Early in June, U.S. Congressman Ryan Zinke, R-Montana, introduced bill HR 2644, the National Forest Collaborative Incentive Act. Greens, especially the sue-crazies, are upset, but I’m not. I’m impressed, and surprised.
The bill would put limits on lawsuits brought against forest management proposals in certain circumstances – those covered by community wildfire plans, those proposed by a resource advisory committee (RAC), or projects that come out of the “collaborative process” authorized by the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003.
Under the bill, when the Forest Service prepares an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) out of any of these three classes, it would prepare only two alternatives: No action, or implement the action.
The “exciting” part is section 202, which would require litigants to post a bond equal to the estimated “reasonable” cost of defending the chosen action in court.
Under current law, eco-plaintiff groups don’t risk a dime of their own. With no fiscal downside, they can file multiple-count, kitchen-sink allegations and if just one count sticks, everything stops until that count is resolved. Furthermore, even in cases where just one of many counts is upheld, the government is obligated to pay the legal costs of the plaintiff.
Under the language in Zinke’s bill, to get a bond refund (with interest, of course), plaintiffs would have to “ultimately prevail” on “all causes of action in all actions brought by the plaintiff challenging the forest management activity.”
Furthermore, “no amounts may be obligated or expended” to cover legal fees “to any plaintiff” against collaborative, RAC or wildfire-plan projects.
Keep in mind, Zinke’s bill won’t require bonding for every lawsuit. Most other action proposals, including Forest Plans, will still be subject to litigation by the usual suspects under current dysfunctioning statue.
There’s a couple other cool provisions, such as a RAC pilot program that would run until September 2020. RACs would be tasked with proposing projects “intended” to accomplish management or “support community development” and “generate receipts.” Projects must “include the sale of timber” and “restore and improve land health and water quality.” Even better, there would be a residency requirement for RAC appointees – who “shall reside within the county or counties” where the RAC has jurisdiction.
Congressman Zinke’s bill was added to HR 2647, the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2015 sponsored by Congressman Bruce Westerman (R-Arkansas), which passed the U.S. House June 9 (262-167) and is now before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Foresty chaired by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kansas).
Westerman’s bigger bill (63 pages) is pretty comprehensive. If passed, it could make a helpful dent in public-lands analysis paralysis – such as a prohibition against “restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, and injunctions pending appeal” of salvage harvests or reforestation after certain major events.
Hmmm … wouldn’t that have been nice to have in law after the Robert/Moose/Wedge/Doris/Brush/Chippy/Skyland fires? Ya think maybe the Glacier Rim fire might have posed less of a scare with a little less standing (and falling) dry firewood? You know, premium stuff that could have gone to a mill and made logs back in 2004-5, but didn’t for some strange reason?
Unfortunately, even with a tidy vote margin in the U.S. House, GovTrack.us only gives Westerman’s HR 2647 a 15 percent chance of passing. As a broken-down timber beast of long standing, I think that’s too optimistic, actually.
First, some swing-state “Republican” senators up for election in 2016 will be hammered by “mainstream” environmental groups if they vote as they should. They don’t “get” the West except in the most-superficial way – and have no reason to.
Second, I have to give President Barack Obama credit – he dances only with them whut brung him. Period. If the Senate passes good forest reforms that haven’t been compromised into pablum, Obama will use his veto.
Nonetheless, I’m grateful to Congressman Zinke and others for finally putting forth proposals that might help to end the 30-years drought of common sense on our public lands. At long last, I smell rain on the way. For all our sakes, I hope it comes in time.