landusepbb
08-11-2006, 06:27 AM
:shaking: :rolleyes:
Appeals court rejects Bush administration forest rules
Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal appeals court on Thursday overturned 2003 Bush administration forest rules while upholding a lower court decision giving the public greater say in national forest management.
The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals means the U.S. Forest Service must take public comments and consider appeals on projects such as prescribed burns and timber sales on public lands.
Thursday's decision stemmed from a 2003 lawsuit by environmental groups challenging the harvest of burned trees in the Sequoia National Forest in Northern California - a plan approved without public comment or appeals.
The administration argued it was necessary to curtail public comments when it came to thinning burned forests or controlling infestations because the quicker the work could be done, the better off the environment would be.
The San Francisco-based appeals court said the administration's position was "contrary to Congressional intent."
The case is Earth Island Institute v. Ruthenbeck, 05-16975
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/state/15244955.htm
Appeals court rejects Bush administration forest rules
Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO - A federal appeals court on Thursday overturned 2003 Bush administration forest rules while upholding a lower court decision giving the public greater say in national forest management.
The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals means the U.S. Forest Service must take public comments and consider appeals on projects such as prescribed burns and timber sales on public lands.
Thursday's decision stemmed from a 2003 lawsuit by environmental groups challenging the harvest of burned trees in the Sequoia National Forest in Northern California - a plan approved without public comment or appeals.
The administration argued it was necessary to curtail public comments when it came to thinning burned forests or controlling infestations because the quicker the work could be done, the better off the environment would be.
The San Francisco-based appeals court said the administration's position was "contrary to Congressional intent."
The case is Earth Island Institute v. Ruthenbeck, 05-16975
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/state/15244955.htm