Environment Groups: Western Communities Would be at Risk From Wildfire Under Bill that House Resources Committee will Review

4/29/2003

From: Chris Mehl of the Wilderness Society, 406-586-1600

WASHINGTON, April 29 -- Western communities would be left at risk from wildfire under a bill that the House Resources Committee will review Wednesday, according to a broad coalition of environmental groups. The bill stands in sharp contrast to a proposal by conservation groups that would focus aid on communities at risk from wildfire.

The proposal to be considered by the committee was circulated by Representative Scott McInnis (R-Col.) for the first time last Friday, and may be voted on in committee before a single committee hearing is held.

The McInnis bill, like the Bush administration's so-called Healthy Forests initiative, does not focus scarce federal funding and resources where they would do the most good: in the Community Protection Zone adjacent to at-risk communities. Instead, the bill will continue to allow the Forest Service and Department of Interior to conduct misguided logging projects deep in the backcountry in the name of "fuel reduction." In fact, these plans would provide more help to timber companies than to fire-threatened and cash-starved communities.

The Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Earthjustice, American Lands, Natural Resources Defense Council, U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG), Alaska Coalition, National Environmental Trust, Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited and other national, regional and local environmental groups support an alternative approach, known as the Community Protection Plan. The groups advocate fuel reduction projects and "firewise" protections along the boundaries of communities adjacent to forest lands.

"We know that the Forest Service has limited resources, and that the best way to reduce the risks of fires to homes and lives is to focus on forest areas immediately around communities. So why do Rep. McInnis and the Bush Administration insist on diverting limited resources to logging in the backcountry instead of focusing on protecting communities?" asked Carl Pope, Sierra Club Executive Director. "We can do better to protect communities from fires."

Through block grants to states, the Community Protection Plan would provide funds for fuel reduction on private, state and tribal lands-which comprise 85 percent of the forested land near vulnerable communities-as well as on federal lands.

This approach, the coalition says, would put the limited available funds to use where they are most effective: at the sites where forest fires pose a real threat to human lives and homes.

In contrast, the McInnis bill does not prioritize projects that would create a crucial defensible space around western communities. Instead it calls for logging 20 million acres of federal lands, often far from any community, and provides virtually no funding for fuel reduction on non-federal lands. What scant funds the McInnis bill provides to local communities are buried within new programs in the bill that are not dedicated to protecting communities from wildfire.

"It is time for Congressman McInnis and the Bush administration to reverse their present course," said Gene Karpinski, U.S. PIRG Executive Director. "They should start protecting communities at risk rather than the profits of the timber industry."

Conservation groups are also concerned about the chilling effect that the McInnis bill, like the Bush administration proposal, would have on the basic democratic principal of public participation in the management of public lands. The McInnis proposal seeks to eliminate the most important part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) -- the requirement that alternatives to agency actions be considered. The courts have called this consideration of alternatives the "heart of NEPA."

"The Bush administration and Rep. McInnis continue to try to pin the blame for wildfires on public participation and environmental laws rather than the real cause -- poor forest management," said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of Defenders of Wildlife. "If they would focus on protecting communities and improving their forestry practices rather than dismantling environmental laws, they might actually accomplish something useful."

The McInnis bill also seeks to significantly interfere with our nation's independent judiciary. It requires a court to limit preliminary injunctions of logging projects carried out under the bill to 45 days, unless the court affirmatively acts to renew the injunctions. It also seeks to force any courts, including appellate courts, to issue a final ruling on a case in 100 days. It even attempts an astounding change in the American legal standard that governs how courts determine equitable relief for an injured party.

"If courts adhered to the desires of the McInnis bill, these logging projects would essentially be put at the front of the line ahead of most other civil and criminal cases on the courts' dockets," said Marty Hayden, Legislative Director for Earthjustice, the nation's largest non-profit environmental law firm. "The McInnis bill even attempts to allow logging to go forward after a court has ruled that a project is illegal. It's the equivalent of allowing a convicted felon to walk."

Title IV of the McInnis bill seeks to allow the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture to conduct an unlimited number of 1,000 acre logging and other projects, termed "applied silvicultural assessments," which would be categorically excluded from public review under NEPA.

"Calling a 1,000 acre clearcut an 'Applied Silvicultural Assessment' is the height of green-scamming," said Randi Spivak, Director of American Lands. "The McInnis bill is an insult to the public if he thinks that citizen' won't see this as a clear hand-out to the timber industry that will do nothing to protect communities. Commercial logging is commercial logging and it shouldn't be exempt from our fundamental environmental protections."

CONTACT: Sierra Club, Carl Pope, Executive Director, 415-977-5799 The Wilderness Society, Chris Mehl, 406-586-1600 Earthjustice, Marty Hayden, Legislative Director, 202-667-4500 American Lands, Randi Spivak, Director, 202-547-9029 Natural Resources Defense Council, Amy Mall, Policy Analyst, 202-289-6868 U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Gene Karpinski, Executive Director, 202-546-9707 Alaska Coalition, Laurie Cooper, Forest Outreach Director, 202-628-1843 National Environmental Trust, Robert Vandermark, Policy Analyst, 202-887-8800 Defenders of Wildlife, Rodger Schlickeisen, President, 202-682-9400 Trout Unlimited, Chris Wood, Vice President of Conservation, 703-284-9403