Breckenridge Destinations supports independent journalism. Click for great deals on vacation lodging in Breckenridge.
2012 budget includes rider that could limit public input on forest management decisions.
Conservation group says rider could limit public involvement in national forest management
By Summit Voice
SUMMIT COUNTY— An environmental group says the budget bill that’s awaiting President Obama’s signature includes a rider that eliminates the public’s ability to administratively appeal Forest Service management decisions.
“This year’s appropriations bill is a bad deal for the American public and our national forests,” said Taylor McKinnon, public lands campaigns director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “National forests are publicly owned lands that deserve public oversight. Curtailing the public’s participation will mean more bad timber sales, drilling and other development proposals.”
According to McKinnon, the change applies to all management actions across the 193-million-acre national forest system. It could cut public input on timber sales, oil and gas leasing and other activities affecting forests, recreation, wildlife and pristine landscapes. Instead, it leaves litigation as the public’s only recourse to challenge Forest Service decisions.
The bill replaces the administrative appeals process with a Bush-era “pre-decisional” objection process that only allows the public to “object” to management proposals before they’ve been finalized. The bill also reduces the amount of time that the public has to respond to specific proposals — from 45 to 30 days. In addition, it includes a sweeping, vague clause allowing the Forest Service to bypass even the pre-decisional objection processes whenever it determines that emergency circumstances exist.
The rollbacks in public participation come just as the Forest Service is re-writing National Forest Management Act regulations that provide the framework for national forest management nationwide. The Forest Service wants to replace some longstanding standards for wildlife and watersheds with more discretionary provisions. A final rule is expected early in the new year.
“For decades, national forest policy trended toward stronger environmental safeguards and more public involvement and oversight,” said McKinnon. “This week’s elimination of administrative appeals, along with the attempted weakening of safeguards in the planning rule, mark a drastic step backwards for our national forest system — all on the Obama administration’s watch.”
Filed under: Colorado, Environment, forests, Summit County news, US Forest Service Tagged: | Environment, national forests, Public land, Summit County News, US Forest Service
Arapahoe Basin supports independent journalism. Click to visit The Legend online.
Powder's falling at Monarch!! Have you reserved your spot yet?
Innovative energy underwrites coverage of energy stories.
This may read cynical, which is exactly what it should. The present Congress in their sycophantic surge to please their plutocratic pay masters, are in essence, trying to destroy what has taken years of hard fought effort to achieve. It could be seen as the equivalent to detonating “Nuclear bombs” on the environment. 2012 will be pivotal in where this country goes. Hopefully, the apathy will be replaced with reality, before it’s too late. Merry Christmas to all.
The bombs have long ago been delivered by the SO CALLED environmental groups that want all use of natural resources stopped. We can harvest timber and and extract minerals from public land in a responsible manner. To not do so is folly.
Bill, your take is rather misguided here. If one looks at any of the present Mineral withdrawal, one sees that “responsible” as with safety, takes a back seat to production. The accident[al] rate of incidence has increased beyond occasional, to being one of part of doing business. The fact that the extraction process of the easy to get at natural resources is over, leaving the harder more difficult ones left, is why corners are cut, because it costs more money to do so carefully. It has become easier to take the fine[s] than to comply with more rigorous requirements demanded by law. And those fines come after the fact, when it’s too late.