On January 3, the United States Forest Service (USFS) published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking declaring the agency’s intent to revise its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures to increase the efficiency of environmental analysis.
Signed into law in 1970, NEPA requires that federal agencies analyze the environmental effects of proposed actions before making decisions. The USFS’s NEPA process has been the subject of scrutiny over the years because its process is relatively slower than other agencies. NEPA is often abused by special interest groups to impede USFS projects, and the resulting “analysis paralysis” has significantly increased the time it takes the agency to complete environmental assessments and environmental impact statements. The threat of litigation coupled with inefficient NEPA procedures increases the costs and delays the implementation of forest health and wildlife habitat improvement projects across the country.
The USFS also cites the increasing percentage of its annual budget spent on wildlife suppression (16 percent in 1995 compared to more than 50 percent in 2017), the 39 percent reduction in non-fire staff since 1995, and the more than 80 million acres of USFS land in need of restoration as reasons to support a streamlined NEPA process. Forest management and fire-borrowing reforms have been a major priority for hunting conservation groups, and streamlining the USFS’s environmental analysis process would allow the agency to save resources and complete more projects that reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire, increase forest resiliency, and improve habitat for wildlife.
The USFS specifically requests input on the following:
Email revision@fs.fed.us or visit https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public/CommentInput?project=ORMS-1797 to submit comments. Comments will be accepted through February 2, 2018.
Studies conducted at both the state and federal level have found that the number of hunters and trappers have been on a generally declining trend over the past several decades. To increase recruitment, retention, and reactivation (R3) of hunters and trappers, which initiative do you think would have the greatest impact?
