Every Why down in Why-ville liked appeals a lot…
But the Chief, who lived just East of Why-ville, did NOT!
The Chief hated appeals!
The process didn’t please him!
Now folks, don’t ask why.
No one quite knows the reason.
It could be that his head wasn’t screwed on quite right.
It could be, perhaps, that his rules were too tight.
But I think that the most likely reason of all
May have been that his boss hasn’t much on the ball.*
U.S. Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth said that the nation’s holiday tree might not be delivered to the Washington Monument in time for the festivities. And that thousands of families who cut Christmas trees on national forests would not be getting their permits this year. Weddings had been canceled, mushroom harvesting stopped and firewood permits withheld. The chief said a judge made him do it.
In July, Federal District Court Judge James Singleton ruled that the Forest Service needed to follow the Forest Service Decisionmaking and Appeals Reform Act, passed by Congress in 1992, and seek public comments when implementing forest plans, including plans for logging. Under the Appeals Act, those who comment are then entitled to appeal decisions to a higher Forest Service official.
In 1992, the first President Bush said he wanted to eliminate the long-established practice of allowing citizens to appeal decisions. The public would then be forced to file suit in court or take their grievances directly to Congress; both are overworked and expensive forums. Congress responded to Bush by enacting the Appeals Act, which put into law three simple steps. For each project that implements a forest plan, the Forest Service must notify the public in advance, accept public comments, and allow those who commented to appeal the final decision.
In 1993, the Forest Service adopted a set of rules to implement the Appeals Act. These rules required that all logging projects be subject to the Act’s notice, comment and appeal procedures.
In 2003, the Forest Service amended the rules by eliminating most logging projects from the comment and appeals process. Of course, that’s the outcome the Forest Service originally sought in 1992 and that Congress tried to prevent by passing the act.
Five environmental groups sued to invalidate the 2003 changes. Judge Singleton agreed: “To read this plain language as allowing exclusion of timber harvests is to read into the statute a drastic limitation that nowhere appears in the words Congress chose.”
Chief Bosworth claimed that Judge Singleton’s order forced him to shut down the national forests, but the judge rejected the chief’s position and reinstated the 1993 rules.
Now, two powerful anti-environmental opponents of government accountability, Representatives Pombo, from California, and Goodlatte, from Virginia, have introduced HR 4091, which would bar citizen appeals of most Forest Service timber sales. This bill is what the Forest Service sought when it willfully misinterpreted the judge’s order to hold hostage the nation’s holiday tree. Don’t let the Grinch steal your right to appeal Forest Service logging decisions. Call your member of Congress now to oppose HR 4091.
*With apologies to Dr. Seuss
Photo © George Filgate