Sierra Nevada Protection Upheld

By JIM WASSERMAN
.c The Associated Press


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - The Bush administration said Thursday it will implement a Clinton-era plan offering greater protection to old-growth woodlands in 11.5 million acres of national forests in the Sierra Nevada.

The news cheered environmentalists and disappointed loggers and others who hoped the Republican administration would throw out the management plan for 11 national forests in California and Nevada.

The ruling by Agriculture Under Secretary Mark Rey upheld last month's Forest Service decision to reject appeals by loggers, ski resorts and off-road groups. The Agriculture Department oversees the Forest Service.

The plan took the Forest Service nine years and $12 million to craft, and began in 1992 as an effort to protect the endangered spotted owl.

``It is the Forest Service's best effort to date to lay out a blueprint to manage the forests of the Sierra Nevada,'' said Rey, a former timber lobbyist.

The plan adds safeguards for endangered species and bans logging of most trees larger than 20 inches in diameter. Environmentalists said logging will be limited to levels one-tenth those during the Reagan administration in the 1980s.

California Forestry Association President David Bischel called Rey's ruling the ``worst decision they could have made'' and one that will ``add to the risk of catastrophic wildfire.''

He said forestry groups may eventually take their case to court.

Bob Roberts, director of California Snow, a group of Sierra Nevada ski resorts, also expressed displeasure. Ski resorts won't be able to add new lifts if they can't remove trees larger than 20 inches in diameter, he said.

``Recreations has been a casualty of the process,'' Roberts said.

Forest Service officials said they intend to revise the plan to better prevent destructive wildfires that frequently rage in the nation's longest unbroken mountain range. Some of the revisions incorporate points made by plan opponents, they said.

Environmentalists said they fear that might be a backdoor way to accomplish more logging. They, too, promised to sue if that happens.

But spokesmen for environmental organizations had mostly praise for Rey's decision.

``Today the sun is shining on California's Range of Light,'' said Jay Watson, regional director the Wilderness Society, borrowing 19th century conservationist John Muir's description of the mountain range.

On the Net:

Forest Service: http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/snc

Logging industry: http://www.woodcom.com

California Wild: http://www.californiawild.org

AP-NY-12-27-01 2100EST



:usa:

http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2001/12/0274.htm


Release No. 0274.01



Pete Pierce (202) 720-6767

Alisa Harrison (202) 720-4623



BY
UNDER SECRETARY MARK REY





SIERRA NEVADA FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT APPEALS





DECEMBER 27, 2001




Yesterday I completed my examination of the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment appeals to determine if departmental discretionary review of Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth’s November 16 appeal decision is warranted.



I affirm Chief Bosworth’s decision and his instructions to the Pacific Southwest regional forester. Therefore, I will not conduct a discretionary review. I have returned the Chief’s appeal decision to the agency to implement in accordance with his instruction to the regional forester to reexamine certain aspects of the forest management plan.

I am confident that the regional forester will put forth an aggressive plan to respond to the chief’s decision and that he will continue to engage the public through an open, cooperative process. I am also confident that the regional forester’s action plan will address a number of issues raised in the appeals that I reviewed.

The Sierra Nevada Framework would not have been possible without the hard work of many Forest Service employees, interested citizens, governmental agencies and a host of others.

I am grateful to each person who had a part in this activity and wholeheartedly encourage all participants to remain engaged throughout the process of refining, implementing, and where necessary, amending the plan.




###



Scott Riebel

Director of Environmental Affairs

United Four Wheel Drive Associations

www.ufwda.org

This stuff hurts my head.

[list=1]
[/list=1] I wonder if anyone out there is keeping track of the areas being closed to OHV, verses the areas that in the begining were OHV friendly. I'm thinking at some point geographicly, we should start stating our case in percentages. Something cross referenced by the number of SUV sold per capita. Not in hostile mode but rather point out a starting point and track it so that John Q public can understand it if it was published in the paper. It would be interesting to see. Alot of people don't read the whole article but look at pictures and say they read the article. Just thinking! It would be a good tool for presentation. By the way great job Yellowsub, keep it up! :D

This story has generated lots of press. This article at least gathers input from off-road interests....

Crowdog
www.crowley-offroad.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STOCKTON RECORD
December 30, 2001
Balancing forest laws difficult
Staff and wire reports

WASHINGTON -- Environmentalists and the timber industry tend to be two bookends on a long shelf. Rarely do they meet, particularly now, as the Forest Service changes three key policies put in place by the Clinton administration.

While some environmentalists believe President Bush's team is chipping away at hard-won forest safeguards, timber-industry representatives welcome relief from what they saw as an overzealous bureaucracy.

U.S. Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth finds himself caught between the two, each with a passionate interest in the 192 million acres of federal forest and grasslands, used for everything from fishing to producing timber to sheltering wildlife.

There are so many confusing regulations, the national forests are in a state of "analysis paralysis" -- lots of planning and evaluating, but little action -- Bosworth said during a visit to Sonora in late September for a Natural Resources Summit hosted by Assemblyman David Cogdill, R-Modesto.

Too often, he said, the Forest Service spends so much time trying to comply with various laws, regulations and procedures "that we can't do the necessary work on the ground."

Bosworth reiterated his desire to make polices clear and regulations easier to understand during a recent interview that looked at his first eight months on the job. "I don't want them to add so much more process that they add to the ... gridlock that we are in already," he said.

Comments such as those are music to the ears of the California Forestry Association, a pro-logging group. "He's clearly looking to unscramble the egg," Chris Nance, an association spokesman, said of Bosworth. "And in doing so, he's looking to revisit how regulations are interpreted to ensure that the work on the ground actually gets done rather than tied up in paperwork. We support that."

But in Bosworth's changes, environmentalists see an erosion of former
Forest Service chief Mike Dombeck's natural-resources agenda, and new favor for boosting timber sales and developing pristine areas.

Mike Anderson, forest analyst for the Wilderness Society, said analysis paralysis happens when the Forest Service re-enters environmentally sensitive areas, such as habitat for endangered species.

"Public opposition does lead to paralysis. We think that if they were to choose less-controversial activities, ... they will have broad public support," he said.

Some fear that Bosworth's desire to cut through red tape could short-circuit public participation. "He wants to see work get done on the ground," said Jay Watson of The Wilderness Society, "but the measures that he might take to reduce paralysis, so to speak, could be very far-reaching and cut the public out of the decision-making, and that is of great concern. "The Forest Service can be endless planning and analysis, but look at the Sierra Nevada Framework. Once they found their footing and said, 'We're going to follow the science,' it took them three years -- and that's for 11 million acres. I don't think that's particularly onerous."

Local decisions?

Bosworth's decision essentially to back the Sierra Nevada Framework, a new management plan for 11 Sierra national forests -- including the Stanislaus -- angered some timber, grazing and recreational interests.

And when Mark Rey, a U.S. Agriculture Department undersecretary, chose to back Bosworth, some Bush administration supporters felt betrayed.

Don Amador, a spokesman for the Blue Ribbon Coalition, a national recreation group, said Bush promised during his campaign that he supported local decision-making but that upholding the Sierra Nevada Framework was a step away from that.

Nance, though, said Bosworth appears more interested in allowing forest supervisors to have greater say in planning for their forest activities than Dombeck was. Nance characterized Dombeck's approach as "one-size-fits-all" and said that doesn't work, particularly in California, where forests differ from region to region.

"He's been known as a can-do Forest Service leader," Nance said of Bosworth. "Now as chief, he's continuing with that approach and to that end, pushing the decision making process down to the local level, where it can be most beneficial for the sake of the forest first."

Major policy reviews

Although the Sierra Nevada Framework decision has been reached, Bosworth and the Bush administration are reviewing and revising three major policies:

* The roadless rule, which roped off 58.5 million acres of forest, free of most logging and road construction.

* A transportation policy that outlined the management of more than 383,000 miles of forest roads to reduce a maintenance backlog and protect undeveloped areas.

* A set of regulations that provided local officials with guidance for writing 10- to 15-year forest management plans that could limit logging, skiing and other activities to protect ecosystems.

In each case, conservation groups contend, the changes being made undermine important forest protections. Bosworth said the policies didn't work.

"Those things got all intertwined, and our folks in the field had an awful time trying to understand what it is we really wanted," he said.

The timber industry, on the other hand, is encouraged that the
administration is listening to its complaints. During the 2000 presidential campaign, industry executives got the Republican Party's attention with a $1.5 million fund-raiser in Portland, Ore.

This month in Aurora, Ore., about a dozen timber-company and industry-association executives met with some of Bush's key natural-resource officials to talk about land-management policies.

The industry's message that day echoed Bosworth's on analysis paralysis: "Get us off of the total dead stop," said Chris West, vice president of the American Forest Resource Council in Portland. "Right now, the system is broken."

More of the same

The issues are not new. Under a 1960 federal law, the Forest Service must manage the land for many uses, including timber production, conservation and recreation. Under Dombeck, the Forest Service received national direction from headquarters as to the proper balance of uses. Bosworth and timber-industry officials believe such decisions are best made at the local level.

Chris Wood, a former top aide to Dombeck, sees the agency moving away from an "outward-looking" conservation agenda. However, "different and controversial issues over public lands don't get any easier through delay or neglect or trying to push them down into the organization," he said. "They just fester."

Consider the continuing fight over the roadless rule, which was designed to end a 30-year debate on the suitable protections for generally remote, undeveloped areas.

A federal court temporarily blocked the roadless rule in May from taking effect, and the administration began to revise it with more local input. Since then, Bosworth has issued a directive saying he will handle all decisions about roadless-area development until each forest comes up with its own plan. He hasn't received a single request.

However, environmentalists complain about a cutoff date in the directive that allowed lower-level agency officials to sign off on some logging, most notably in Alaska's Tongass National Forest.

Ron Olsen, spokesman for the Alaska Rainforest Campaign, says those officials are making the wrong decisions, and portions of about 8.5 million acres of roadless areas in the Tongass rain forest are in jeopardy, with six timber sales being planned. "We went back to where we were prior to the roadless rule being signed in January," Olsen said.

Seeking solutions

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., believes the challenge is finding practical solutions to natural-resource issues that aren't "bureaucratic water torture," a lesson he's learned on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee's forests subcommittee, which he chairs.

Under President Clinton, "not enough was done in those eight years to make balanced progress on either front" to promote environmental protections or help timber-dependent communities, Wyden said. "The premium is not just saying you disagree. The premium is on saying what you are going to do."

Bosworth has been on the job only since April, and some say they need more time before awarding him a grade. John Buckley of the Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center said it's difficult to categorize Bosworth yet as either pro-conservation or pro-industry. "He's done just enough to raise red flags from the conservation side related to his stance on the roadless policy and been just strong enough on the Sierra Nevada Framework to gather some tentative support from the conservation community," Buckley said. "Everyone is kind of waiting to see what comes next, particularly on a major, important issue like the roadless policy. That may be the one that defines whether he's seen as pro-industry, middle ground or pro-conservation."

January 1, 2002

Review Set for Sierra Use Plan
Environment: Forestry official's letter keeps alive the debate over millions of acres of federal forest land.

By BETTINA BOXALL, TIMES STAFF WRITER


A federal forestry official signaled Monday that he is open to significant reshaping of a plan that slashes timber harvests and strengthens wildlife protections on national forest land in the Sierra Nevada.

In a letter released by his office, Pacific Southwest Regional Forester Jack Blackwell said that over the next year, he will undertake a broad review of the Sierra blueprint to gauge its impact on grazing, recreation, local communities and wildfire threats.

His statement promises to keep alive a long and contentious debate over management of 11 1/2 million acres of federal forest up and down the Sierra Nevada. Just last week, the Bush administration upheld the much-appealed plan, adopted in the final days of the Clinton presidency after years of study and revision.

But in affirming the guidelines, Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey also gave the regional forester room to modify them.

In his letter to Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth and in accompanying documents, Blackwell said he is assembling a team to review the plan, "evaluate any needed changes . . . and, if necessary, propose them."

Environmentalists immediately charged that Blackwell is intent on undermining the new protections, which timber and recreational interests have criticized as far too restrictive.

"This is clearly catering to the timber industry," said Chad Hanson, executive direct of the John Muir Project.

Blackwell singled out several areas for reexamination. One is greater reduction of forest growth that fuels fires. Another is the impact of the new guidelines on ski areas, cabins and other recreation uses.

He also indicated he will move ahead with a pilot project in part of the range that is less restrictive than the overall management plan; attempt to maintain livestock grazing near existing levels; and reconsider some restrictions dealing with wildlife sites and old-growth trees.

Critics of the Sierra guidelines said they were encouraged by Blackwell's position, if unsure where it would lead.

"We have a wait-and-see attitude," said Don Amador of the BlueRibbon Coalition, a recreation group. "But certainly this letter today is a step in the right direction."

Officials of the Regional Council of Rural Counties said they were heartened by Blackwell's letter.

Environmental groups that last week praised the Bush administration for letting the Sierra guidelines stand were uniformly dismayed by Blackwell's letter.

"It's very alarming," said Craig Thomas of the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign. "It looks like they want to basically take apart all this work that has been going on for nine years."

Wilderness Society regional director Jay Watson said the scope of Blackwell's review "begs the question of whether Jack Blackwell was sent here to destroy this plan. This seems like a bomb has been dropped on the framework."

Forest Service spokesman Matt Mathes said Blackwell is trying to address issues raised in appeals.

"We are sensitive to concerns expressed by members of the public," Mathes said. "These are public lands."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000000206jan01.story
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Crowdog

Editorial: The Sierra Bowl
Bush, environmentalists poised for lawsuits
Sacramento Bee
Published 6:20 a.m. PST Thursday, Jan. 3, 2002
The Sierra Nevada look like the mountainous spine of California. They might as well be shaped like a football. The federal government's management plan for the Sierra is about to get kicked around, in the halls of Washington, D.C., and in the courts. That's precisely what happens when two competing interests (the timber industry and environmentalists) and two unrealistic agendas (lots of logging vs. no logging) cause a disconnected federal administration to become even more so. What a wasted opportunity.

The Bush administration was forced to come up with a Sierra strategy and waited to the very last minute to do it. It had to decide whether it would follow or stray from a plan devised during President Clinton's administration to scale back logging. The Bush team took a hard look at the plan, and the Sierra's ugly politics. And on fourth down, with the clock ticking, it punted.

For the Bush team, the snapper on the punt was Mark Rey of the Agriculture Department. A former lobbyist for the timber industry, Rey came to Sacramento the other day to announce that he was upholding the Clinton plan for the Sierra, but with an invisible string attached: A new "action plan" was to be forthcoming.

Rey wouldn't say what was in that new plan. He wouldn't say, when asked repeatedly, what his decision actually meant. Standing uncomfortably at a press conference podium, deflecting one question after another, he made it plain that Sacramento was the last place on the planet he wanted to be.

The punt came a few days later from Bush's new leader for the Sierra, Jack Blackwell of the U.S. Forest Service. He was the one who released this "action plan" -- on New Year's Eve, undoubtedly timed for minimal media coverage. It turned out that the Bush administration wasn't about to uphold the Clinton plan after all. Blackwell, instead, called for a year of "review." This comes after eight years under Clinton of reviewing, planning, drafting, redrafting and, at long last, deciding.

Clinton's plan was more than just a press release. It was encased in an environmental impact report, with a semblance of science behind it. The environmental review provides the legal grounds for anyone who doesn't like the plan to file a lawsuit based on how it is being implemented. Those who think that the science supports more logging to prevent devastating fires can sue. So can those who think there should be less logging and more protection for wildlife. Ski resorts can sue. Cabin owners can sue. Off-road vehicle enthusiasts can litigate as well.

If history is any indication, Blackwell will take a lot longer than a year to do this "review." How the Forest Service intends to manage the forests in the meantime is anyone's guess. Then, once the Bush team actually has a management plan for the Sierra, some interest will sue; maybe they all will. Then the future of the Sierra will be in the hands of a judge.

A court is a lousy place to devise forestry policy. But absent some political will and some courage among the interests to search for common ground, that's precisely where this football is heading.

A court is a lousy place to devise forestry policy. But absent some political will and some courage among the interests to search for common ground, that's precisely where this football is heading.

This statement couldn't be more true...


:usa:

Sierra on back burner
Bush administration fumbles the ball on controversial forest plan.

(Published Friday, January, 4, 2002 5:28AM)


The Sierra Nevada look like the mountainous spine of California. They might as well be shaped like a football. The federal government's management plan for the Sierra is about to get kicked around, in the halls of Washington, D.C., and in the courts. That's precisely what happens when two competing interests (the timber industry and environmentalists) and two unrealistic agendas (lots of logging vs. no logging) cause a disconnected federal administration to become even more so. What a wasted opportunity.
The Bush administration was forced to come up with a Sierra strategy and waited until the very last minute to do it. It had to decide whether it would follow or stray from a plan devised during President Clinton's administration to scale back logging. The Bush team took a hard look at the plan, and the Sierra's ugly politics. And on fourth down, with the clock ticking, it punted.

For the Bush team, the snapper on the punt was Mark Rey of the Agriculture Department. A former lobbyist for the timber industry, Rey came to California the other day to announce, at a Sacramento press conference, that he was upholding the Clinton plan for the Sierra, but with an invisible string attached: a new "action plan" was to be forthcoming.

Rey wouldn't say what was in that new plan. He wouldn't say, when asked repeatedly, what his decision actually meant. Standing uncomfortably at the press conference podium, deflecting one question after another, he made it plain that this particular spotlight was the last place on the planet he wanted to be.

The punt came a few days later from Bush's new leader for the Sierra, Jack Blackwell of the U.S. Forest Service. He was the one who released this "action plan" -- on New Year's Eve, undoubtedly timed for minimal media coverage. It turned out that the Bush administration wasn't about to uphold the Clinton plan after all. Blackwell, instead, called for a year of "review." This comes after eight years under Clinton of reviewing, planning, drafting, redrafting and, at long last, deciding.

Clinton's plan was more than just a press release. It was encased in an environmental impact report, with a semblance of science behind it. The environmental review provides the legal grounds for anyone who doesn't like the plan to file a lawsuit based on how it is being implemented. Those who think that the science supports more logging to prevent devastating fires can sue. So can those who think there should be less logging and more protection for wildlife. Ski resorts can sue. Cabin owners can sue. Off-road vehicle enthusiasts can litigate as well.

If history is any indication, Blackwell will take a lot longer than a year to do this "review." How the Forest Service intends to manage the forests in the meantime is anyone's guess. Then, once the Bush team actually has a management plan for the Sierra, some interests will sue; maybe they all will. Then the future of the Sierra will be in the hands of a judge.

A court is a lousy place to devise forestry policy. But absent some political will and some courage among the interests to search for common ground, that's precisely where this football is heading.

From: Fresno Bee