Senators vow to ease US rules to snuff forest fires
Date: 02-Aug-02
Country: USA
Author: Christopher Doering
The bipartisan group of lawmakers promised to use the summer recess to draft legislation and drum-up support to accelerate thinning of brush in an estimated 10 million acres (4 million hectares) of forest land in the Western U.S. during the next 18 months.
"We're going to try to do something that is long over-due," said Pete Domenici, a New Mexico Republican at a Capitol Hill press conference.
"The crisis we are experiencing this year, fueled by a terrible drought and massive wildfires, has compelled us to take action now to launch an effort to save our forests," he said.
The legislation would mirror similar language added by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to an emergency supplemental appropriations bill.
Under the deal reached among South Dakota lawmakers, the timber industry and environmental groups, the bill would expedite thinning in the Black Hills Forest by avoiding time-consuming lawsuits and protecting area residents and wildlife.
BAD FIRE SEASON
Thinning projects would be exempt from some environmental regulations "due to extraordinary circumstances" that have put many forests in danger.
The United States is bracing for one of its worst fire seasons in history. Already an estimated 53,070 fires have scorched 4.3 million acres (1.7 million hectares) of forest land this year, more than double the 10-year average, according to the U.S. Forest Service.
This week, 112 fires were burning in the United States, threatening pristine lands such as the Sequoia trees in California.
The Forest Service, a division of the Department of Agriculture, has spent more than $700 million and is expected to borrow millions of dollars more from other forest activities such as removing flammable underbrush to fight the fires.
The senators said they will propose adding between $900 million and $1.1 billion in fire suppression funds to the new 2003 federal budget.
Environmental groups contend that efforts to thin the forests are merely an attempt to remove older trees that are coveted by large timber companies.
With limited resources to fight fires, green groups contend that homeowners would be better protected if the Forest Service thinned trees near homes and conducted prescribed burns.
"The real issue is we have more homes and communities at risk then we have the resources to handle, so lets do what is best to protect them," said Chris Mehl, a spokesman with the Wilderness Society.
Republicans argue that green groups have blocked in court any plans to remove rampant growth of brush and dead trees, both of which serve as fuel to spread wildfires.
"I would hope (environmental groups) would be willing to join with us and say its about time we realize our past policies have been mistaken," said Sen. Kit Bond, a Missouri Republican.
