|
What's the worst thing you can do to a forest? The Walden logging bill!
 When a forest has been burned, the scientific evidence is clear: the best thing for recovery is to leave it alone. Commercial logging activities after events like forest fires impede recovery, causing erosion, decreased water quality, compacted soils, and the elimination of the very nutrients a forest will need to recover.
But Congress will soon vote on a bill introduced by Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) which runs directly against this scientific consensus, and would fast-track logging projects all across America in the name of forest recovery. The bill also disregards important protections for clean water and wildlife, eliminates meaningful environmental analysis and public involvement, and would misleadingly define even rain or windstorms as “catastrophic events.”
This timber industry’s dream come true could come to the House floor this week! Please, ask your representative to oppose this “log first, ask questions later” legislation!
Are you having trouble with this link? Click here.
Personalized messages are the most effective: even changing the subject line helps your letter stand out!
| Sample Letter for Campaign |
Subject: Oppose the Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act (HR 4200)
Dear [ Decision Maker ] ,
As a constituent who cares deeply about the health of our magnificent national forests, I urge you to oppose Rep. Greg Walden's misleadingly titled "Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act" (H.R. 4200). The best available science has shown that post-fire road building and logging undermine rather than enhance forest recovery.
Pre-approving harmful activities such as post-fire logging and road construction and exempting those activities from the National Environmental Policy Act would eliminate the important environmental review and meaningful public participation usually required for these proposals. In addition, because "catastrophic events" are defined to include common weather events like rain, wind, snow, or insect outbreaks, these activities could be fast-tracked at almost any time.
Instead of promoting forest restoration as it claims, this bill would promote logging and road building, disregard important protections for clean drinking water and wildlife, and eliminate meaningful environmental analysis and public involvement. I urge you to firmly oppose this disingenuous bill.
Sincerely,
|
Campaign Launched:
May 15, 2006
|
 |
| Galen Rowell/Mountain Light |
Post-fire logging and replanting activities may sound like good ideas at first, but in many cases these actions actually hinder forest recovery and restoration. Studies have shown that removing dead or dying trees can damage streams, destroy wildlife habitat, and actually increase the risk of future fires. These activities also waste taxpayer dollars: salvage timber sales are among the largest money losers for the U.S. taxpayer.
Rep. Walden’s “Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act” (H.R. 4200) broadly defines a “catastrophic event” as much more than just a huge forest fire or a severe hurricane. The list also includes natural events like snowstorms, high water, mudslides, windstorms, rainstorms, drought, and insect or disease outbreaks that happen relatively frequently. This over-inclusive list could mean that virtually any weather event would be enough to trigger “emergency” logging or road building activities, without any meaningful public input or site-specific environmental analysis. And if the area impacted is 1,000 acres or greater, the Forest Service would have to complete a “catastrophic event recovery proposal” within only 30 days.
 |
| The Babyfoot Lake trail "post-treatment," Biscuit project, Southwestern Oregon | Specifically, the Walden logging bill seeks to:
- Provide pre-approved management practices that would allow for logging and road construction, even in old growth forests and roadless areas, whenever a “catastrophic event” occurs;
- Eliminate environmental review, which would usually be required under the National Environmental Policy Act, by pre-approving harmful activities such as post-fire logging and road construction;
- Undermine public participation in decision-making on site-specific activities that would harm our forests by exempting these pre-approved practices from having to comply with NEPA;
- Eliminate the vital check and balance role that the federal wildlife agencies play in the approval process for "recovery" projects that may harm threatened or endangered species; and
- Harm the recovery of our forests by allowing heavy equipment and logging activities to compact soils, increase erosion into streams, and remove the large dead and down trees that provide the very nutrients and microclimates burned forests need to recover.
While wilderness, national parks, and monuments are exempt from this proposal, roadless areas are not. Rep. Walden’s bill would allow “temporary roads” to be constructed for salvage sales in roadless areas that have never been developed. Proponents of the bill claim that these “temporary roads” will be obliterated by the contractors, but don’t be fooled. The contractors cannot guarantee that temporary roads will be taken out, because no funding is guaranteed for these activities. Moreover, once even a “temporary” road has been punched into a roadless area, it is no longer considered roadless.
The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management possess all the authority they need to complete forest rehabilitation and recovery after natural disturbances. In fact, all forest recovery projects after Hurricane Katrina -- one of the greatest natural disasters in our nation’s history -- are being managed completely within the confines of current forest management laws.
This misleading bill is moving quickly, and will likely come to the House floor this week. Find out if your representative is a cosponsor of the Walden logging bill here.
We need your help to stop H.R. 4200 from barreling through the House of Representatives. Take action today to make sure your representative understands how damaging fast-tracking logging projects after disturbances would be!
|
