CANYON COUNTRY WATCHDOG
from the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance

Fight Hansen's Anti-Great Basin Wilderness Bill:

In the spirit of this "retro" issue, we refer you back to last Zephyr "Millennium" edition for a complete explanation of Hansen's latest effort to prevent wilderness designation of over 1.6 million acres of spectacular lands in the Great Basin country of western Utah, H.R. 3035. At a recent rural county meeting, Hansen touted that "this bill would resolve the wilderness issue in western Utah." Where did he get his cue cards? Leavitt? Certainly not the majority of Utahns and the national public that demand congressional designation for all remaining wilderness-quality lands (there are 2.6 million acres that fit this category in the Great Basin alone). Sorry Hansen, but the battle has just begun. The American public deserves better, and the issue of Wilderness in Utah will not be resolved until Congress considers a comprehensive bill for all 9.1 million acres of wilderness--not any inadequate, piecemeal, anti-wilderness excuse for legislation. In a new millennium spin on the words of the great Chief Seattle: "we will fight for more forever."

The bill will probably go to committee markup in February, and on the House floor in early spring. Please call the White House at (202) 456-1111 and tell the operator to ask President Clinton to stop Hansen's bad Utah wilderness bill, H.R. 3035.

Bookcliffs "consensus" crashes:

The old adage that history will repeat itself holds true for the consensus group formulated for the Bookcliffs Resource Management Plan Amendment--either that or the group was not Y2K compliant.

As typical, the effort was programmed for disaster with the composition of the group stacked heavily in favor of off-road vehicle (ORV), grazing, oil and gas, and other extractive/development interests. BLM puts these "consensus" groups together when it does not want to make a decision or cannot take the heat, and hopes the group will respond like a marionette to its suggestions.

These "consensus" processes were originally designed by local grazing and development interests to override the national public and BLM management authority, and the Bookcliffs group was no exception.

This group turned into a monster--untamable by the agency, and it took direct orders from Texas billionaire Oscar Wyatt. Wyatt, who owns Alameda corporation, holder of extensive grazing permits, and who is also the majority owner of Coastal oil and gas corporation with, in his own words "probably half a billion plus invested in this particular area," was determined to run the show.

He personnally paid for classes to "educate" (read "brain-wash") the participants on the consensus process, and was sure to infect each technical review team (smaller groups broken-out of the larger Working Group that discussed specific resources) with his hired goons. Fanning out from him at the Working Group table sat his attorneys, ranch hands, the chairman of the public lands committee (who is on Oscar's payroll and is also a spokesman for People for the West, an anti-wilderness organization), and the county commissioners that he seduced.

After years of arduous discussions, and behind the scenes political manuvering, the group came up with "recommendations" that are totally skewed toward development and ORV travel (despite the scoping comments on the original plan that called for wilderness and primitive recreation).

Nothing in the group's recommendations could be supported by environmental laws and BLM regulations, and the process by which the recommendations were developed do not even remotely comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

In addition, consensus was not reached, and therefore the BLM should not recognize any of these recommendations. Send a letter to Sally Wisely, BLM State Director asking her to scrap all the recommendations of the group, and to never go down the "consensus" path again. Her address is BLM, Utah State Office, P.O. Box 45155, Salt Lake City, Utah 84145-0155.

LIZ REPORTS FROM CEDAR CITY

U.S. Forest Service roadless policy:

Last fall President Clinton announced his plan to protect United States Forest Service lands that remained roadless. Referring to these lands as "our treasured inheritance," the President directed the U. S. Forest Service (USFS) to develop a policy (after receiving public input) to protect more than 40 million acres of inventoried roadless areas on National Forests. The USFS was also directed to establish a process for evaluating possible limitations on activities in other uninventoried unroaded areas through forest planning at the local forest level.

The President's directive is intended to help slow forest fragmentation. In addition, the announcement responds to public desires concerning the conservation and use of forest resources, including clean water, biological diversity, wildlife and habitat protection, and recreational opportunities in roadless areas away from the sight, sound and smell of motorized vehicles.

The directive also acknowledges that the USFS should not be building more roads when it cannot take care of the 380,000 miles of "official" roads that already exist on USFS lands (this does not include the thousands of miles of user-created routes). The President's pronouncement included statistics intended to quell the expected uproar from timber industries--that such a plan would be the end of the world, as we know it.

For instance, the President noted that the initiative would have almost no effect on domestic timber supply, as only five percent of the country's timber comes from national forests. Further, less than five percent of that five percent is currently being cut in roadless areas.

The President concluded that the federal timber program can easily be adjusted to replace five percent, but that we can never replace what would be destroyed if we don't start protecting the remaining roadless areas.

The USFS is considering a two-part regulatory process to implement the President's directive. Part One would provide immediate protection for inventoried roadless areas with various types of protection proposed including: prohibiting new road construction and reconstruction; prohibiting both road construction; and commercial timber harvest; and allowing only activities that contribute to maintaining or enhancing the ecological values of roadless area.

This approach appears to limit immediate protection to roadless areas that were previously inventoried in RARE II and existing forest plan inventories. Such a narrow definition could omit many existing roadless areas that the USFS merely failed to inventory for RARE II in the 1970's and the 1980's--the guiding factor should be whether current on-the-ground reviews indicate the area is roadless. In addition, it appears that the USFS will only consider protecting roadless areas from "commercial timber harvest," rather than all forms of logging.

This creates a huge loophole as the USFS is increasingly shifting its timber sale program toward creatively named timber cutting projects such as "ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation" projects, "vegetation treatments," insect control, and other non-commercial objectives.

In essence, this limitation to "commercial logging" leaves the door wide open for extensive logging in roadless areas "conducted for the sake of forest health."

Part Two of the directive would provide additional direction for managing inventoried roadless areas and for determining whether and to what extent similar protections should be extended to uninventoried roadless areas. Any additional protection would not take effect immediately, but would be implemented gradually through the forest planning process, which has been, and could continue to be delayed for many many years.

This is our big chance to get the USFS to start protecting, rather than corrupting, the invaluable areas of our national forests that remain free of roads. Take a few minutes and draft a letter to the USFS that could help protect your favorite forested place. Issues that should be emphasized in comments to the USFS include:

* provide the strongest possible protection to the greatest possible amount of wild, roadless lands, including the Tongass National Forest (AK) under Part One.

* protect roadless areas from all road construction and reconstruction, commercial and non-commercial logging, mining, and off-road vehicles under Part One.

* do not defer protection of any roadless areas to the forest planning process. All inventoried roadless areas should receive immediate protection.

* protect all uninventoried roadless areas greater than 1,000 acres.

Comments on the roadless area policy can be sent via email to: roadlessareasnoi/wo_caet@www.fs.fed.us or mailed to: USDA, Forest Service-CAET, Attn: Roadless Areas NOE, PO Box 221090, Salt Lake City, UT 84122


To Zephyr Main Page February - March 2000