Naked Science : There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere.
Updated: 1/3/2007; 5:32:10 PM.

 


Subscribe to "Naked Science" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 
 

Saturday, December 23, 2006

Forest Service rule disputed by Corinne Purtill of The Arizona Republic

Conservation groups are angry about a new rule from the U.S. Forest Service that they say will diminish the public's voice in how their forests are used. Earlier this month the Forest Service implemented changes to the 15-year management plans required of each national forest and grassland. One of the major changes involves no longer including an environmental-impact statement.

In practical terms, this means that each forest plan, which outlines which parts of the forest should be used for different activities, will no longer go through the extensive formal study outlined in the National Environmental Policy Act. The studies examine a project's effects on the environment and weigh public comment along the way.

Forest plans are like municipal zoning guidelines and show which areas are prime for wildlife habitat, recreation, logging or grazing. Arizona's six national forests - Apache-Sitgreaves, Coconino, Coronado, Kaibab, Prescott and Tonto - are all in the process of updating their forest plans. Most are at least a few years overdue.


The move has drawn criticism from lawmakers. Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W. Va., the incoming chairman of the House Resources Committee, told news outlets that the new rule is yet another example of the Bush administration's efforts to undermine wildlife protection.

Lori Faeth, adviser to Arizona's Gov. Janet Napolitano on natural resources and the environment, agreed.
"This administration seems to go to bypassing important environmental review processes before anything else," Faeth said. "As a policy, that's not a very good rule."


In addition, this appears to violate NEPA regulations, which serve as the basic environmental protection of our land, water, and air. I'm not sure how they can get away with this violation, but, given the current administrative climate, little seems beyond the pale of these folks. It's a shame that the Forest Service, long a bastion of protecting and preserving our shared natural resources, has fallen prey to the political machinations of our current administration. jg


3:58:11 PM    comment []

© Copyright 2007 John Giacobbe.



Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website.
 


December 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Nov   Jan