|
ANTI-RECREATION LAWSUIT BANS
FOREST ACTIVITIES
 POCATELLO,
ID (Sept. 29) – A recent order by a federal court
prohibits the U.S. Forest Service from using streamlined
regulations to permit many popular recreational
activities as well as projects that reduce hazardous
fuels and improve wildlife habitat.
On July 2, 2005 the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California issued an
Order banning the use of Categorical Exclusions
(CEs). The ruling requires any forest project using
a CE to include a formal public notice, be available
for public comment and give the public the option
of appealing the decision. The order applies to
all decisions made with a CE after July 7, 2005.
It also applies nationwide.
The court order is a result of a lawsuit filed
by the following anti-recreation groups; the Earth
Island Institute, Sequoia ForestKeeper, Heartwood,
Center for Biological Diversity, and the Sierra
Club against a timber project on the Sequoia National
Forest.
A CE is a category of actions that do not have
a significant effect on the environment and therefore
do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA)
or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). CEs are
allowed under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). They simplify documentation -- not eliminate
it -- for those actions that clearly do not have
a significant effect on the environment. Such permitted
activities include certain off-road vehicle events,
mountain bike tours and group outings for organizations
such as the Boy or Girl Scouts.
Brian Hawthorne, Public Lands Director for the
BlueRibbon Coalition, states, “I think the green
groups have gone too far with their anti-recreation
agenda. They seek to create a virtual ‘analysis
paralysis’ in the Forest Service to advance their
agenda. Sadly, it is the responsible recreating
public will suffer because of their extreme positions.”
"I believe the American public will see this
for what it is - radical environmentalism run amok.
If a project meets the specific and limited criteria
for Categorical Exclusion and cannot have a significant
effect on the environment, land managers should
not be forced to complete an unnecessarily lengthy
and wasteful analysis. " Hawthorne added.
This decisions impact projects such as the Capitol
Holiday Tree program, which allows a tree from a
different national forest to grace the lawn of the
U.S. Capitol throughout the holiday season—a proud
tradition for nearly 40 years. “Instead of approving
such projects with a streamlined permit using CEs,
the agency must now enact a lengthy 135 day notice,
comment, and appeal process,” Hawthorne said. “It’s
not just the mom and pop recreation clubs that get
hurt, but great American traditions like placing
the Christmas tree on the White House lawn are affected
as well.”
Hawthorne noted that the ruling potentially affects
hundreds of projects throughout the country, including
projects that will reduce hazardous fuels and improve
wildlife habitat. Hawthorne added; “The effects
of the decision are not yet completely understood
and it will take some time to fully assess a strategy
of action. BRC remains committed to protecting recreational
access to public lands and will be watching the
situation closely.”
More info on the ruling:
http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/litigation.htm
|
