Posted on 08/25/2002 6:28:24 AM PDT by ChadGore
(Ouch, that's hot!)
(very hot)
Yes ! There's 'plenty of fuel' to support that debate.
By The Journal editorial board
This summer's wildfires have done more than alter the landscape of western forests, they have changed the political landscape as well. On Thursday, President George W. Bush flew to Oregon to announce his plan to thin federal forest land and lessen the risk of wildfires. The president proposes easing forest management rules to make it easier to thin dense stands of timber that have contributed to the type of catastrophic wildfires that have blackened 6.2 million acres of land so far this year, more than twice the 10-year average.
What makes Oregon an unusual backdrop for his announcement is that forest management in the state has undergone a drastic change in the last 15 years. Once one of the most productive timber states in the country, environmental appeals and the spotted owl controversy has reduced Oregon's federal timber harvests by almost 90 percent. According to Oregon Department of Forestry data, total state timber harvests in 1987 were 8 billion board feet, with 3.42 billion board feet from U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land. In 2001, timber harvests from federal lands were 400 million board feet, a drop of 88.3 percent.
The president's Healthy Forests Initiative would:
-- Improve procedures for implementing fuels treatment and restoration projects.
-- Reduce overlapping environmental reviews.
-- Weigh short-term risks against long-term benefits of fuels treatment and restoration projects.
-- Ensure consistent procedures for fuels treatment and restoration activities.
President Bush is asking Congress for legislation that would:
-- Authorize agencies to enter into stewardship contracts with the private sector, non-profit groups and local communities. The contracts would allow private companies to sell wood products in exchange for thinning trees and brush and removing dead wood from federal lands.
-- Expedite fuels treatment and restoration projects in high-priority areas, using Sen. Tom Daschle's legislation for the Black Hills National Forest as a model. (Although Daschle's BHNF legislation was the result of intensive negotiation among local environmental, industry and Forest Service representatives. Congress can't simply duplicate that effort by legislative fiat.)
-- Ensure that judges consider risks of harm to people, property and the environment in court challenges to forest management plans.
The Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 established five multiple uses for managing national forests - timber harvests, grazing, recreation, wildlife and watershed protection. Missing from this mix of uses is concern for public safety and wildfire management. Congress needs to pass legislation that gives priority to public safety and fire risk management in deciding forest management plans.
How is it possible that fuel treatment plans designed to reduce the threat that wildfires pose to lives and property get tied up in court? Many of this year's 60,000-plus wildfires were on land on which managers had tried to reduce the fire risk but were blocked by appeals and court challenges filed by environmental groups, including the Squires Peak Fire that President Bush toured last week. Nationwide, 54 percent of national forest fuels treatment plans are appealed or litigated. Environmentalists say the majority of appeals were of commercial timber sales. The Forest Service counts commercial sales as "thinning for fire protection" whenever there is a non-commercial component to the project. While appeals may not be aimed at stopping pure thinning projects, the upshot is that thinning, as well as commercial timber sales, are held up.
Wildfires are a part of our national forests. In fact, a healthy forest is occasioned by periodic wildfires. However, it's not practical to let fires burn without trying to contain and extinguish them; and it's foolhardy to let fuels build up on public lands until they explode in catastrophic crown fires that kill most living things in the forests.
A July 2002 Forest Service report on factors preventing timely fuel treatment decisions faulted excessive analysis due to uncertainty surrounding appeals and lawsuits, inconsistent standards, changing court interpretations of the law, and demands that require new documentation.
The president's forest initiative recognizes the changing landscape of the forest management debate by seeking to streamline the process that delays fuel treatment planning. This season's wildfires may be unusual in number and intensity because of the drought, but shouldn't we base our management policies to be prepared for the worst? Our congressional delegation should work with the president to make common sense and public safety the guiding principles of national forest management policy.
IF the forestry department was able to impliment their policies without countless rounds of expensive pointless litigation (at tax payer expence), you'de have a point.
Tell us...who lobbies the forestry department through the US Senate?
It just might be those innocent environmentalists, huh?
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.