News Service May 21, 2003

Both Sides Hail Wildfire Report

By Mark Flatten, Tribune

Almost 60 percent of the projects aimed at reducing the wildfire danger in the national forests that are subject to appeal get challenged, according to a study released Wednesday by the U.S. General Accounting Office.
County bans fires in parks
Airplanes to fight less in wildfires

The report has fueled the arguments from both sides as to whether appeals, particularly those brought by environmental groups, have stalled plans to thin overgrown forests that are primed to explode in a repeat of the Rodeo-Chediski fire that burned 469,000 acres in Arizona last year.

The reason both sides are quick to cite the study is that they can each hang their arguments on different findings.

The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, found that of the 762 fuel treatment decisions, 180 were appealed. Some environmental advocates say those figures — which amount to about 24 percent of treatment decisions — rebut claims that appeals have unnecessarily stalled forest-thinning efforts.

However, 457 of those projects covering 3 million acres were not subject to appeal, under the law. Those projects were approved under what are known as categorical exclusions, a provision in the law that shields certain projects such as controlled fires from the U.S. Forest Service's internal appeals process. Of the 305 decisions that were subject to challenge, 59 percent were appealed, according to the GAO.

The study, based on projects proposed in fiscal 2001 and 2002, also found that 23 fuel reduction projects were challenged in court, about 3 percent of all decisions. Even those projects passed under categorical exclusions can be challenged in a lawsuit.

“It is extremely troublesome, but it is a reaffirmation of what we have known,” Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., said of the figure that more than half of the projects subject to challenge are appealed. “It fuels the frustration in addition to fueling catastrophic fires.”

But environmentalists say the new GAO report shows it is not appeals or lawsuits that are blocking effective forest management. Even when projects are appealed, most fuel treatments do not experience significant delays that would add to fire danger, said Brian Segee of the Center for Biological Diversity in Tucson, which has been a primary litigant against the Forest Service in Arizona.

The GAO report says that of the projects that were appealed, 79 percent were allowed to proceed within 90 days. Republicans in Congress and the Bush administration have claimed that cumbersome delays caused by appeals and lawsuits are the reason large-scale thinning is not being done, Segee said. The findings of the new study show that the vast majority are not challenged and that even those that are typically are not significantly delayed, he said.

“It confirms earlier studies that there is essentially no delay with the vast majority of Forest Service fuel reduction projects,” Segee said. “If 95 percent of these projects are going forward within 90 days, regardless of whether they were appealed, these projects are not being stopped on Forest Service land.”

Rob Smith of the Grand Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club echoed that conclusion, saying that almost all of the fuel-reduction work planned by the Forest Service is getting done. Those projects that are delayed because of challenges tend to be those with large elements of commercial timber sales, he said.

“Our focus is what gets done on the ground,” Smith said.

Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., said the arguments from environmentalists are bogus.

It makes no sense for environmentalists to claim they are not obstructionists by citing the projects that are not subject to appeal, Shadegg said. As important as the fact that almost 60 percent of the projects are appealed is the finding in the GAO report that of the 180 plans that were appealed, 133 of those projects were sustained as appropriate by regional foresters, Shadegg said.

That shows almost all of the challenges are without merit, he said.

“It means they are obstructionists,” Shadegg said of environmental groups. “They are playing loose and fast with the facts and essentially their position is deceptive. They are creating the impression that the total number of appeals is low by relying on a whole category of cases where they cannot legally appeal.”

Aside from the number of cases in which the Forest Service's plans were upheld, the GAO found that the Forest Service's proposals were reversed in 19 cases, and modified in 16. An additional 12 were withdrawn by the Forest Service.

When a project proposed by a local national forest is proposed, it can be appealed to the regional forester. Arizona's forests are in the southwestern region, based in Albuquerque, N.M.

In the southwestern region of the Forest Service, seven of the 18 projects subject to appeal were contested, according to the GAO. None was challenged in court.

Contact Mark Flatten mflatten@aztrib.com