|
Bill would offer compromise on wildfires
11/20/03 WASHINGTON -- Lawmakers announced a compromise on wildfire legislation Wednesday night that they hope will get final approval before Congress adjourns this year. Environmentalists were not pleased with the results, legislation similar to a bill that passed the Senate. "This bill doesn't guarantee any greater protection for homes," said Amy Mall, senior forest specialist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "It's still designed to increase logging." Robert Vandermark, director of the National Environmental Trust's National Forests Campaign, said the Senate didn't keep its word, allowing bad wildfire policy to get worse. But Sen. Ron Wyden, one of several lawmakers involved in the behind-the-scenes talks that led to Wednesday's announcement, had a more optimistic take on the measure. "When this bill becomes law, we will prove that you can restore forests, protect the environment, and put people back to work in rural communities. These are not mutually exclusive goals," said Wyden, D-Ore, one of two Democrats involved in the talks. Richard Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee and part of the talks, focused on getting the bill through Congress and onto President Bush's desk for signing. Bush first outlined the Healthy Forests Initiative -- limited environmental reviews to speed forest-thinning projects -- in Oregon in August 2002. "We have light at the end of the tunnel," said Pombo, R-Calif. "This bipartisan agreement puts the Healthy Forests legislation within reach of the White House." Other lawmakers involved in informal talks: Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Larry Craig, R-Idaho; and Thad Cochran, R-Miss., chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee that has jurisdiction over the wildfire bill in the Senate; and Reps. Scott McInnis, R-Colo.; Greg Walden, R-Ore.; and Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. The compromise bill is similar to a version the Senate passed in October. It calls for tightening the time for appealing decisions and limiting the number of plans federal agencies consider to reduce the risk of wildfires. The bill would authorize thinning projects on 20 million acres of federal lands rated high risk for wildfires. Both the Senate and House bills got caught in legislative limbo when Senate Democrats blocked negotiators' appointments to protest their treatment by Republicans in negotiations on the Medicare and energy bills. Wyden and Pombo said they now expect the Senate to appoint negotiators who will back what was developed in the informal talks. The compromise would authorize but not guarantee $760 million a year for removing brush, bug-infested trees and small trees that can act as ladders for fires to climb. If the money were provided, it would be $340 million more than now is spent on thinning projects. Half of the money for forest thinning would be used in areas near communities, now defined as 1.5-mile boundary between a community and public lands. In communities with a wildfire protection plan, the Forest Service would have to review two proposals for thinning around inhabited areas but is no longer required to consider proposals to do nothing. Healthy stands of old-growth forests, which are older, larger and more fire-resistant trees, would be protected from logging. Public land managers would be required to maintain those forests. A forest health research center would be moved to Prineville, Ore.,
in the Ochoho National Forest as a West Coast complement to a similar
center that would be opened on the East Coast in Mississippi. |