|
Voices of the Northwest
Things are looking pretty bad for our nation's forests. Right now
the House and Senate are arguing about which version of the Bush forest
bill will prevail--the really awful House version, or the slightly less
awful Senate version. Neither of these versions will do what they were
supposedly designed to do, which is to protect the homes of people living near forested areas. Neither of them will do any good for our forests.
In this article, I will summarize the differences between the bills,
give an update on what's happening in Congress right now, and give some actions we can take to keep the damage to a minimum.
A COMPARISON OF THE TWO BILLS
Both versions of the bill resemble our Oregon "beauty strips",
those narrow bands of trees that line our highways, giving the impression of a healthy forest while hiding the clearcuts behind them. Both increase logging and reduce citizen participation and environmental protections in the name of protecting our forests from fires.
There are a few differences. The Senate bill allocates $760
million a year for thinning projects and says that half of it must be used
in the wildland/urban interface. Since half of the nation's fuels
reductions projects already take place in the wildland/urban interface,
this would not be an increase. The House version appropriates no money. Instead, it relies on trading profitable and healthy old growth trees to loggers in exchange for thinning the brush around them. The House does not want to guarantee that any percentage of projects be near the wildland/urban interface.
Unlike the House version, the Senate bill talks about protecting
old growth. However, it has enough loopholes to accomodate a fleet of
logging trucks. For example, it accepts the existence of a forest plan in a
national forest as proof that old growth is being protected; yet most
forest plans don't adequately protect old growth. It also allows
fast-track logging in any forest damaged by insects, disease, windfall, or ice storms; yet dead and dying trees are a natural part of a healthy old growth forest.
Several amendments were offered to the Senate bill which would have
corrected some of its faults. They would have required a greater percentage of money for the wildlands/urban interface, closed the gaping loopholes on old growth protection, preserved environmental protections, protected judicial decisions, and required the legislation to be reviewed in five years. All five ammendments were voted down by a 2 to 1 margin.
WHAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING IN CONGRESS
With two bad bills to choose from, the best scenario we could hope for is that the House and Senate disagree over them so much that no bill
emerges from the Conference Committee. This is not impossible. Several
Democratic Senators have said that they have compromised as much as they can, and that they won't compromise any further.
Senate Democrats,angry at being shut out of talks on energy policy
and Medicare, have refused to start the negotiation process with the House, saying that the Republicans will just shut them out.
However, Wyden and Feinstein, two of the co-authors of the bad
Senate bill, have been urging the leaders of the House and Senate to get
together to "work things out informally." It is both tragic and ironic
that these two Senators should be the ones working so hard to make this bad bill a reality. Earlier this year, they co-authored a bill that,
although not perfect, offered real protection both to rural communites and to old-growth forests, as well as inventoried roadless areas and most watersheds. These two know how to write an adequate bill, if not a good one, and it is a shame to see them working so hard to create a bad one.
WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?
1) Tell the Senate Democrats that you support their refusal to negotiate,
and to hold firm on their present compromise. Senator Tom Daschle, who leads the Senate Democrats, listens to messages from out-of-state callers, although he probably does not give them as his South Dakota constituents. All Senators can be reached at the Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121. Local numbers for local Senators can be found in the "government" section of your phone book.
1) Hold Wyden to his earlier promise: For those of us who live in Oregon,
there doesn't seem to be much we can do about Wyden's deal-making.
However, if there is a conference committee, and if the resulting bill is
the House version, we need to call Wyden and hold him to his earlier
promise to stand firm on his wishy-washy compromise and not compromise any more than he already has. Wyden's Eugene number is 541-431-0229. His Portland number is 503-326-7525.
2) Thank the 15 Senators who voted against the Senate bill. These include: Bayh, Biden, Clinton, Carper, Dodd, Durbin, Cantwell, Rockefeller, Jeffords, Harkin, and Kennedy.
3) Thank the Senators who offered amendments that would have improved the Senate Bill: Senators Leahy, Boxer, Murray, Cantwell, and Harkin. Encourage them to oppose any further compromise.
4) Pray, if you are so inclined. We need all the help we can get.
This message was prepared from material from American Lands Alliance and Oregon Council on Natural Resources (ONRC), as well as articles from the mainstream press. For more information, visit American Lands.org
© Copyright 2000-2004 by West By Northwest.org
Top of Page
untitled
|
