A
New Political Landscape
Lost in the South Carolina coastal plane several weeks ago,
I found myself driving through an example of “excellent”
forestry. For several miles on either side of the road, stately
pines shadowed the dew on the wiregrass. It was a high point
in an otherwise bleak day. I had just received news that the
“Healthy Forests Initiative”just passed the Senate.
This Act, in tandem with the other recent regulatory changes,
represents the biggest set back for forest conservation in 30
years – essentially the full span of my professional career.
Thirty years ago, the gridlock in the debate over clearcutting
lead to passage of the National Forest Management Act. In this
legislation, Senator Hubert Humphrey and his colleagues charted
an unprecedented course for participatory democracy in the forests.
This legislation thus set the stage for tremendous engagement
of ordinary citizens in the management of our forests. This
involvement lead to numerous successes in forest conservation
over the next 25 years:
Moderated
timber cutting on public lands.
The annual timber harvest on the national forests dropped
from nearly 13 billion board feet to 2 billion. Although
the Forest Trust supports active management and timber production
on the national forests, we agree with most independent
foresters that harvests were way beyond sustainable levels
in the early 1980’s, particularly when the health
of non timber resources such as water quality or wildlife
was considered.
Local
representation in forest decision making.
We entered an era when community-based forestry enjoyed
tremendous growth. Even as late as the 1980’s, rural
communities had little or no role in management decisions
on the forests. Today the number of community-based organizations
is approaching that of local land trusts. The empowerment
of these rural communities was made possible by requirements
for participatory democracy on the national forests.
Although
it includes several constructive programs, the Healthy Forests
Initiative is essentially a reversal in this climate of improved
forest management. The Initiative curtails the power of citizens,
rural communities and even state governments and puts full
control of public forest back in the hands of the federal
government. Although federal authority, in itself, might not
be a bad thing, unchecked discretion invites the kinds of
behaviors that resulted in the debates over clearcutting in
the 1970’s. Examples of thoughtless or irresponsible
fuel reduction projects are already rolling in.
We need your help in developing strategies that meet the challenges
of this time. We will focus on ensuring that the methods used
to reduce fire danger are the most effective and have the
least impact on forest values. We will challenge federal land
managers to be the best that they can be. Finally, we will
examine private alternatives for forest conservation. When
the course of forest policy on public lands can undergo such
a radical reversal within a short span of time, responsible
conservationists must look to other strategies – including
private lands - to meet their goals.
I hope that you will be able to support us in this effort.
Henry H. Carey, Director
henry@forestguild.org
|
