Proposed rule changes will speed forest damage
Only logging, mining, oil/gas companies will benefit from this
These days, our national forests face severe challenges. Years of underfunding, the stress of climate change and severe wildfires are all taking a toll on the health of treasured places. These places are also under attack by policy makers who are putting the health of our forests at risk and potentially jeopardizing our water supply for generations to come.
There are five national forests in New Mexico, totaling over 9 million acres. The headwaters of the Pecos River, Gila River and Rio Grande originate in these forests and provide drinking water to our communities and water for farmers who grow our food. They also provide vital habitat for wildlife and plants. With nearly 70% of the state’s population living in the 10 counties along the Rio Grande alone, how our forests are managed is critical to water supplies and the local economy.
Despite the great importance of these places to New Mexicans, the U.S. Forest Service is proposing to weaken a bedrock law called the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which protects forests and allows our communities to have a say in how they are managed.
In June, a new rule was proposed that would cut both public participation and the role of science in the land management decisions for the 193 million acres of national forest lands across the United States.
It’s not surprising that the current administration would sugarcoat these harmful changes as “modernization” designed to “streamline” the regulatory process. While touting concern for protecting the environment and including public participation, the actual rule could put our forests at greater risk.
Several new “categorical exclusions” would allow the Forest Service to conduct planning behind closed doors, and eliminate any science-based review of impacts to water, wildlife and recreation. The changes would also create loopholes to increase the speed and size of resource extraction, including logging and mining — while eliminating public awareness and input on up to 93% of proposed projects. Meaning you, or local leaders, may not even know about the seriousness of a project in your area before it is too late to provide input.
The good news is this is only a proposed rule at this point. There is an opportunity right now to provide our own thoughts and comment about how the proposed changes could wreck our forests and impact our communities.
The major problems with the proposed rule fall into four main buckets of terrible ideas:
The rule favors corporate interests over the public interest. It would foster back-room deals with little or no involvement from the owners of our national forests — the public. All of us deserve a voice in how our forests are used.
It puts drinking water at risk. Millions of people depend on clean water from our national forests, which serve as natural purifiers. Logging, mining, road building and related activities degrade streams and waterways.
Future generations would have fewer opportunities to enjoy real backcountry recreation. The rule could result in thousands of miles of new roads being built into our last remaining wild places, with no public involvement or notification.
Finally, by ushering in dramatic increases in mining, energy leasing and clear-cut logging, the rule would forever degrade vital wildlife habitat, treating our shared public lands as if they were industrial parks.
Who stands to gain from this proposal? Not our local communities, our wildlife, or our water. The primary beneficiaries would be logging, mining, and oil and gas companies that would directly benefit from the broad discretion the Forest Service would have to approve massive extractive projects with no public or scientific involvement.
For all these reasons, the Forest Service should reject this rule.