http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/ENVIRORESOURCESev0312030.pdf
Needed: A Common-Sense Approach
to Protecting Our Nation’s Forests
Executive Summary
• More than 190 million acres of federal forest land are in declining health due to
overgrowth, disease, insect infestation, and weather-related damage and, as a result,
also are susceptible to catastrophic wildfires. The Nation’s forests are among our most
treasured natural resources. The health of those forests is a safety issue for millions of
Americans who live in or near them, but more than that, it is essential to assuring a
diverse ecosystem of plants and animals that can survive for generations to come.1
• The tools are readily available to restore our forests to healthy conditions.
Improving forest health through thinning smaller trees, reduction of overgrowth, removal
of dead and dying trees, and prescribed burning to further reduce unwanted fuels can help
return our forests to “pre-settlement conditions.” This will assure that: a diverse
ecosystem of plants and animals will survive for generations to come; air and water
quality are improved; recreation opportunities and scenic beauty are preserved and
enhanced; and that the threat of catastrophic wildfires is reduced.2
• Obstacles – in the form of environmental extremists – are impeding timely
treatment of our forests. Administrative appeal of restoration projects and litigation to
prevent federal forest managers from conducting forest health projects have drastically
slowed the effort to restore forest health. Policymakers and lawmakers should
concentrate on removing administrative and legal impediments to forest health restoration effort.
Despite the widespread understanding that our forests are at risk, some environmental
groups literally have formed human roadblocks to stop efforts by federal land managers to restore
forest health. Appeals and lawsuits filed by environmental groups for projects throughout the
nation, large and small, now represent the greatest risk to federal forests.
Enhancing Plant, Fish and Animal Habitats and Increasing Diversity
Some observers, claiming to speak in the name of “environmental protection,” advocate
limiting the use of thinning to the so-called Wildland-Urban Interface, where developed
communities abut federal forest lands. Dr. Covington suggests that concentrating on those
regions alone – while useful in protecting homes, farms, ranches, and people – does little to
address the health threat to entire forest ecosystem, including the habitats of birds, fish, and other
animals. Left untreated, the vast interior of our valuable forests will not be a welcoming place
for some of nature’s diverse species:
“Another reason that attention cannot be narrowly focused on a ring around the city is
because it will fail to address one of the most contentious issues of our time, the
protection of endangered species. . . . By not restoring the forest, we contribute to the
decline of habitat and the collision between society and nature.” 8
On the other side of this coin is a critical benefit yielded by forest thinning: a dramatic
increase in species diversity. According to Secretary of the Interior Gail Norton, catastrophic
fires in overly dense forests pose a threat to many threatened and endangered species, and
removal of small trees and undergrowth will benefit ecosystem health: she notes that the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that 46 species of forest birds, including 13 species of great
concern to wildlife biologists, will benefit from better management of the forests.9