Obama wants to roll back National Forest protections (making them “weaker than Reagan’s”) TELL HIM NO!

 

Deadline Monday — Tell the Obama Administration: Don’t roll back National Forest protections. 

New rules would weaken 30-year-old forest and wildlife and protections.

Don’t let the Obama administration roll back 30-year-old National Forest protections. Submit a public comment now.
Take action now! 

Click here to add your name

Dear Mark,

“Weaker than Ronald Reagan’s.”1

That might not be what you would expect to hear about the Obama Administration’s proposed National Forestry Management rules, but that unfortunately is the case.

The proposed rules replace 30-year-old, mandatory forest and wildlife protections with subjective guidelines that make it easier to prioritize logging and other extractive activities over the protection of the fish, wildlife and ecosystems of America’s National Forest System — 175 forests and grasslands comprising an area the size of Texas.

The Department of Agriculture is accepting comments on the new rules until Monday, May 16th. Wildlife and conservation groups are demanding stronger rules, and it’s essential that we help build the call to protect the vast, priceless areas of our National Forests.

Tell the Obama Administration: Don’t weaken National Forest protections. Submit a public comment by the Monday Deadline.

For 11 years, the National Forest Service has been trying to weaken the 1982 rules. But proposed revisions by both the Clinton and Bush Administrations were struck down in court.

While the Obama Administration’s revision is a step up from the Bush-era rules, it represents a significant step back from the rules currently in place. Among other rollbacks, the new rules:

  • Replace mandatory protections for all forest wildlife with a narrower, subjective standard, applying only to “species of conservation concern” — a term whose measurements is not defined, and left instead to the discretion of local forest managers, who have been more easily influenced by pressure from logging industries.2
  • Substantially reduce Forest Service accountability by weakening the standards which currently allow the public to take action when the Forest Service fails to maintain required forest protections.
  • Weaken the role of science based decision-making, specifying only that local decision makers “consider” the best available science, but not requiring them to base their decisions on it.3

Our National Forests provide habitat for hundreds of fish and wildlife species, and encompass watersheds that account for one-sixth of the public water supply.

It’s essential that a natural resource this valuable be protected by strong, mandatory, consistent and science-based standards. If anything, the Obama administration should be enacting stronger rules than the existing Reagan-era standards. Certainly, we shouldn’t be weakening them.

Tell the Obama Administration: Don’t weaken National Forest protections. Submit a public comment now.

Thanks for protecting America’s National Forests.

Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets

1. Enviros: Obama’s new forest rules are weaker than Reagan’s,” Ecotrobe, February 11, 2011
2. Editorial: Forest Rules,” New York Times, March 15, 2011
3. Our Questions on the Forest Planning Rule,” Defenders of Wildlife, March 22, 2011

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *