Posted on 11/27/2002 2:57:05 PM PST by Sparta
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is proposing less emphasis on wildlife preservation and other environmental concerns when deciding how much logging or recreation to allow in the 192 million acres of federal forests and grasslands.
Officials said Wednesday their intent was to improve the forest management rules approved by the Clinton administration two months before President Bush (news - web sites) took office. Democrats accused the administration of undoing environmental safeguards that protect forests and the wildlife within them.
Eight senators and seven House members complained in a letter to Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth that the new measures "establish no minimum standard for protecting species, no rigorous procedures for ecological studies and, in fact, no solid protections for wildlife and environmental sustainability."
The proposal would give local and regional managers of the U.S. Forest Service more discretion to approve logging, drilling and mining operations without having to conduct formal scientific investigations into their impact on plant and animal life.
"A lot has changed in the last 30 years," said Sally Collins, the Forest Service's associate chief. "This new rule cuts out a lot of red tape."
Collins said land management plans for each forest or grassland now typically take up to seven years to complete because of requirements for detailed scientific studies and other paperwork. She estimated that the Forest Service could save 30 cents on every dollar now spent on what she said are often duplicating efforts.
"This is fundamentally a process that doesn't need a long detailed analysis," she said. Asked if the changes would result in more logging, she replied, "We can't say it's going up or down or sideways or the same."
The proposal, crafted with White House oversight, described the Clinton rules as too complicated and "neither straightforward nor easy to implement."
Chris West, vice president of the timber industry's American Forest Resource Council in Portland, Ore., said the proposal restores a common-sense approach to balancing environmental and economic interests.
"What you're not going to have is a bunch of time wasted and opportunities for environmentalists to be obstructionist at a macro-planning level," West said. "To think we can maintain every species on every acre is just a fantasy."
Environmental groups asserted that forest managers will now be allowed to make decisions about timbering and mining activities with less public involvement.
"It's a blatant effort by the Bush administration to boost logging and help the timber industry, which had a clear hand on the pen of these regulations," said Robert Dewey, vice president of Defenders of Wildlife.
The rule making is the latest administration measure to allow more timbering in national forests. Bush and Western lawmakers in both parties pushed measures in Congress this year to cut down excess trees they blamed for fueling wildfires that blackened more than 6.5 million acres this year.
Last year, the new administration declined to appeal a judge's decision overturning Clinton regulations putting nearly 60 million acres of undeveloped forestland off limits to roadbuilding and timbering.
The new proposal would specifically allow local federal forestry officials to develop or alter management plans for the land they supervise without having to first conduct an in-depth environmental impact study.
The administration said those management plans are essentially a zoning document, and that it would be better to conduct environmental studies on a case-by-case basis when specific threats to wildlife are anticipated. A regional forester, however, still could decide that a management plan itself has significant environmental impacts, triggering the need for a study.
Specific standards and procedures for maintaining and monitoring wildlife populations would be eliminated, with broad goals substituted in their place.
___
On the Net:
Forest Service: http://www.fs.fed.us
Hence he could go a long way and make aquire much political capital by relegated them to sidelines and solidifying the support of farmers, landowners, resource industries and other land based communities. They're his natutal supporters, and it's just the right thing to do.
I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised with his handling of the enviros. He needs to give his brother some pointers.
Quote...
"Stroke of the pen...law of the land! Kinda cool!"
How's it feel NOW that the shoe is on the other foot, you socialist cannon fodder?
Time to bring back ALL their quotes from that corrupt Klinton regime, and throw them in their faces!
The thing I keep hearing from people in the property rights movement is that most people don't get involved until it's their ass on the line.
Keep us posted on your wars with the envirals and the awakening of Jeb on this issue.
I think we're making some headway. We've been in contact the FL DEP and the people at the top are actually listening to us now. Not only listening, but probably going to take substantial action on a particular issue we're dealing with.
6 months ago this would have been impossible. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Right-on Dave!
I say, give it chance, it will take a little time to defang the wacko left, maybe they'll turn on themselves? :o)
I think we're making some headway. We've been in contact the FL DEP and the people at the top are actually listening to us now. Not only listening, but probably going to take substantial action on a particular issue we're dealing with.
6 months ago this would have been impossible. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
What caused the change.
Re people not moving against the enviralist and getting on our side re property rights, the elites and most suburbanites just laugh at those who suffer from Rural Cleansing until it slaps their A$$es. That is what is happening in elite Wine country right now.
They already are to some degree. Some groups are wondering why they don't get funds from the land trusts. Answer: They don't act as they're expected, to attain the goals of the financers. Those goals could range from socialist power grabs to actions to disable competitors.
In any case the financing has little or nothing to do with saving the environment.
One thing good about the downturn in the economy is that much of the "Rockefeller" funding that the envirals were getting is drying up. A microcosm is psycho-boy Ted Turner cutting way back and not taking any new projects on.
I'd love to talk more about the disgusting and anti-American land grab grant process (both public and private) but it would take all day and I'd be ill by the time I was done.
A lot of the Arthur Andersen companies which went belly up or nearly belly up this year, were huge Rat donors and donors to these Watermelon groups.
There has been no money to donate from these companies and failed CEOs. How much money will Martha Stewart have to donate next year. She was one of the top DNC donors before her world came down.
So when these Rat controlled and led companies go belly up or near belly up, they have less money to donate to the dark side.
Right-on and those door to door, greenie beggars won't be getting the $$$ they usually get...people gotta eat before they give up $$$ to protect endangered weeds and bugs... ;o)
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.