A
Real-Life Chainsaw Massacre |
In a recent move, the Bush administration stated it would not oppose
placing the Clinton administration roadless rule into effect, protecting
approximately one-third of the national forests from road building
for commercial activities, although allowing roads to be built for
fire fighting and public safety. However, in a move to satisfy Republican
governors of some western states driven by the timber industry, the
administration, through the USDA, intends to introduce an amendment
to the roadless rule allowing states to apply for exemptions and to
reverse the new regulation for portions of Alaska's Tongass National
Forest. The Bush administration has long held that the rule was too
broad, but that position is contrary to the US Ninth Circuit Court
of Appeals' April '03 ruling. The Forest Service already faces a maintenance
backlog of $8.4 billion on its 380,000 mile network of forest roads.
The US Agriculture Secretary, Ann Veneman, maintains the amendment
is needed to allow states to maintain the health and integrity of
roadless forest area. The move has been praised by Montana's governor
Judy Martz even though in 2001 78% of comments submitted by Montana's
residents on the roadless rule were for the ban on road building.
Wyoming's governor Dave Freudenthal also has publicly stated the state
would most likely apply for some projects to be exempt, but was unsure
which ones although several projects were delayed when the rule was
originally passed. He also cites this move by the Bush administration
as an "unfunded mandate," forcing states to develop forestry
expertise they do not have. Many environmental groups contend that
this move shows that the administration was never dedicated to upholding
the spirit of the law. For an administration priding itself on fiscal
responsibility, adding more costs to an $8.4 billion maintenance backlog
makes little sense. It is unclear how the "exceptional circumstances"
amendment will give states more flexibility in forest management decisions,
when they are limited by fiscally tight times. |
|