Streamlined forest rules draw praise, criticism

WASHINGTON -- Reaction in Douglas County was mixed regarding a Bush Administration initiative that would allow managers of the nation's 155 national forests more discretion to approve logging and other commercial projects without lengthy environmental reviews.

The long-awaited rules, announced Wednesday, overhaul application of the landmark 1976 National Forest Management Act, which sets guidelines for managing 191 million acres of national forests and grasslands and protecting wildlife there.

Forest Service Associate Chief Sally Collins said the new rules will make forest planning more open, understandable and timely.

Forest managers will be able to respond more quickly to changing conditions, such as wildfires, and emerging threats such as invasive species, she said.

The complex forest management rules have not been updated since the 1970s, and officials have long complained that detailed analyses required under the law take years to complete. For example, a 15-year management plan for the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forest in Colorado took seven years and $5.5 million to revise.

Under the new rule, forest plan revisions could be completed within two to three years, officials said.

Umpqua National Forest Supervisor Jim Caplan said management plans in forests the size of the Umpqua National Forest cost about $1 million. The Umpqua is operating on a plan completed in 1990, and is set to redo the plan in 2007 or 2008.

He said the new rule "refines the planning process, speeds it up somewhat and hopefully reduces the cost."

The new plan gives regional forest managers more discretion to approve logging, drilling and mining operations without having to conduct formal scientific investigations known as environmental impact statements.

Environmentalists reacted with skepticism, however, saying the administration was catering to the industries and weakening standards for protecting endangered or threatened species.

"The president's forest regulations are an early Christmas gift to the timber industry masquerading as a government streamlining measure," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife.

Penny Lind, executive director of Roseburg-based Umpqua Watersheds, was disappointed by the announcement.

"With the NFMA changes, the administration uses the word flexibility to disguise more losses to our natural treasures and resources like old-growth forests, water quality, fish and wildlife, and future opportunities for our communities," she said.

With greater use of the forest, including recreation, logging and restoration, more critical analysis is needed, not less, she said. And she worries the change could limit public input.

"A lot will hinge on how supervisors determine how they're going to move forward," she said.

Caplan said that people won't be shut out of planning projects.

"I don't think the public will find that their ideas ... are diminished on the new planning rule," he said.

Douglas County commissioners see the change as potentially positive for the Umpqua National Forest.

"In a lot of ways, our local supervisors' hands have really been tied," said Commissioner Dan Van Slyke. He cited several examples, including the slow process of reaching a restoration solution for Diamond Lake and planning salvage logging projects after fires such as the 2002 Apple Fire.

He encourages the Umpqua National Forest to work even harder at public involvement.

"If these folks are given more power at the local level, then they need to be really sensitive to their constituents ... the users of the forest," he said.

Forest Service officials say the idea is to make forest planning more responsive to changing conditions by eliminating unnecessary paperwork and relying on assessments by local and regional managers rather than one-size-fits-all federal requirements.

"We really have a process that takes way too long -- that really isn't as responsive ... as it should be," Collins said.

But environmentalists say the plan eliminates analyses required under the National Environment Policy Act, which mandates that federal agencies assess potential environmental impacts of their actions and examine alternatives. The plan also would scrap wildlife protections established under President Reagan and limit public input into forest management decisions, they said.

"We can't imagine it's going to be satisfactory for replacement of the wildlife safeguards and public involvement that the public has enjoyed for the last 25 years," said Mike Anderson of The Wilderness Society.

Collins disputed that, saying the new rule directs forest managers to take into consideration the best available science to deliver clean air and water and sustainable habitat for wildlife.

The new approach could cut costs by as much as 30 percent, Collins said. She also noted the new rules require independent audits of all forest plans.

The audits, to be conducted in some cases by private firms and in others by federal employees, are based on a concept known as "environmental management systems." Such standards are frequently used by the timber industry as a way to address environmental issues and ensure compliance with the law, Collins and other officials said.

Environmentalists said there is no evidence a corporate model will ensure accountability for managers of public lands.

"It sounds like they are keeping on track with putting the logging interests in the driver's seat while shoving wildlife and the public to the back of the bus," said Marty Hayden, legislative director of the environmental advocacy group Earthjustice.

Environmentalists also said they were troubled the plan relaxes a requirement to protect fish and wildlife in national forests so species do not become threatened or endangered. Instead, the rules assert an overarching goal to "maintain healthy, diverse and resilient" ecosystems and species native to forest lands.

Tom Partin, president of the American Forest Resource Council, a timber industry group, called the new rules "a lot more responsive" than the current rules, which he called cumbersome and counterproductive.

House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, R-Calif., called the rules change long overdue.

"The process is so burdensome and time consuming that the plans are obsolete before they are finished," Pombo said. "These Soviet-like methods have produced so many outdated plans and so much red tape that the agency has been incapable of responding to changing conditions in our forests, such as insect and disease outbreaks, hurricane and storm damage, and catastrophic wildfire."

The new rules take effect following publication in the Federal Register, expected next week.