White MountainNational Forest
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PROCESS
Producing a timber sale on the White MountainNational Forest is a complicated and time-consuming process. Federal law requires the Forest Service to follow the National Environmental Policy Act. It is easier to understand this law if we review some history.
Up to the 1960s, the government produced many large and controversial, projects like dams, and highways. These projects often had extensive effects on local or regional communities. Some were unpopular with large groups of people. These groups began to sue the government, often exposing poor planning or questionable reasons for doing the project. Congress responded with legislation that required government agencies to involve the public in the planning process and disclose the effects of the project. If people participated in the analysis and still disagreed with the decision they could appeal and have a higher authority review the work. The higher authority could reverse the decision or require the agency to do additional analysis.
In the early days this was a fairly simple process. Projects that were well thought out with a reasonable purpose, moved through the process with very little attention from the public. Over time, some groups who oppose activities like logging learned that they could slow the process and create a great deal of extra work for government agencies by commenting adversely, and routinely appealing all projects. On a few occasions they won appeals where the Forest Service analysis was poorly done. They also won a few court rulings where judges disagreed with Forest Service decisions. Today there are so many complicating factors - endangered species, new scientific information, public misconceptions about the effects of timber harvesting - that it becomes more and more difficult to produce a flawless document in a reasonable amount of time.
The White MountainNational Forest recently completed a revision of their Forest Plan. A lot of good people, with different interests, participated, compromised, and agreed to the final alternative selected. It provides something for everyone and carefully combines the interests of all the users of the White MountainNational Forest. This plan provides overall direction for all future projects on the forest. It includes managing timber resources on about 46 percent of the Forestwith an annual harvest of 24 million board feet of forest products. It supports local economies, produces a mix of wildlife activities, and helps meet the demand for forest products, nationally.
The timber sale process starts after the Forest Service has conducted an inventory of the resources in the project area and develops a list of desirable management activities covered under the management plan. These often include activities in addition to timber management such as recreation needs or wildlife habitat improvement. A notice is put in the Manchester Union and a letter or an e-mail is sent to people who have asked to be involved that outlines the project. The purpose, quantity, and type of work proposed is included with a project map. People have 30 days to send in their comments concerning the proposed activities. To be effective the comments need to be specific to the project. General comments or opinions don’t count. This process is called Scoping.
When the Scoping period is over, Forest Service personnel read all the comments and decide if the project needs to be modified or if more information is needed. They may also decide to develop alternative methods of accomplishing the project objectives based on the public comments about the proposed activities.
For example, a project might include a cutting unit next to a hiking trail, several commentors object to the visual effects to hikers. An alternative could be developed,creating a buffer area where only hazard trees would be removed and an informational sign would be posted to describe what was being done in the adjacent area and why..
After Forest Service personnel have digested all the comments, they develop an environmental analysis. This document explains the effects of the activities proposed in all the alternatives developed to accomplish the project. It must includea no action alternative thatdoes nothing more than continue ongoing projects and serves as a baseline for comparison of the effects of the other alternatives. The analysis estimates the effects of doing each of the alternatives - economic, recreation, water quality, wildlife habitat, etc. When the analysis is completed and a tentative, preferred alternative is selected, a copy is sent to all those who commented and a notice is put in the Manchester Union. Another 30 days is provided for the public to comment on the analysis. These comments help the Forest Service determine if the analysis is complete or needs more work and provides input from the public on which alternative they think should be selected. Following this comment period the District Ranger makes a decision on what alternative the Forest Service should implement.
Once made, a copy of the decision is sent to all those who participated in Scoping or commented on the analysis and alternatives. The decision is also published in the Manchester Union. If any of those who participated in the decision making process disagrees with the decision, they can appeal. Forty-five days are provided for the public to submit an appeal. If there is an appeal, first there is an attempt to negotiate the differences with the appellant. If that fails, the document, supporting information, and the appeal are sent to the next higher Forest Service office where the document and decision are reviewed. Another 45 days are provided for this step. Those who participated earlier have established standing and have the right observe any subsequent negotiations and provide information to the Forest Service. The decision may be reversed, upheld, or upheld with stipulations. This process was designed to reduce the number of law suits government agencies had to deal with. Today it is often just a required step prior to the law suit.
If you assume there will be an appeal and do the math, you can see that there is 5 months of time associated with just waiting for public input or higher headquarter review. This doesn’t include the time it takes to inventory, prescribe, and layout a sale, plus all the writing time.
If a decision is contested in court, it can often take years to get a legal decision. Often, during the review of the project and appeal record, the judges read the comments portion to gauge public sentiment for the project. If all they see are negative comments it can effect their perception of the project and enter into their ultimate decision. Positive comments also help as a support to Forest Service personnel who have to fight this up hill battle. It helps them to know that there are citizens out there who support their work and effort.
These timber sales are important to our industry and the NH economy. The potential 24 MMBF represents 740 jobs and $75 million in revenue in our economy. It also means approximately $1.3 million to local towns in timber tax receipts and“25% fund” payments. A significant portion of recreational activities in the White Mountain area is hunting, fishing and bird watching. Practicing good forest management is also valuable to wildlife habitat. Income form these forms of recreation are also important to our local economies.
In review, we have an opportunity to support White MountainNational Forest timber sales, by commenting at the start of a project, called scoping, and after the Environmental Analysis is released. Doing this is relatively easy if you have access to a computer. All you do is click on the e-mail address for the project and type out your comment and send it. If you want to do it on paper, just write out your comment and send it to the mailing address provided. It doesn’t have to be a formal letter. As long as you identify the project and make comment that is specific to it and the project area.
Examples: Wrong – “I support this project because clear cuts are important to wildlife.”
Right – “I support this project and the clear cuts proposed because they are needed in this area for wildlife.”
Wrong – “I support timber cutting because it is good for our economy.”
Right – “I support this project because the harvest of timber will provide income to my town and will create jobs in our region.
Thanks for taking the time to read this. Please send comments for the next project, every comment counts!
Steve Wingate
NHTOA Program Director