FS Planning Rules Christmas Gift to Industry or Sound Policy Changes?

Get ready to crank up the sawmills because it looks like Uncle Sam is about ready to open national forests to a lot more timber harvesting. Or at least that is what the latest statements made by "mainstream" preservationists groups would have you believe.

                      Recently, eco groups lashed out against the Bush administration for its new forest planning rules. Preservationists predicted the new policies will lead to more logging and cause environmental damage. Does that sound familiar?

                      "These new rules continue the Administration’s practice of putting logging interests in the driver’s seat while shoving wildlife and the public to the back of the bus," said Marty Hayden of Earthjustice.

                      The San Francisco Chronicle carried an editorial calling the rules a "Holiday gift for the timber industry."

                      Preservationists claim the new procedures bypass environmental laws and eliminate necessary protections. While the preservationist groups have issued their typical criticisms, the U.S. Forest Service (FS) appears to have a common sense answer for all the issues raised by naysayers.

                      Timber sales from national forests have remained about the same over the last three administrations according to the FS. Dan Jiron, the national press officer for the FS, said, "Fifteen years ago about 30% of the national timber production came from national forests. Today, it is less than 5%. The reality is that there isn’t this increase in timber production from national forests as some critics claim." Dan claimed that the new rules should not significantly impact the amount of timber harvested on national forests.

                      "The new rule will improve the way we work with the public," said FS Associate Chief Sally Collins. "It will enable the FS experts to respond more rapidly to changing conditions, such as wildfires, and emerging threats, such as invasive species."

                      The FS hopes to cut costs by 30% and reduce the time it takes to get a plan finalized or amended.

                      Instead of focusing on specific projects and operational issues as the agency has done in the past, the new planning process will be more holistic in nature addressing the overall management goals of a particular forest. As a result, the new process does not require for the forest plan to include an environmental impact statement, which has raised criticism from preservationists. The FS contends that its new procedures comply with all laws and that environmental assessments and impact statements will continue to be conducted on timber sales and other operational decisions.

                      I am beginning to wonder how long the same old song will continue to find an audience. It seems to any reasonable human being that the FS is simply trying to evolve with the times. Instead of being mired down in bureaucracy and court battles, the FS hopes to become more nimble in managing forests. The FS wants to cut costs and streamline processes. The FS wants to stop working on plans that are out of date by the time they get finished. The FS wants to really do something about worsening forest health conditions not just let nature take its course.

                      Preservationists groups must have something to get excited about or else they cease to have a reason to exist.

                      Donors want action and nothing makes the cash roll in like a good villain. The FS has been labeled the bad guy for years even though the agency has drastically reduced timber harvesting and is working to enact more ecologically sound policies.

                      While the eco-extremists continue to cry about all the logging taking place on national forests, the record indicates something completely different. Instead of the changes being a gift to the timber industry, in reality the new rules should help improve forest health. And the eco-extremists appear to be the Grinch trying to steal the future of America’s National Forests for greater donations today.