Veneman Recuses Herself on Sierra Nevada Proposal

Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman, who until recently represented one of the most vehement opponents of a blueprint for conserving 11.5 million acres of national forest land in the Sierra Nevada, has recused herself from all decisions on the issue, her spokesman said.

As a private attorney, Veneman represented the Sierra Nevada Access, Multiple Use and Stewardship Coalition, an umbrella of 80 groups that use the forests for snowmobiling, hunting, logging and other purposes.

“There wasn’t an obligation for her to disqualify herself,” said Veneman spokesman Kevin Herglotz. “But to assure the actuality and the appearance of impartiality, she decided she would disqualify herself from participation in this matter.”

The Clinton administration developed the management blueprint to reduce logging in 11 national forests that cover 40% of the Sierra Nevada range and to preserve species on the decline, including the spotted owl.

The plan, which would decrease the amount of timber cut in the Sierras by about half within five years, was signed last month by the Clinton administration’s regional forester and is now undergoing a 90-day appeal period.

Environmentalists said that they believe Veneman made the right decision but that they are not sure it is good news for the Sierra plan.

“It is ethically appropriate that she do that,” said Barbara Boyle, a senior regional director for the Sierra Club. “But everything we know about Ann Veneman says that she is the type of person you can sit down and work with. Who knows who will make the decision since she’s recused herself. It could be another [Bush] appointee who is completely aligned with timber.”

Veneman Not Queried on Sierra Blueprint

Veneman, who was California’s agriculture chief under Republican Gov. Pete Wilson, has a reputation as a moderate and was warmly received by the Senate panel that backed her nomination.

Despite her role in representing groups opposed to the Sierra plan, she was not questioned on the topic at the hearings.

Veneman’s reception stood in stark contrast to questioning that Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton underwent during her confirmation process.

Norton was queried about her role representing recreation and logging interests as a private attorney and about whether she would adequately protect the natural resources put in her care.

Barbara Ferguson, co-chairwoman of the coalition, said that as the group’s attorney, Veneman worked to ensure that their efforts to influence the outcome of the Sierra management blueprint were “responsible and centrist.”

She said she was surprised to learn that Veneman decided to recuse herself from decisions on the Sierra’s conservation plan.

Nonetheless, Ferguson said, “I think that the Bush administration will be friendlier to our point of view.”

Ferguson accused the Clinton administration of failing to look out for the interests of the people who want to use the forests. Her group represents a wide array of them, including horsemen, four-wheel-drive enthusiasts and chambers of commerce.

She said her group plans to appeal the blueprint on the basis that it leaves too many trees in the Sierra Nevada, increasing the risk of fires and making it harder for recreational users to enjoy the forests.

“What we have right now is too many trees--many, many, many too many trees. That’s not good for the species or for us who want to use the forests,” she argued.

She said better management of the forest areas, even cutting down big trees sometimes, will help prevent wildfires.

Timber Interests May Appeal Proposal

The timber industry also is considering appealing the plan, said Chris Nance, spokesman of the California Forestry Assn.

Nance argued that the Clinton administration made last-minute changes in the plan without public comment and failed to submit the blueprint to adequate scientific review because of haste to complete it before President Bush took office.

The blueprint reflected a major shift in philosophy toward the U.S. national forests under the Clinton administration. Conserving species and forests assumed prominence over providing access to the forests for loggers and those seeking recreation.

Although it is rare for such a plan to be altered significantly at this late stage of the process, both advocates and opponents of the plan believe that more significant changes might be forthcoming because the Bush administration has a markedly different approach to the environment and public lands than its predecessor.

Recreational users, timber companies and energy and mining interests all are expected to gain greater influence under the new administration.

Environmentalists, however, said that any effort by the Bush administration to alter the plan will be hotly contested. They said the blueprint is based on thorough scientific studies of the region.

“In the Sierra Nevada, we have overcut the range for decades,” said Boyle of the Sierra Club.

“We have destroyed animals and bird and amphibian habitats. Unless we step in to restore the habitats, many species will be extinct,” Boyle said.