POINT OF VIEW
Western forests, burned by lawsuits SYLVA - The
intense fires in the West have many environmental groups running for
cover. Their campaign to lock up our national forests by essentially
shutting down any active management by the U.S. Forest Service is now
bearing fruit. The results are quite clear in the smoke rising from the
Arizona woods.
The fire season has just begun, but by late June the Forest Service
had reported 42,205 fires that burned 2.5 million acres. The Government
Accounting Office reports that more than 65 million acres of national
forest are at high risk to catastrophic wildfire or insect and disease
infestation. A staggering one out of every three acres is already dead
or dying.
Arizona Governor Jane Hull perhaps says it best: "The policies
that are coming from the East Coast, that are coming from
environmentalists, that say we don't need to log, we don't need to thin
our forests are absolutely ridiculous. Nobody on the East Coast knows
how to manage these fires and I for one have had it."
And so has a growing majority of the public. As a professional
forester, I say it's about time!
In 2000, the federal government spent $1 billion fighting wildfires,
and an additional $142 million will be spent to rehabilitate and restore
the lands burned. Had thinning and timber sales planned for some Western
forests gone forward, the wildfires would not have been as severe and
revenues from these projects would have been distributed to local
counties and school districts.
Predictably, the environmentalists' collective response has been,
"It's not our fault...it's because of logging."
Last year, Forest Service Deputy Chief for Research, Dr. Robert Lewis
addressed timber harvesting and its impact on fires before the House
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health:
"In the early part of the last century when more logging slash
was left than is left today, this (increased fire risk) was true,"
stated Lewis. "Modern harvesting operations, based on
scientifically sound silvicultural prescriptions, use material more
efficiently and follow up rapidly with burning or mechanical reduction
of residues. The risk of fire is minimal. Thinning trees in conjunction
with subsequent prescribed burning is an effective strategy for reducing
fire risk."
Why is it that none of these catastrophic fires have occurred on
private forest lands managed for timber production? Clearly, active
forest management reduces the risk of catastrophic fires because the
forest stays healthy, flammable fuels are controlled and reduced, timber
is harvested and the site quickly reforested.
Years of a flawed fire suppression strategy and passive management
have made our federal forests susceptible to high-intensity fires,
threatening the lives of the public and firefighters, private and public
property and natural resources. These fires know no boundaries,
destroying homes in their path and wasting our only renewable natural
resource.
The Forest Service's ability to implement management tools in a
timely manner is limited by conflicting environmental laws and mandates
that are manipulated by environmental groups. They wield their power in
courts with a legal strategy to tie up projects in endless appeals and
lawsuits. Unclear goals and the threat of lawsuits leave professional
land managers with few options.
The environmental legal machine files more than 500 appeals and
lawsuits annually against the Forest Service. Environmental studies and
documentation required on every activity on federal lands costs U.S.
taxpayers between $179 million and $329 million annually. The resulting
delays exact an incalculable human and environmental toll.
It doesn't have to be this way. We cannot and should not try to
eliminate fire. But we can significantly reduce catastrophic wildfire.
Active forest management involving the judicious use of fire to reduce
fuels, timber harvesting and other tools can greatly reduce the severity
of fires and the destruction from insects and disease.
We have to get the courts out of forest management and the Forest
Service needs clear goals and direction, along with adequate funding
from Congress. We have to turn the management of our forests back to
professionals and not let environmental obstructionists block common
sense. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
|