Environmental policy under attack

America's public lands are an embodiment of our nation's democracy. Today, the lands and the democracy that governs them are in need of protection.

The intimate relationship of land and democracy is so commonplace that it is frequently overlooked.

Rarely do individual Americans consider that their citizenship grants them partial title to all of the publicly owned land managed by the United States government.

It is no coincidence that the Declaration of Independence describes the founding of America as based on "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God."

Thomas Jefferson saw our rights as a part of our place in Creation. America's founding document makes the government secondary to those natural rights: "To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

The law that secures our God-given rights as applied to the management of the public lands is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

It is NEPA that provides for public notice and participation in the management decisions that determine what happens or doesn't happen on Americans' public lands.

It is under attack by the Bush administration and perhaps soon by their allies in the Congress.

In January of this year the administration finalized new U.S. Forest Service regulations guiding the development of the Resource Management Plans (RMPs) which are required to be completed every 15 years or so.

These new regulations allow Forest Managers to "categorically exclude" RMPs from NEPA and its requirements for public participation.

The new rules also allow managers to "categorically exclude" modifications to existing RMPs.

The federal government is setting the stage for what could become the most radical power grab in the history of the U.S. Forest Service.

In March, Rep. Richard Pombo, chairman of the Resource Committee in the House of Representatives, announced the establishment of a task force to recommend changes to NEPA.

The ostensible objective is to reduce the number of NEPA related lawsuits.

Why would citizens file a lawsuit using a law whose central purpose is to keep the citizens informed of and participating in government decisions affecting our land?

Most likely it would be because the citizens felt the government was trampling on their God-given rights, secured by NEPA.

If Rep. Pombo is truly interested in reducing lawsuits, he would be much better off telling his task force to come up with ways to get the federal government to better comply with the law so citizens wouldn't be forced to resort to lawsuits.

I am a conservationist. I believe that as an American and as a Christian, I am called to be a good steward of the land.

However, whether you agree with me about conservation or not, you should be concerned about the federal government's attempts to cut the people out of public lands decision-making processes.



<i>The writer is a national conservation organizer for the Sierra Club. He recently spoke tothe local Blue River Group chapter about environmental policy. He can be reached at (708) 408-0214.</i>