Trump to strip protections from Tongass National Forest, one of the biggest intact rainforests

Hello ATS,

The Trump administration is rolling back laws that protect the Tongass National forest in Alaska from foresting by logging companies. Now these logging companies are free to cut down trees, build roads and infrastructure, and totally ruin this pristine area which is home to plentiful Salmon and other wildlife. It's also a major carbon sink to the North just like the Amazon is a major carbon sink to the south. How anyone can support this is beyond me. SMH!

President Trump will open up more than half of Alaska’s Tongass National Forest to logging and other forms of development, according to a notice posted Wednesday, stripping protections that had safeguarded one of the world’s largest intact temperate rainforests for nearly two decades.

As of Thursday, it will be legal for logging companies to build roads and cut and remove timber throughout more than 9.3 million acres of forest — featuring old-growth stands of red and yellow cedar, Sitka spruce and Western hemlock. The relatively pristine expanse is also home to plentiful salmon runs and imposing fjords. The decision, which will be published in the Federal Register, reverses protections President Bill Clinton put in place in 2001 and is one of the most sweeping public lands rollbacks Trump has enacted.

I think Trump is doing this to boost the economy to recoup losses due the the pandemic. However, I think this is a bad move. Instead of facing the pandemic and doing what he's being told to do by the professionals, he's creating another problem by opening the Tongass forest of Alaska to development because of the near term economic benefits. Sure, it will boost the economy and make a lot of people rich in the short term but long term this will be very bad for the planet even if it only incorporates half of the Tongass. Just my opinion but, honestly, who thinks this is a good idea? What says ATS?

www.washingtonpost.com...

I have read about this but do not trust the opinions of writers right now, too much politics corrupting the interpretation of the changes in policies. I would need to see the laws, environmentalists always blow things out of proportion too, but I am not sure what this means till I get time to read the legislation or someone I trust has read the legislation and interpreted it properly. When I say trust, I mean someone who has and open mind when evaluating it, some here are good at that.

originally posted by: rickymouse
I have read about this but do not trust the opinions of writers right now, too much politics corrupting the interpretation of the changes in policies. I would need to see the laws, environmentalists always blow things out of proportion too, but I am not sure what this means till I get time to read the legislation or someone I trust has read the legislation and interpreted it properly. When I say trust, I mean someone who has and open mind when evaluating it, some here are good at that.

I can respect this, Rickymouse! I value your opinion. We've been on this site for a while now. I do agree that some of it is cyclical headlines but at the same time I keep a watchful eye on developments such as this. I'll check other sources for validity to this topic.

Thanks for your input!

a reply to: lostbook

Welp.

Truth hurts sometimes.

It will never happen.

Neither will Pebble Mine.

I wish that outsiders would leave Alaska alone because they have no idea what is here.

a reply to: rickymouse

Here's the law as posted in the source article:

[3411-15-P]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 294
RIN 0596-AD37
Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation; National Forest System Lands in
Alaska
AGENCY: Forest Service, Agriculture Department (USDA).
ACTION: Final rule and record of decision.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA or Department), is adopting a
final rule to exempt the Tongass National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Area
Conservation Rule (2001 Roadless Rule), which prohibits timber harvest and road
construction/reconstruction with limited exceptions within designated inventoried
roadless areas. In addition, the rule directs an administrative change to the timber
suitability of lands deemed unsuitable, solely due to the application of the 2001 Roadless
Rule, in the 2016 Tongass National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
(Tongass Forest Plan or Forest Plan), Appendix A. The rule does not authorize any
ground-disturbing activities, nor does it increase the overall amount of timber harvested
from the Tongass National Forest.
DATES: This rule is effective [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE
FEDERAL REGISTER].
This document is scheduled to be published in the
Federal Register on 10/29/2020 and available online at
federalregister.gov/d/2020-23984, and on govinfo.gov
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Tu, Interdisciplinary Team
Leader, at 303-275-5156 or [email protected]. Individuals using
telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay
Services at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USDA Forest Service manages
approximately 21.9 million acres of federal lands in Alaska, which are distributed across
two national forests (Tongass and Chugach National Forests). These national forests are
characterized by a diverse array of landscapes, ecosystems, natural resources, and land
use activities.
In January 2001, the USDA promulgated a discretionary rulemaking establishing
prohibitions on timber harvesting and road construction on approximately 58 million
acres of the National Forest System (NFS), including over 14 million acres within
Alaska. The 2001 Roadless Rule has been the subject of litigation for almost two
decades. Initially, the 2001 Roadless Rule was challenged in multiple lawsuits, including
a suit brought by the State of Alaska. Another suit filed by the State of Alaska in 2015 is
still ongoing. Citing various concerns, including damage to the economic and social
fabric of southeast Alaska and compliance with the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act (ANILCA) and Tongass Timber Reform Act (TTRA), the State of
Alaska petitioned the USDA to exempt the Tongass National Forest from the 2001
Roadless Rule.
Having carefully considered the petition, public comments on the proposed rule,
and a wide range of alternative approaches to the 2001 Roadless Rule, the USDA is
granting the State of Alaska’s request to exempt the Tongass National Forest from the
2001 Roadless Rule. The Tongass Forest Plan along with other conservation measures,
will assure protection allowing roadless area values to prevail on the Tongass National
Forest while offering additional flexibility to achieve other multiple-use benefits.
Background
On January 12, 2001, the USDA promulgated the Roadless Area Conservation
Rule (hereafter 2001 Roadless Rule) (66 FR 3244), establishing nationwide prohibitions
on timber harvest, road construction, and road reconstruction within inventoried roadless
areas (IRAs) with certain limited exceptions. The intent of the 2001 Roadless Rule is to
provide lasting protection for IRAs within the NFS in the context of multiple-use land
management. Based on the State of Alaska’s Roadless Rule Petition (described below)
and a review of public comment, the USDA analyzed rulemaking alternatives addressing
whether and how the national prohibitions on timber harvesting, road construction, and
road reconstruction should apply on the Tongass National Forest.
In 2001, the State of Alaska filed a lawsuit challenging the USDA’s promulgation
of the 2001 Roadless Rule and its application in Alaska. State of Alaska v. USDA, A01-
039 CV (JKS) (D. Alaska). The USDA and the State of Alaska reached a settlement in
2003, and the USDA subsequently issued a rule temporarily exempting the Tongass
National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Rule. In 2011, a Federal district court set aside
the Tongass Exemption Rule and reinstated, with clarifying instructions, the 2001
Roadless Rule on the Tongass National Forest. The district court’s ruling was initially
reversed by a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit but was ultimately upheld in a 6-5 en
banc ruling in 2015. Consequently, the 2001 Roadless Rule (as provided for in the district
court’s Judgment) remains in effect in Alaska and the Forest Service continues to apply
the 2001 Roadless Rule to both the Tongass and Chugach National Forests.
Currently there are over 21.9 million acres of NFS lands within the State of
Alaska, of which approximately 14.7 million acres (67%) are designated IRAs as defined
by the 2001 Roadless Rule, including both the Tongass and Chugach National Forests.
The Tongass National Forest is approximately 16.7 million acres of which approximately
9.3 million (55%) acres are designated IRAs. The Alaska Roadless Rule focuses on the
Tongass National Forest only and does not apply to the Chugach National Forest.
State of Alaska Petition
In January 2018, then-Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources for
the State of Alaska, Andrew Mack submitted a petition on behalf of the State of Alaska to
Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). The petition requested USDA consider creation of a state-specific rule to exempt
the Tongass National Forest from the 2001 Roadless Rule and conduct a forest plan
revision for the Tongass National Forest. In June 2018, the Secretary of Agriculture
accepted the petition and agreed to review the State’s concerns on roadless area
management and economic development opportunities in southeast Alaska through a
rulemaking process. The Secretary directed the Forest Service to begin working with
representatives from the State of Alaska concerning a state-specific roadless rule.
However, the Secretary did not commit to the State’s request for a forest plan revision.
On August 2, 2018, the State of Alaska and the USDA Forest Service signed
a memorandum of understanding concerning the development of a state-specific rule. The
Forest Service initiated its environmental analysis process with the publication in the
Federal Register of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) on August 30, 2018 (83 FR 44252).
On September 6, 2018, Governor Walker issued Administrative Order 299 to
establish the Alaska Roadless Rule Citizen Advisory Committee (the committee) to
provide an opportunity for Alaskans to advise the State of Alaska on the future
management of Tongass National Forest roadless areas. The committee was comprised
of 13 members, appointed by Governor Walker, intended to represent a diversity of
perspectives, including Alaska Native tribes and corporations, fishing, timber,
conservation, tourism, utilities, mining, transportation, local government, and the Alaska
Division of Forestry. The committe

a reply to: lostbook

I think that if you own a large piece of property and you do not allow logging then you are allowing mother nature to do her own harvesting.

A thousand years ago Native Americans were smart enough to do controlled burns.

Now we are not smart enough to harvest a lot of that potential fuel for building materials instead?

I'm not sure why you think that a huge forest fire in the future will lower carbon emissions...

And I am quite sure that you have never seen deer on fire.

It is horrifying.

Rrrhhhhheeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

Climate change!

I'd love to see the scenario for when a major solar activity happens, which is really the only thing that can produce a earth changing event.

Can't wait for the WHO to list climate change as a legitimate cause of death......

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: lostbook

Welp.

Truth hurts sometimes.

It will never happen.

Neither will Pebble Mine.

I wish that outsiders would leave Alaska alone because they have no idea what is here.

I agree that it should be left alone. This is an unfortunate development in my opinion.

a reply to: Lumenari

"I'm not sure why you think that a huge forest fire in the future will lower carbon emissions..."

What? I never said that. I never said anything remotely close.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

"Rrrhhhhheeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

Climate change!"

I never said climate change. I said environmental impact(s) which can be seen as a product of climate change so I see why you would go there but I never said "climate change" as a result of this action.

Forests can be harvested, managed and replanted easily. We actually know a lot about conservation believe it or not. Making it sound like the plan is to cut down half the forests with no conservation implemented is dishonest and fear mongering. There will be strict rules and it will be monitored.

It won't be like Afghanistan where they cut down all the trees then wonder what happened to all their forests. Afghanistan use to be covered in forests.

End of the day the population is growing and it needs resources. All those complaining about forests and fossil fuels are not giving up their petroleum products, rare earth metal in their phones and beautiful spruce acoustic guitars. It has to come from somewhere. We can either rape other countries or do it here with some sound conservation practices.

a reply to: Lumenari

Uh, I live here in Alaska.

We don’t take Sh# from nobody.

President or not.

Even Clinton trying to protect the place was suspect by us Alaskans. Why would you think that any “edict” out of Washington is any different??!

You have no idea what Alaska is about.

And I laugh out loud at you!

Trash and harvest all the national parks and forest. The only kind of people that like that kind of stuff are millennial neck bearded man bun types. Ant their ugly girl friends. God gave us dominion over the land and the beasts of the field.
It's in the bible...read it!!

a reply to: lostbook



this was not Trump this has been going on for a while. Alaska in 2018, under then-Gov. Bill Walker, asked the federal government to consider the exemption, a decision supported by current Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy. Members of Alaska’s congressional delegation also have pushed for the exemption. There is also outstanding Litigation trying to lift restrictions from Alaska they want control of the forest. Alaska's government thinks they should be in charge of land management. Wasnt Trump that made these decisions he was simply asked by the governor and Alaskas politicians in congress and senate.

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: Lumenari

Uh, I live here in Alaska.

We don’t take Sh# from nobody.

President or not.

Even Clinton trying to protect the place was suspect by us Alaskans. Why would you think that any “edict” out of Washington is any different??!

You have no idea what Alaska is about.

And I laugh out loud at you!

Maybe you guys should opt out of the USA and join Russia.

a reply to: lostbook

Anything the Washington post says is complete BS