Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads
Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads By Christopher Doering WASHINGTON, Dec 12 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court in San Francisco on Thursday reinstated a Clinton administration ban on road construction in nearly 60 million acres of U.S. forests, overturning a preliminary injunction obtained by Boise Cascade Corp. BCC.N. The decision overturned a lower court ruling in favor of Boise Cascade, which is among many U.S. timber, mining and energy companies that oppose the roadbuilding ban. "This is a huge victory for our last wild forests, but also for the 1 million people who supported this rule," said Tim Preso, a lawyer with Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, who had a copy of the decision issued by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, went to the appeals court seeking to lift a May 2001 injunction issued by a federal judge in Idaho. The judge halted the Clinton plan at the request of Boise Cascade, saying the previous administration hurried the rule, skirted environmental rules and did not allow enough time for the public to comment. The Clinton plan aims to prevent road construction and the removal of oil and lumber in 58.5 million acres (23.67 million hectares) of federal forest land, unless needed for environmental reasons or to reduce the risk of wildfires. U.S. timber, mining and oil companies oppose the plan because they cannot move in heavy equipment without roads. It was issued just days before Clinton left office in January 2001. The Bush administration was accused by environmental groups of failing to vigorously defend the road-building ban in the lawsuit. On Thursday, a federal appeals court reversed the Idaho judge's ruling. "Because of its incorrect legal conclusion on prospects of success, the district court proceeded on an incorrect legal premise, applied the wrong standard for injunction, and abused its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction," the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in a 55-page decision. Environmental groups and the Bush administration have clashed on other forest issues. On Wednesday, the White House proposed to help prevent wildfires by making it easier to cut down the forest growth that fuels them. That move was criticized by activist groups who said logging companies would exploit the relaxed measures to commercially harvest timber under the guise of forest-thinning projects. In November, the Bush administration unveiled a plan to give local forest managers greater control over commercial activities in federal forests, a policy that opponents said would skirt environmental rules designed to protect fish and wildlife. |
Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads
It is my opinion that if this type of conclusion in the courts regarding our
national forests continues (considering the current state of a large majority of the USFS forestlands) we will be not only using products from other countries (primarily Brazil and other S.A. countries), but increasing the rate of destruction of biodiversity there and losing jobs in North America (including Canada and the USA) and soon lumber prices will skyrocket which will of course tie into the construction and financial markets heavily (the domino effect). This is in addition of course, to the huge cost of wildfire maintainence which by the way, pays government employees millions every year in overtime hours (some of the pay while they are sitting on their duffs). Apparently, some of these environmental groups care nothing of the environment, or are losing some of the big picture somewhere. The main problem concerning this issue is fires - and of course that has resulted in mistakes made by previous forest industry people. Back then (before the 1930's), there was very little concern for conservation - and I will admit that at least some of the forestry "professionals" have that same mentality even today - all timber and no birdies. We must have a balance, people, not either one way (lock it up) or the other (cut it up)!!! Ah, hell maybe these court rulings are a good thing - maybe I can get a suntan in my new big 10,000 square foot "green" house just like those wealthy jet-setters who run the environmental orgs...That is after I learn how to speak Portugese... If there are any earth first!, Earth justice, Sierra clubbers or any of the 1,000,000 people out there (probably a very low approximation) that truly support outcomes such as this, please explain your take on this outcome!!! -Geoff Aozotorp wrote: Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads By Christopher Doering WASHINGTON, Dec 12 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court in San Francisco on Thursday reinstated a Clinton administration ban on road construction in nearly 60 million acres of U.S. forests, overturning a preliminary injunction obtained by Boise Cascade Corp. BCC.N. The decision overturned a lower court ruling in favor of Boise Cascade, which is among many U.S. timber, mining and energy companies that oppose the roadbuilding ban. "This is a huge victory for our last wild forests, but also for the 1 million people who supported this rule," said Tim Preso, a lawyer with Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, who had a copy of the decision issued by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, went to the appeals court seeking to lift a May 2001 injunction issued by a federal judge in Idaho. The judge halted the Clinton plan at the request of Boise Cascade, saying the previous administration hurried the rule, skirted environmental rules and did not allow enough time for the public to comment. The Clinton plan aims to prevent road construction and the removal of oil and lumber in 58.5 million acres (23.67 million hectares) of federal forest land, unless needed for environmental reasons or to reduce the risk of wildfires. U.S. timber, mining and oil companies oppose the plan because they cannot move in heavy equipment without roads. It was issued just days before Clinton left office in January 2001. The Bush administration was accused by environmental groups of failing to vigorously defend the road-building ban in the lawsuit. On Thursday, a federal appeals court reversed the Idaho judge's ruling. "Because of its incorrect legal conclusion on prospects of success, the district court proceeded on an incorrect legal premise, applied the wrong standard for injunction, and abused its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction," the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in a 55-page decision. Environmental groups and the Bush administration have clashed on other forest issues. On Wednesday, the White House proposed to help prevent wildfires by making it easier to cut down the forest growth that fuels them. That move was criticized by activist groups who said logging companies would exploit the relaxed measures to commercially harvest timber under the guise of forest-thinning projects. In November, the Bush administration unveiled a plan to give local forest managers greater control over commercial activities in federal forests, a policy that opponents said would skirt environmental rules designed to protect fish and wildlife. |
Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads
Geoff Kegerreis wrote in message ...
It is my opinion that if this type of conclusion in the courts regarding our national forests continues (considering the current state of a large majority of the USFS forestlands) we will be not only using products from other countries (primarily Brazil and other S.A. countries), but increasing the rate of destruction of biodiversity there You would have to first show the destruction of the forests there were correlated in anyway with past use of US Forests! and losing jobs in North America (including Canada and the USA) That ended when all the large lumber was cut and similar size and well placed lumber allowed mechanization of the process! and soon lumber prices will skyrocket which will of course tie into the construction and financial markets heavily (the domino effect). So Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Burma will fall? This is in addition of course, to the huge cost of wildfire maintainence which by the way, pays government employees millions every year in overtime hours (some of the pay while they are sitting on their duffs). Apparently, some of these environmental groups care nothing of the environment, or are losing some of the big picture somewhere. You would have to proove any of those statements! The main problem concerning this issue is fires - and of course that has resulted in mistakes made by previous forest industry people. Back then (before the 1930's), there was very little concern for conservation - and I will admit that at least some of the forestry "professionals" have that same mentality even today - all timber and no birdies. We must have a balance, people, not either one way (lock it up) or the other (cut it up)!!! Very interesting but the numbers of forest animals such as Fishers show no great recovery - showing the type and nature of the forests out there are not indiciative of recovered forests! Ah, hell maybe these court rulings are a good thing - maybe I can get a suntan in my new big 10,000 square foot "green" house just like those wealthy jet-setters who run the environmental orgs...That is after I learn how to speak Portugese... If there are any earth first!, Earth justice, Sierra clubbers or any of the 1,000,000 people out there (probably a very low approximation) that truly support outcomes such as this, please explain your take on this outcome!!! -Geoff Aozotorp wrote: Court clears way for Clinton ban on forest roads By Christopher Doering WASHINGTON, Dec 12 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court in San Francisco on Thursday reinstated a Clinton administration ban on road construction in nearly 60 million acres of U.S. forests, overturning a preliminary injunction obtained by Boise Cascade Corp. BCC.N. The decision overturned a lower court ruling in favor of Boise Cascade, which is among many U.S. timber, mining and energy companies that oppose the roadbuilding ban. "This is a huge victory for our last wild forests, but also for the 1 million people who supported this rule," said Tim Preso, a lawyer with Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, who had a copy of the decision issued by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, went to the appeals court seeking to lift a May 2001 injunction issued by a federal judge in Idaho. The judge halted the Clinton plan at the request of Boise Cascade, saying the previous administration hurried the rule, skirted environmental rules and did not allow enough time for the public to comment. The Clinton plan aims to prevent road construction and the removal of oil and lumber in 58.5 million acres (23.67 million hectares) of federal forest land, unless needed for environmental reasons or to reduce the risk of wildfires. U.S. timber, mining and oil companies oppose the plan because they cannot move in heavy equipment without roads. It was issued just days before Clinton left office in January 2001. The Bush administration was accused by environmental groups of failing to vigorously defend the road-building ban in the lawsuit. On Thursday, a federal appeals court reversed the Idaho judge's ruling. "Because of its incorrect legal conclusion on prospects of success, the district court proceeded on an incorrect legal premise, applied the wrong standard for injunction, and abused its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction," the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in a 55-page decision. Environmental groups and the Bush administration have clashed on other forest issues. On Wednesday, the White House proposed to help prevent wildfires by making it easier to cut down the forest growth that fuels them. That move was criticized by activist groups who said logging companies would exploit the relaxed measures to commercially harvest timber under the guise of forest-thinning projects. In November, the Bush administration unveiled a plan to give local forest managers greater control over commercial activities in federal forests, a policy that opponents said would skirt environmental rules designed to protect fish and wildlife. -- |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter