There’s a strong following pleading with the Obama administration’s newly proposed forest policy. Members of congress, a large group of scientists, and hundreds of thousands of citizens are calling for a strengthening of protection for water and wildlife.
The public was given a 90-day period to comment on the administration’s rule on forest-planning. This new rule will guide how the 193 million acres of forest and grasslands that the U.S. Forest Service manages under the National Forest Management Act.
Viewed as one of the most imperative policies the Obama administration will take on, by environmental organization experts, it is still far from complete.
One of the positive aspects of the new policy is that it will make it easy to report how certain activities such as logging are negatively affecting the wildlife, as well as the forest health.
“The outpouring of public support for wildlife and water shows just how important national forests are to all Americans. While we’re encouraged by some of the forward-looking features of the proposal, such as making restoration of rivers and streams a priority and managing forests so that they’re more resilient to threats such as climate change, there’s widespread concern that the rule lacks clear, necessary standards to ensure it will be fully implemented to achieve these goals on the ground,” says Jamie Rappaport Clark, former director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and currentexecutive vice president for Defenders of Wildlife.
“In my experience, land managers welcome clear rules because that clarity makes tough but proper decisions easier to defend against unwarranted political pressure. Without such clarity, this planning rule could lead to a confusing and contradictory implementation decisions from forest to forest, undermining the effectiveness of the rule in protecting America’s wildlife and water,” Clark adds.
“They [the regulations] must provide clear standards and strong safeguards for managing our national forests: provisions that guide line officers away from the mistakes of the past and make public input and participation fully meaningful,” the CEOs said in a letter to Agriculture Secretary, Tom Vilsack.
Even though there are many positive aspects, there are a lot of things that will do more harm then good. For instance, the proposal doesn’t require species to be monitored to ensure forest management is actually maintaining fish and wildlife populations.
There is plenty of time for the Obama Administration to iron all of the many wrinkles out. Hopefully, they will take into account the numerous amount of suggestions given to them in the 90-day commenting period that they allowed.
For a more in-depth look at this issue please read the following link:
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/22411