Photo courtesy U.S. Forest Service

by Andy Stahl

When it comes to protecting the environment, one law stands above all others. The 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is the simplest of our nation’s environmental laws. NEPA says that the government has to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before taking any action that might harm the environment.

No government agency finds it more difficult to tell the truth than does the U.S. Forest Service. In fact, no agency has broken NEPA laws more often than has the Forest Service. And no agency loathes NEPA more because of the restrictions NEPA places on Forest Service activities.

In order to operate with less environmental oversight, the Forest Service is spearheading the Bush Administration’s anti–NEPA agenda.

The Forest Service’s hatred of NEPA can be traced to a medium–sized bird—the once obscure, but now famous, northern spotted owl. Most people think that the spotted owl’s status as a threatened species saved millions of old–growth forest acres in the Pacific Northwest. But that’s not true. Not one spotted owl habitat timber sale was ever stopped by the Endangered Species Act.

It was NEPA that saved eight million acres of our nation’s finest ancient forests. It was NEPA that forced the Forest Service to reduce logging in the Pacific Northwest by 90 percent.

How did NEPA do it? When the Forest Service adopted its first spotted owl plan in the mid 1980s, it chose to shade the truth (to be polite) about the spotted owl’s chances of survival. That first plan protected only 5 percent of the owl’s ancient forest habitat. What the Forest Service omitted from its plan was the fact that not one credible scientist thought the plan protected enough forest to save the owl. Not one. Not even the timber industry’s own hired gun expert.

At that time I worked as a forester for an environmental law firm in Seattle. We took the Forest Service’s plan to court. We didn’t sue under the Endangered Species Act (in fact, the spotted owl wasn’t even protected as a threatened species at that time). We sued under NEPA because the Forest Service had not told the whole truth. The Forest Service had refused to come clean that it had no credible science supporting its claim that the spotted owl would survive a 95 percent habitat loss.

We won. The judge stopped logging in the owl’s ancient forests. Not once. Not twice. But three times. Each time we won it was because the Forest Service had omitted key scientific information. It had not told the whole truth and violated NEPA as a result. And each time we won, the Forest Service increased the ancient forest acres protected. The Forest Service had to. As the Forest Service was forced to tell more of the truth and consider more of the scientific information, the truth compelled it to protect more of the spotted owl’s habitat. Once the agency acknowledged the science, it had to act upon it.

Finally the Forest Service got it right, or at least close enough for government work. With the 1992 Northwest Forest Plan, which protects about 85 percent of the owl’s ancient forest habitat, the Forest Service was able to claim, truthfully and with scientific credibility, that its owl protection plan might well work. (New scientific evidence is showing that the owl is still imperiled, however.)

The Bush Administration is well aware of the dangerous consequences that truth–telling has on its pro–logging policies. At the time of the spotted owl lawsuits, the man who is now Undersecretary of Agriculture, Mark Rey, was the timber industry’s leading strategist battling against ancient forest protection. Now he’s in a position to do something about it.

Mark Rey would like nothing better than to convince Congress to repeal NEPA. And, although there are moves afoot to do just that, he can’t count on it happening—especially if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in November.

If Mark Rey can’t get rid of NEPA, the next best thing is to exempt Forest Service plans from NEPA. So that’s what he has done.

The only way to make a forest plan exempt from NEPA is to make the forest plan meaningless; so meaningless that the plan makes no decisions about anything at all. If a forest plan makes no decisions, then there are no decisions about which to tell the truth. And if there are no decisions about which to tell the truth, then NEPA’s duty to tell the truth does not apply to forest plans.

Mark Rey has written new rules for forest plans to make them completely discretionary without any enforceable requirements.

Forest plans now cannot protect wildlife habitat, cannot impose rules on logging, cannot restrict clearcutting, cannot limit off–road vehicle use—in fact, they cannot do or decide anything at all.

Mark Rey’s forest plans have no Environmental Impact Statements, therefore no disclosure of effects.  Thus they don’t tell the truth about what will happen to the environment –– they don’t say anything about the environment at all.  Also, forest plans don’t tell you what the Forest Service is actually going to do, e.g., graze cattle, cut trees, etc.  That’s another way in which they aren’t telling the truth because the Forest Service is going to graze cattle, cut trees, etc.

Rey is trying out his new superficial forest plans in Montana first. FSEEE is there to meet his challenge. We know that beating Rey in Montana will be the key to saving the Northwest Forest Plan, which is Rey’s real target. The 17 National Forests covered by the Northwest Forest Plan (in Oregon, Washington and northern California) have over half of the Forest Service’s standing sawtimber.

Mark Rey has staked his legacy on returning logging to the National Forests. To do so he has to take down the Northwest Forest Plan. And to do that, he has to make sure that forest plans no longer have any enforceable requirements.

FSEEE has put together a robust legal strategy to defeat Rey’s subterfuge. To carry it out, we need your financial assistance. We will be bringing two lawsuits. First, we will challenge Rey’s new forest plan rule that says plans are exempt from NEPA. Second, we will sue to require that Montana’s forest plans—the first out of the chute under the new rule—do, in fact, follow NEPA.

Winning these cases will establish the legal precedent that will prove critical to saving the Northwest Forest Plan. Forest Plans must be required to comply with NEPA.

Even more is at stake than eight million ancient forest acres. We seek to restore truth to Forest Service management. Please help us if you can.

The following is a time line of Mark Rey’s pro–timber liaisons and activities.

TIME LINE OF MARK REY’S PRO–TIMBER CAREER ACTIVITIES

REY TOP LOBBYIST FOR FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRY

• 1976–1984: Held several positions for the American Paper Institute/National Forest Products Association, a consortium of trade associations.

• 1984–1989: Vice President for forestry programs for the National Forest Products Association.

• 1989–1992: Executive Director for American Forest Resource Alliance.

• 1992–1994: Vice President for Forest Resources for American Forest and Paper Association.

REY CONGRESSIONAL STAFFER FOR PRO–TIMBER SENATOR

• 1995–2001: Staff member with the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

As an advisor to Senator Larry Craig (R–ID), Rey helped Craig oppose the Clinton administration efforts to restrict logging on public lands.

Rey also helped author the controversial “salvage rider” amendment, which allowed logging of old–growth in the Pacific Northwest.

REY HEADS FOREST SERVICE AND LAND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS

• June 2001: Rey nominated by Bush to be Under Secretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources and Environment. In this position, Rey is responsible for managing the Forest Service and land conservation programs.

• May 2005: Rey has Roadless Rule overturned, under the guise of giving authority to state governors, to allow road building for access to timber and mining.

• February 10, 2006: Rey proposes plan to sell–off National Forest land to pay for rural schools and roads in America. Opposition is strong and the measure fails.

• July 28, 2006: Rey states his intention to revive plan to sell–off National Forest land in the next congressional session.

Sources: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, www.usda.gov, Associated Press, 8/14/02; National Journal, 2/23/02; Associated Press, 6/22/01; Los Angeles Times, 6/24/01; White House website, www.whitehouse.gov/news/nominations/1041.html; Associated Press, 8/14/02; 6/22/01; New York Times, 5/6/05; Seattle Times; 2/11/06; Helena Independent Record, 7/29/06.