Finding New Ways to Manage Forests

By Conan Milner
July 28, 2011

A new system for managing nearly 200 million acres of U.S. forests and grasslands is expected later this year. The U.S. Forest Service says a new plan is urgently needed, and experts suggest that the forest-planning rule is one of the most important conservation policies the Obama administration will address. However, designing a plan that pleases everybody isn’t so easy.

Forest management plans provide guidance for protecting the health of the nation’s 155 national forests and our wildlife, while contributing to recreational and economic sustainability of the land. These plans are typically designed to last 15 years, but the last one was written under the Reagan administration in 1982. It focused on using the national forest for logging, but it was also written with a strong national mandate to protect wildlife.

When the plan was due for an update, President Clinton drafted a proposal that was later rejected when President Bush took office. The 2005 and 2008 Bush administration proposals were struck down in federal courts for failing to adequately protect watersheds and for eliminating mandatory wildlife conservation requirements.

With no update to replace it, the 1982 planning rule has remained the basis for all existing Forest Service land management plans, but critics say it’s too complex, too expensive, and makes it too cumbersome for the public to provide input. In addition, the U.S. Forest Service wants a plan that reflects the latest scientific evidence on climate change.

Tribes, lawmakers, industry groups, and about 300,000 individuals weighed in on the draft. The 90-day public comment period to address the proposal ended in May, but many are concerned how the final version, expected this November, will read. Will it strike the right balance between conservation and industry?

One contentious issue in the draft proposal is how it addresses the critical watersheds found on these lands. These watersheds form the single largest source of fresh water in the nation—providing fresh water to 60 million people and thousands of wildlife species. Environmentalists observed that while the plan addressed the need for watershed protection, it wasn’t explicit enough on requirements for managing them.

Another issue for environmentalists is wildlife protection. Since President Regan first proposed the original wildlife conservation standard, the Forest Service has been obligated to provide for the health of all species on its land. However, the recent draft proposal only pertains to animals with "evidence demonstrating significant concern.”

“The wildlife conservation proposal embedded in the draft rule only requires attention once the species is on life support. This is a problem for anyone who likes to hunt, fish, or view wildlife in our national forests," said Kristen Boyles, attorney for environmental group Earthjustice in a statement. "As it written, this proposal delivers on theories but misses on accountability and delivery.”

Others, however, don’t like the proposal for different reasons. Livestock producers and representatives of other industries say that the draft contains requirements that would be impossible for them to meet. Last month, nearly 60 members of Congress sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsak calling for a redraft of the proposal rule “to make it simpler and less process oriented and to eliminate the ‘species viability’ clause, which goes beyond the statutory requirements set out in the National Forest Management Act.”

“By adding more process requirements and introducing new technical terms, you are increasing the likelihood that, like previous attempts at reform, the proposed rule will be tied up in courts for years,” lawmakers told Vilsak.

The debate to shape the new forest management plan continues to burn after the enormous wildfires in Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Florida, and New Mexico this year. Industry groups have argued that logging and grazing would have effectively thinned the Arizona forests and could have prevented that state’s devastating fires. Environmentalists, meanwhile, maintain that better forest planning is required to prevent future wildfire catastrophes.

Source: The Epoch Times.
Link: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/united-states/finding-new-ways-to-manage-forests-59703.html.