Healthy Forests Initiative

The Healthy Forests Initiative (or HFI), officially the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003, is a law originally proposed by President George W. Bush in response to the widespread forest fires during the summer of 2002 [cite web
url= http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/healthyforests/
title= Healthy Forests an initiative for wildfire and stronger communities
accessdate=2008-01-13] . The main thrusts of the law are to thin overstocked stands, clear away vegetation and trees to create shaded fuel breaks, provide funding and guidance to reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels in National Forests, improve forest fire fighting, and research new methods to halt destructive insects. Much of the basis for the law revolves around the overcrowding of forests due to the suppression of low intensity fires, which vary in their natural role of thinning small trees and clearing vegetative debris. The resulting build up of ground fuels and trees weakened by overpopulation (resource competition and spread of disease) pose a serious threat in some stands that can no longer be addressed through prescribed burnings. Disagreement exists concerning the role of private logging companies in thinning stands and clearing fire-breaks. The HFI also requires that communities within the "wildland urban interface" create "community wildfire protection plans." Community wildfire protection plans designate areas adjacent to communities that should be thinned so that crown fires will not directly burn into communities.

Controversy

The Bush administration claims broad support for HFI, stating on the official website: "The Administration and a bipartisan majority in Congress supported the legislation and are joined by a variety of environmental conservation groups." This statement ignores the opposition to HFI by conservation groups such as the Sierra Club [cite web
url= http://www.sierraclub.org/forests/fires/healthyforests_initiative.asp
author = Sierra Club
authorlink = Sierra Club
title= Debunking the "Healthy Forests Initiative"
accessdate=2008-01-13] , the Natural Resources Defense Council [cite web
url= http://www.nrdc.org/land/forests/pfires.asp
author = Natural Resources Defense Council
authorlink = Natural Resources Defense Council
title= Wildfires in Western Forests
accessdate=2008-01-13] , The Wilderness Society [cite web
url= http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Documents/McInnis-WaldenBillAnalysis.cfm
author = The Wilderness Society
authorlink = The Wilderness Society (United States)
title= Analysis of "Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003"
accessdate=2008-01-13] , and the John Muir Project [cite web
url= http://www.johnmuirproject.org/news-exploiting-federal-lands.html
author = Chad Hanson
title= Exploiting Federal Lands The myth of 'thinning' forests
date= August 26, 2002
accessdate=2008-01-13] . Supporters include the Society of American Foresters [cite web
url= http://www.safnet.org/policyandpress/hfiupdate.cfm
title= The Healthy Forest Initiative: Legislative and Regulatory Update
author = Society of American Foresters
accessdate=2008-01-13] , local fire protection agencies, and a number of hunting and fishing advocacy groups. [cite web
url= http://www.sportsmenslink.org/issues/legislation/archives/108th/healthyforests-conference.asp
author = The Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation
title= House and Senate Pass Final Healthy Forests Bill
accessdate=2008-01-13]

In March 2006, it was reported in the news section of the ACS journal "Environmental Science & Technology" that timber interests created a front group called Project Protect to help pass the Healthy Forests legislation. [cite web
url= http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2006/mar/policy/pt_bigindustry.html
title= Hidden ties: Big environmental changes backed by big industry
author= Paul Thacker
authorlinke = Paul D. Thacker
date=March 8, 2006
accessdate=2008-01-13]

Pro HFI

Proponents of HFI believe that private industry can be used to thin parts of federally owned forests which are susceptible to forest fires, reducing the risk of conflagrations that endanger human lives and destroy valuable forests. It is believed that allowing private industry to log large-diameter trees will reduce the costs of otherwise removing them. This is because old trees - large diameter trees included - are significantly more susceptible to fire and insect infestation.

Anti HFI

Opponents of the nicknamed "No Tree Left Behind" Act claim that logging companies will be allowed to unnecessarily cut large diameter trees under a false pretence, while neglecting the greater issue of ladder fuels (such as brush and small trees) and possibly leaving debris that would add to extremely volatile ground fuels. Some opponents also criticize the blanket prescription of thinnings to forests where low intensity fires did not historically play a pivotal role Fact|date=October 2008. In addition, some opponents consider the term, "Healthy Forests Initiative" (similarly to the Clear Skies Initiative), to be an example of administration Doublespeak, using environmentally friendly terminology as "cover" for a give-away to business interests. [cite web
url= http://www.southshore.com/baedd.htm
title= A Guide to the Bush Administration's Environmental Doublespeak
date=October, 2004
accessdate=2008-01-13] Furthermore, some saplings only grow after forest fires have cleared away older and dead trees; if humans intervene by preventing natural forest fires from occurring for too long, the forest will eventually die and grow back very slowly.

Litigation

In 2004, the Sierra Club and Sierra Forest Legacy (formerly named Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign) brought a lawsuit challenging one aspect of HFI. The National Environmental Policy Act requires preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for agency actions. Under HFI, the Forest Service had promulgated a "categorical exclusion" that eliminated the EIS requirement for timber sales up to 1,000 acres and prescribed burns up to 4,500 acres. On December 5 2007, in "Sierra Club v. Bosworth" [cite web
url= http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2A448B61AEC54DE6882573A800522CB9/$file/0516989.pdf?openelement
title= Sierra Club v. Bosworth United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Opinion
author= Judge David Thompson
date=December 5, 2007
accessdate=2008-01-13] , the Ninth Circuit held that the Forest Service's promulgation of the categorical exclusion "was arbitrary and capricious".

References

External links

* [http://www.healthyforests.gov/ Official Healthy Forests Website] - Dead link:wayback|http://www.healthyforests.gov/