The San Francisco Chronicle (California)
Copyright 2006 The Chronicle Publishing Co.
All Rights Reserved
The Sierra Nevada forests are primed for another dangerous summer. Decades of neglect and conflicting policies mean the fire-prone woods may burn faster, hotter and more uncontrollably than ever.
A federal courtroom in Sacramento seems the last place to craft a way to end this peril. A balanced plan that serves wildlife, recreation and — yes — logging should be hammered out by forestry experts, not a judge.
But that’s where an impasse between environmentalists and the Bush administration has landed. At issue is the abrupt change in policy governing 11 million acres of federal forests stretching from the Central Sierra through the northern ranges in California.
Alarmed by wildfires across the West and pushed by timber interests, the U.S. Forest Service in 2004 quadrupled the allowable amount of timber cutting. Thinned forests carry less fire danger, and the hauled-away logs mean money for wood products companies.
This policy angered environmentalists, who had banked on a Clinton-approved plan adopted in 2001 that allowed harvest of smaller trees and imposed limits on back-country roads and pesticides. That policy, called the Sierra Framework, was devised after long negotiations, intricate fine-tuning, and scientific study.
Either plan, it’s fair to say, is a major change from the old days when the Forest Service snuffed fires and sold timber for harvest and grazing rights. Both plans accept an epochal change in viewpoint: The forests are diseased, overgrown and fire-prone, and the feds face a new job in restoring the woods to good health.
Before the court are issues of law, i.e., did the Bush team properly observe regulations in increasing the timber cuts? This question, while important, doesn’t begin to describe the emotions at work or the background of the debate.
California’s forests need steady, thoughtful care, not rushed policies that ignore earlier work. The court should keep this goal in mind in sorting through the latest arguments. Whatever happens in the courtroom will have long-term effects in the wild and among who make their living in the woods.