Amid Severe Fire Season, Finger Pointing Over Forest Management Heats Up

In the midst of Montana’s severe fire season, a heated debated has reignited over forest management, with a group of Montana Republican lawmakers arguing that lawsuits halting logging projects are elevating wildfire dangers, while critics counter that GOP lawmakers are at fault for not recognizing climate change and failing to properly fund federal agencies. U.S. Sen. Steve Daines, Rep. Greg Gianforte and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recently toured the Lolo Peak Fire, which has burned nearly 40,000 acres, forced numerous evacuations in the Lolo and Florence areas and cost more than $34 million. “Montanans are saying we are tired of breathing the smoke,” Daines said on the tour, according to Montana Public Radio. “We are tired of seeing these catastrophic wildfires. And either we are going to better manage our forests, or the forests are going to manage us.” Daines blames “extreme environmental groups” that have sued the U.S. Forest Service for halting logging and thinning projects that he says could reduce large amounts of fuel and help prevent wildfires. The comments made by Daines, and similar ones made by Gianforte and Zinke, sparked backlash from others who say the GOP-led Congress has neglected to properly fund the U.S. Forest Service for fire prevention and forest management. Critics also say the GOP, including Montana’s delegation, is failing to recognize the impacts of climate change, an issue that has elicited wavering responses and inaction among a number of Republicans. A collective of conservation groups is challenging a proposed logging project along the east shore of Lindbergh Lake at the headwaters of the Swan River, saying the project would harm sensitive wildlife and damage habitat while also bucking environmental regulations. The lawsuit clams the Forest Service violated federal law by failing to analyze the environmental impacts of the project with an adjacent project, the Glacier Loon, which is located in the same watershed and would be implemented at the same time. The cumulative effects of these projects should be taken into account, the lawsuit says. The suit argues that the two projects would have combined consequences that would negatively affect grizzly bears and lynx and their habitat...more

Cumulative impacts and grizzlies - NEPA and the ESA - are once again the usual suspects.

The R's can take all the tours and give all the speeches they want, but just talking won't change anything.

The concept of cumulative impacts and the need to account for endangered species are not exactly new items in planning. NEPA (PL 91-190) passed in 1969 and the ESA has been on the books since 1966 (P.L. 89-669 ), amended in 1969 (P. L. 91–135), and amended in 1973 (93-205). So after almost 50 years and numerous court cases, why can't the Forest Service implement these acts? The enviros keep suing and suing and winning and winning. And the taxpayers keep paying to reimburse the enviros' attorneys, and for the court costs and the Forest Service "redos".

If the R's don't like the two outcomes - projects delayed and taxpayers raped - then they should amend the laws creating those outcomes.  Giving speeches will change nothing.  And if the public keeps electing those who speak but don't act, then nothing will change. Just get ready for more lawsuits, more devastating fires and more speeches.