Logging fears as Bush eases forestry laws
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.President George Bush's administration has issued new rules for a looser, more corporate-style management of US forests, something critics say will lead to more logging and other economic activity, and weaken protection for dozens of already endangered species.
President George Bush's administration has issued new rules for a looser, more corporate-style management of US forests, something critics say will lead to more logging and other economic activity, and weaken protection for dozens of already endangered species.
In essence the regulations - the most sweeping overhaul of forest management in almost three decades - will give local forest supervisors more freedom to react to events. They could range from fire problems and invasive new species, to requests for logging or recreation permits. Supporters claim the new system will speed up decision-making, cut costs, and bring the US into line with much of the rest of the developed world. It will make sure some of America's most beautiful wilderness areas are run by people on the spot who know them best, they argue, rather than by a cumbersome, remote bureaucracy.
But environmentalists complain that the scheme is yet another example of the White House pandering to big business. "This rips the guts out of national forest management plans," a spokesman for the Natural Resources Defence Council said. "It doesn't ensure the necessary resources."
The 155 US national forests cover some 300,000 sq miles, more than three times the area of the UK. Largely concentrated in the Rocky Mountains and the west, they are governed by the 1976 National Forest Management Act.
That measure put the priority on preserving the ecological health of forests and protecting endangered species. It set the stage for confrontations such as the decades-long controversy over the northern spotted owl, pitting conservationists against the lumber industry in the Pacific north-west.
In recent years, competing pressures on forests have - if anything - increased. Not only does the timber industry want greater access. The forests are a growing tourist attraction, with the number of visitors doubling in the past eight years. On the other hand, a quarter of all US species facing extinction live in national forests, according to the NatureServe conservationist group.
The new rules extend to environmental management, a system that has gained favour in industry, and has the enthusiastic support of this Republican White House. Instead of conforming to rigid and centralised environmental rules, companies are encouraged to set their own standards. The results are judged by outside auditors.
In this case the outside judges could be officials of the National Forest Service, or outside environmentalist or economic groups. But it is not clear what powers they would have, or even what standards would be enforced.
The new policy has enraged environmentalists, not least because of the timing of the announcement, just two days before Christmas when Congress is not in session, and news coverage will be scant.
Democrats expressed outrage too. "These regulations cut the public out of the forest planning process," Congressman Tom Udall of New Mexico declared. "They will just inspire lawsuits and provide less protection for wildlife."
Tom Harkin, a senior Democrat, said the new policy threatened to "derail decades of progress" in preserving America's forests.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments