Forest Policy Review Ignites Sparks of a Firestorm

A top Bush administration official on Friday defended an effort to rework national forest rules and regulations that environmentalists say would undercut ecological priorities while helping logging and other commercial activities.

In particular, environmentalists are concerned about a policy shift they say would weaken an existing requirement that the “viability” of wildlife take priority over other interests.

Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman said the proposed rules are intended to give local communities a bigger say and inject a “common-sense” approach into management of the nation’s 191 million acres of forest.

But environmentalists say the draft rules would swing the pendulum of forest policy back to an era when concerns about wildlife and the environment were outweighed by efforts to treat the nation’s public woods like an agricultural crop.

“We’re pretty concerned,” said Jay Watson of the Wilderness Society. “If some of these changes come to pass, it will cut the heart out of forest regulations that have been around a long, long time.”

The new rules would affect planning for four Southern California forests: Angeles, San Bernardino, Cleveland and Los Padres.

Veneman was in Redding to review efforts by the U.S. Forest Service to get ready for what could be a blazing fire season. She said environmentalists’ sentiments dramatically overstate the reality of the planning process, which is still months away from completion.

“I don’t think it’s going to push anything way back to another era,” said Veneman, who oversees the U.S. Forest Service. “If you talk to any forester, they’ll tell you there are unique aspects to every forest. We need rules that are flexible enough to recognize those differences.”

The proposed guidelines are a road map for federal foresters as they draw up 10-year management plans for the 175 national forests, guiding decisions on everything from logging to livestock grazing, motorized recreation, hiking, horseback riding and fishing.

The draft rules offer six options for fulfilling the goal of ecological sustainability. Some of those options dropped the concept of protecting wildlife “viability” as a priority for forest planners.

Even under those options, however, manuals would give forest managers guidance on protecting the viability of wildlife, said Sally Collins, the Forest Service associate deputy chief involved in the process.

Collins said the documents represent the first stage in a long process and do not give any indication of the final regulations.

Environmental groups fear the worst in light of the Bush administration’s tough line since taking office. Bush has come under attack for proposing oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, rejecting the Kyoto, Japan, agreement to combat global warming and threatening to step away from President Clinton’s policy of blocking road development in one-third of the national forests.

The draft rules are being reviewed by Forest Service personnel in field offices across the nation. A final set of rules isn’t expected to be cemented until early next year.

Brad Powell, the Forest Service’s regional director in California, said any criticism is premature. “By the end of the year, I expect some thoughtful changes to be made” to the draft rules, he said without elaboration.

*

Times staff writer Elizabeth Shogren in Washington contributed to this story.