How to really limit forest litigation
Senator Stevens, the Alaska Forestry Association, Congressman Young and the Murkowski Administration like to blame Alaskan conservation groups for the low cutting levels on the Tongass National Forest over the last few years. They claim we have litigated the timber industry to near death. Not only is this wrong, as low market demand has been the main limiting factor on Southeast Alaskan logging, but Senator Steven's approach to limiting litigation is misdirected. This approach, one of using riders on appropriation bills to limit the rights of conservation groups to hold the Forest Service accountable for its decisions, will be ineffective.
A better approach would be to demand that the Forest Service, when making its decisions, do the following: 1) adhere to the nation's environmental laws; 2) adhere to their own regulations; 3) adhere to the standards and guidelines of the Forest Plan; and 4) stop ignoring the recommendations of their own biologists and other scientists. If these simple steps were followed litigation would quickly dry up. That they don't make these demands leads to the conclusion that Senator Stevens and the others who complain about public interest litigation are not concerned about the litigation per-se, but rather that the litigation that we bring is so often successful.
Mark Rorick
Chair
Juneau Sierra Club