Right before Christmas, when the attention of the country was justifiably focused on the holiday and the deadly attack in Mosul, Iraq, new rules were released for the management of the 192 million acres of national forests.
From now on, the management of national forests will give timber interests an equal footing with the efforts to preserve national forests and the animal species living there.
Gone are environmental impact statements that take into account the effects that logging – and other uses – would have on individual plant and animal species.
In will be the commercial exploitation of the country’s national forests.
Rep. Tom Udall, talking to the Washington Post, aptly described the new forestry rules: “These regulations, being offered two days before Christmas, cut the public out of the forest planning process, will inspire many more lawsuits and provide less protection for wildlife. It’s a radical overhaul of forest policy.”
These changes, ultimately, will result in more logging and less attention paid to the ecological health of national forests.
Mike Anderson, a senior resource analyst for the Wilderness Society, described the impact of the new rules to Salon.com, an online news magazine. “This would take away the main tool that Forest Service wildlife biologists have had for 20 years. A lot of species probably will be pushed toward extinction. It’s a pretty bleak outlook on all fronts.”
Actions like these are part of a disturbing trend. On Dec. 23, 2003, the Bush administration announced another change in forest policy that benefited the timber industry – the opening of the Tongass National Forest for more logging and development.
This year’s announcement cuts the public out of the forest management process, endangers already threatened animal populations and pushes good science out of the equation in favor of development.
Comments are no longer available on this story