The Bush administration’s reversal of Clinton-era rules protecting 58 million acres of national forest roadless areas represents a potential advantage to timber and mineral interests. Yet the Bush team could be about to commit the same error that haunted the Clinton rules: The U.S. Forest Service still hasn’t made a detailed report on which areas deserve strict protection and which might be suitable for some commercial activities.
Forest Service officials say the state reviews should generate that kind of information. But in doing so, the new rules shift part of the federal responsibility for doing such studies to cash-strapped states, which may lack funds and expertise. Even so, federal officials may be able to ignore the states. (In a previous public comment period, 90 percent of Colorado respondents favored protecting roadless areas.)
“This is really a costly exercise in futility for the states and a mechanism for the Forest Service to deflect political pressure. I frankly wish they would have spent their efforts on making the planning process more effective and efficient for the average citizen rather than adding another layer,” said Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, a moderate Democrat.
The Bush plan offers no money to help states or for managing roads that get built in roadless areas. “Today’s announcement begs the question how the government can play catch-up on the more than $10 billion backlog of capital improvements and maintenance needed on existing roads,” said U.S. Rep. Nick Rahall, a Democrat from West Virginia, one of the few Eastern states with national forest roadless areas.
States must decide how to study the problem. Anticipating that need, the Colorado legislature is poised to pass Senate Bill 243, which would establish a task force to study the state’s roadless areas. Members of the panel would be appointed by Republican Gov. Bill Owens and the legislature’s Democratic leadership.
Sponsored by GOP Rep. Josh Penry of Grand Junction and Democrat Sen. Jim Isgar of Hesperus, SB 243 passed the Senate and House, but minor differences need to be resolved.
The panel would offer a forum for civil,well-informed discussions between environmentalists who want all roadless areas protected and industries that want them open to development. It’s an inventive process that Owens should support by signing SB 243.
