Forest Service May Streamline Rules

AP, via Newsday.com ^ | 12 April 2002 | KATHERINE PFLEGER

[Vigilant1]

The Forest Service is considering speeding up land-management projects by streamlining rules protecting the environment and endangered species, according to a draft report.

Among other suggestions, the agency wants to limit court challenges to its decisions, says the draft obtained by The Associated Press.

A senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, Nathaniel Lawrence, said the report was a Bush administration effort to circumvent environmental laws.

[Vigilant1]

"We're the government! Those EPA rules don't apply to us, they only apply to those peons.... er, I mean citizens."

[exdemrat]

This good news! Meanwhile the NRDC and other ecoextremists need to STFD and STFU. We had eight years of their lefthanded control of our public land.

Soon the leftist ecosquads will push their hand with tree spiking and other forms of terror and then we can release the balloon of freedom.

[Free the USA]

Check the Bump List folders for articles related to and descriptions of the above topic(s) or for other topics of interest.

[editor-surveyor]

"This document had a short and not very useful life, which has already ended as far as this administration is concerned," Rey said.

Where does Bush find these turds?

This is exactly what is need to get this country back on track.

[Phil V.]

The enemy within is still within.

Thanks for the ping.

[MissAmericanPie]

What we need is a complete replacement of Clinton U.N. manual trained employees. It's beyond absurd the lengths that have to be gone to, to get rid of these leeches.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Thanks for the ping

[AnnaZ]

The report was compiled to address what the agency calls "analysis paralysis" or "process gridlock," which it defines as an inability to finish projects, make decisions or handle other challenges in a timely, efficient way.

"Addressing fundamental problems with redundant reviews and other bureaucratic inertia is by definition a good thing," he said. However, "this proposed cure would likely kill the patient."

Ahhhh, the lexicon of Lefty legislation. Someone (with a stronger stomach than I) should compile it.

[Carry_Okie]

Where does Bush find these turds?

Rey was a lobbyist for the American Forest and Paper Association. If you think he is going to allow logging of the National Forests to depress prices that large corporations get for their timber, you are crazy. They don't give a damn what happens to the National Forests. As far as they are concerned they can rot and burn. Environmental groups and the timber industry are in collusion on these issues. All that sound and fury out of the NRDC is just for show.

[glock rocks]

Someone (with a stronger stomach than I) should compile it.

...or compost it.

[mafree]

bump

[AnnaZ]

LOL!!! I was going to make a compost joke m'self, but I'm a little sleepy/lazy. GMTA! Thank you for the very apropos wisecrack!

 

;^)

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!

[WhiteyAppleseed]

"This document had a short and not very useful life, which has already ended as far as this administration is concerned," Rey said.
Where does Bush find these turds?

Taking the first sentence of the article into consideration: The Forest Service is considering speeding up land-management projects by streamlining rules protecting the environment and endangered species, according to a draft report.
And then returning to the OVERSIGHT HEARING ON CANADA LYNX INTERAGENCY NATIONAL SURVEY AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATA COLLECTION of March 6, 2002,when Mr. Rey testified before the House Committee on Resources, Mr. Rey seems to have contradicted his statements. Specificially:

A second challenge is one that we must share -- that is, to review and streamline the entire natural resources decision-making process, with scientific accuracy, accountability, accessibility, trust-building, and efficiency as our goals. This will also give higher value to the knowledge of scientists as we apply their expertise in real-time decisions.

The article mentions streamlining. Whether or not you agree with a federal agency acting as judge, jury, and executioner regarding matters concerning the government's land is one question we could ask.
Take Mr. Rey's attitude regarding the Lynx survey, the subject of the March 6th hearing:

First, the events described by Mr. Thompson achieved such resonance because they apparently ratify a suspicion held by some about the use of scientific information in resources decision-making -- that is, information is manipulated under the guise of dispassionate expertise to achieve desired, or even predetermined, outcomes. This did not occur in this instance, but the rush to judgment that it did should serve as a warning signal to us.

Clearly, Mr. Rey did not believe the Lynx-Fraud-Seven did anything wrong went they circumvented a tested protocol for the lynx survey. Those scientists obviously had the high standard they supposedly subscribe to much as laywers are accredited by the bar. Mr Hansen had a different opinion of the lynx fraud.

Some of these scientists stated that they were only testing the system by submitting unauthorized control samples, making sure that the lynx hair could be identified. If this is true, it shows a fundamental mistrust that these scientists have for the very science they are using. This is very, very troubling.

The plot thickens. Times are indeed, very, very troubling.

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

"Times are indeed, very, very troubling."

WA, You catch on quick. Double-speak from our "heroes" is prolific. Peace and love, George.

[WhiteyAppleseed]

A senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, Nathaniel Lawrence, said the report was a Bush administration effort to circumvent environmental laws.

"This is an agency that doesn't want to be accountable to anybody," Lawrence said. "It wants to rewrite the rules so that it can pay lip service to collaboration and reserve to itself the final unappealable judgment about what to do and where to do it." On another thread Conservatives test greens' tax status of the NRDC>

"NRDC has apparently decided to have it both ways: operate as an advocacy organization and take tax-deductible contributions," said the complaint. "This is unacceptable to taxpayers who are footing the bill for advocacy activities they may not support. It is also clearly prohibited by the IRS."

If nothing else, would appear that the information in this article corroborates the article from the Washington Times.

[zip]

What we need is a complete replacement of Clinton U.N. manual trained employees. It's beyond absurd the lengths that have to be gone to, to get rid of these leeches.

MissAP, you are soooo right. But it's not just in one Department, GW needs to clean house in all Departments, i.e. GAO, DOJ et al. (ES, thanks for the flag)

[sauropod]

This is dangerous. It is already hard enough to combat this stuff.

Need to bring this up at the May 7 rally.

'Pod

[Carry_Okie]

What you are proposing is exactly what makes this situation so bad. You still don't get it because you have so much invested in your objective and all that drumbeating.

[sistergoldenhair]

Thanks for the ping.