defunding is the only practical option.
8
posted on
02/22/2011 9:11:20 AM PST
by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: Amagi; mmanager; Fiddlstix; Fractal Trader; FrPR; enough_idiocy; meyer; Normandy; Whenifhow; ...
9
posted on
02/22/2011 12:00:06 PM PST
by
steelyourfaith
("Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
