The Stand
Web Edition
Vol. 03, No. 04, April 8, 2005
Mark Rey Issues His Decision on Revisions to the Sierra Nevada Framework
On March 21, 2005, Under Secretary of the Department Agriculture Mark Rey concluded his discretionary review of the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment. In a memo to Chief of the Forest Service Dale Bosworth, Mr. Rey stated, “Based upon a review of the appeal records and your decision, I affirm your appeal decision regarding the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment.” Mark Rey’s decision to affirm the revisions to the original Sierra Nevada Framework left the Campaign no option except to seek redress through the courts.
However, even if Rey had announced changes to Chief Bosworth’s decision, they most likely would have been illegitimate. His decision to initiate a discretionary review was announced on December 23, 2004. According to 36 C.F.R. 217.17(f), “The discretionary level Reviewing Officer shall conclude the review within 30 days of the date of the notice issued to participants that the lower decision will be reviewed. . .” Mr. Rey’s review did not conclude until 90 days after his announcement. The 30 days time period expired on January 24, 2005.
The Campaign along with other environmental groups filed suit challenging the changes to the 2001 Sierra Nevada Framework on January 31, 2005. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed a similar suit the same day.
Summary of New National Forest Management Act Directives
The Bush administration continued their assault on the environment shortly after being reelected. On December 22, 2004, changes to the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) were announced. These changes drastically diminished the protection NFMA has provided in the past. Directives supplementing these new regulations were published on March 23, 2005.
Mark Anderson of The Wilderness Society has written a brief summary of the new NFMA directives. The interim version of the directives takes effect immediately, but the Forest Service is taking public comments on the new directives until June 21st. Comments can be sent electronically to: planningdirectives@contentanalysisgroup.com. The subject line should read: Planning Directives.
Under the new NFMA regulations and directives, each forest plan will describe desired conditions of the Forest, set measurable objectives to achieve those conditions, determine the general suitability of lands for various uses, designate special areas such as proposed wilderness, and provide guidelines governing the management practices and uses of the Forest (36 CFR 219.7(a)(2); FSM 1921.11-.16; FSH 12.11). The regulations and directives refer to these as the five “components” of the forest plan.
One of the most important changes under the new directives involves the elimination of the species viability requirement. NFMA originally required forest managers to “preserve and enhance the diversity of plant and animal communities, including endemic and desirable naturalized plant and animal species.” This important requirement of NFMA has been the primary legal basis important to conservation planning, including the 2001 Sierra Nevada Framework and the Northwest Forest Plan. The new directives replace the viability requirement with vague direction to “provide appropriate ecological conditions” for at-risk fish and wildlife species. These new regulations shift the focus of planning from individual species to ecosystems and protect habitat for species only if the ecosystem management strategy is insufficient.
Another important aspect of the changes concerns the development of new forest plans. Under the new directives, forest planning is categorically excluded from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and to consider a range of alternatives. Instead, the Forest Service has invented a document called a Comprehensive Evaluation Report (CER) which the new directives require the Forest Service to produce. However, there is no requirement that the Forest Supervisor even consider alternatives in creating new forest plans.
Overall, the new directives rely on “guidance,” not hard and fast rules, and provide a great deal of discretion to Forest Service managers in deciding the scope of planning and involvement of the public. This is a level of autonomy not seen in the National Forests since before the NFMA was enacted in 1976, with very little in the way of accountability in return.
Read the entire summary by Mike Anderson of the Wilderness Society (152KB PDF>
Hearing in Sacramento on the Campaign's Challenge to the Plumas National Forest's Meadow Valley DFPZ Project
On April 18th, the Sierra Forest Legacy, represented by Earthjustice attorney Mike Sherwood and John Muir Project attorney Rachel Fazio, will present oral arguments on our suit challenging the Meadow Valley DFPZ project in Federal court in downtown Sacramento.
The Meadow Valley DFPZ/GS project was the first project proposed under the Quincy Library Group (QLG) Act following the release of the 2004 revisions to the Framework. The QLG pilot project, if fully implemented as the 2004 Framework revisions direct, will greatly increase both the amount and intensity of logging in the northern Sierra Nevada. The Forest Service has previously concluded that fully implementing the project could “pose a serious risk to the viability of the [California Spotted] owl in the planning area.” The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service similarly concluded that the QLG project “poses a significant threat to the long-term viability of the California spotted owl, Pacific fisher, and American marten due to the loss, degradation, and fragmentation of suitable habitat.” Even in the absence of new information that would change these findings or justify taking this level of risk, the revisions to Framework allow full implementation of this plan.
The Meadow Valley DFPZ project is comprised of 6435 acres of logging resulting in 25 million board feet. Of this area, 743 acres are group selection treatments – 1-2 acre clear cuts. Upon visiting the proposed area, many of the group selection units are areas that have been treated in past projects. Tax payer’s money spent in the past treated these areas and has made them fire resilient. Now, following the passage of the less restrictive 2004 Framework, the Forest Service plans to reenter these areas and cut all trees up to 30” in diameter, which mean that in most cases 1 or 2 trees may be left in these 1-2 acre units. In the project area, 300 acres are Old Forest Emphasis Areas. Finally, 50% of the acres of treatment are outside of the defense and threat zone and serve no protection to the town of Meadow Valley. The Decision Notice and Finding Of No Significant Impact were signed on April 16th of this year. The decision was administratively appealed. The decision was affirmed and our appeal denied on July 22nd. The oral arguments on our law suit to reverse this project will be presented this Monday, April 18th, in Sacramento.
If you are able to attend the oral arguments, please come support our effort to reverse the decision on the Meadow Valley DFPZ Project! Oral arguments begin at 9:00am, Monday, at the Federal Courthouse in downtown Sacramento at 501 I St. Judge England’s court room is on the 15th Floor. We hope to see you there!
****************
For more information, contact:
Sierra Forest Legacy
Craig Thomas, Executive Director
Phone: (530) 622-8718
Fax: (530) 622-8748
Warren Alford, Fire and Fuels Policy Coordinator
Phone: (209) 795-2672
Fax: (209) 795-2672