As we went to press the environmental community flexed its muscles showing the forestry arena that some things will not move forward in the Congress until they say it moves forward. For policy wonks, the delaying and neutralizing tactics are inspired in their intensity, for landowners and people in the forest products industry they are frustrating if not appalling.
As reported extensively in WOODLAND REPORT and LATE BREAKING NEWS the House worked hand to develop a bi-partisan bill that addressed both the healthy forest/wildfire crisis and concerns that environmental safeguards would be unduly overridden to efforts to expedite the Healthy Forest Restoration initiative.
The Senate has drafted major changes (described by some as “poison pills”) to the bi-partisan compromises already hammered out in the House last summer when they passed and sent to the Senate their HB 1904. In an unusual power play, a cadre of Senate Democrats led by Wyden (D-OR) and Feinstein (D-CA) sent word to the House that they would not allow the bill to move forward unless the House leadership agreed in advance that the conferees would agree in advance to accept the Senate language.
The Senate version is clever in that it confuses already agreed upon compromises and opens up a field day for lawyers on all sides to go to court…..and delay resolution of the issue for many years to come. For instance, in the Senate version “watersheds” are defined as “municipal water supplies” which greatly limits the scope of the of law. The Senate language also could complicate recent updates and approvals of National Forest Management Plans.
NWOA strongly supports the Healthy Forests Initiative in concept and is working with the American Logging Council, other landowner groups, and the forest industry to ally fears from the environmental community and reach a workable compromise so a meaningful bill will emerge from Congress and reach President Bush’s best as soon a possible.
The strength and depth of concern
over the worthwhile Healthy Forest Initiative has surprised many. Part of this debate can be traced back to the
1940s when the congress created Sustained Yield Units at the close of World War
II to expedite the harvest of National Forest timber
and make lumber available for the post-war building boom to provide housing to
returning veterans. One of the first and
most successful was in
While the unit achieved it goals of efficient harvest and utilization of National Forest timber and community stability, it also unwittingly became a poster child for the environmental movement as it became evermore critical of the clearcuts being pushed ever higher on the steep ridges surrounding Olympic National Park. The nearly predictable road failures and land slumps that followed not only harmed the streams and native fisheries, but also provided spectacular photo opportunities for those trying to document insensitive and inappropriate management of publicly owned forests. Pilots for Project Lighthawk, the “environmental air force”, produced a variety of aerial photos that from a distance showed more devastation than good forestry. Widely distributed to the media and on Capitol Hill, these pictures have been difficult to refute, especially to those whose minds are already made up.
When the Congress, in an unexpected move, declined to approve a supplemental appropriation last month for this year’s fire fighting efforts, the Forest Service was forced to spend money from other forestry accounts. Unfortunately one of the largest appropriations available was that designated for forest practice cost sharing with independent private woodland owners. Half of this money has now been “transferred” rather than “borrowed” (the phrase used in years past) to pay the fire fighters.
The Forest Land Enhancement Program (FLEP) was established in the 2002 Farm Bill, replacing the popular FIP and SIP programs. Hard fought advocacy by NWOA, the states, and many others resulted in a mandatory appropriation of $100 million to be spent over the next 5 years for cost sharing. Since it is a new program, the Forest Service had to draft new regulations under a lengthy review process just recently completed. As a result, little if any of the money has actually been shared with landowners. Half of the FY2003 allocation has already been “transferred.” NWOA is working with a growing coalition trying to get those funds restored.