-Caveat Lector- WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace at any cost is a prelude to war! Idaho sues U.S. Forest Service Feds accused of railroading lockup of 8 million acres ----------------------------------------------------------------------- By Julie Foster © 2000 WorldNetDaily.com Fearing the federal government is trying to severely restrict the use of eight million of its acres, the State of Idaho has sued the U.S. Forest Service to stop the agency from ramming major policy changes down the state's throat without giving officials there time to provide input. After its Freedom of Information Act Request was ignored for nearly three weeks -- the maximum time allotted for such requests is 10 days -- Idaho filed suit demanding more information regarding the federal government's "roadless protection plan," which proposes to set aside 50 million acres of U.S. land to remain roadless, and about which states were given only 60 days to comment. "What we're asking of the federal government in this lawsuit is to open up the process to provide a meaningful dialogue between the states that would have to live with the effects of this proposal. Any significant relationship between the states and the federal government demands nothing less," said Idaho Governor Dirk Kempthorne. Idaho Attorney General Al Lance calls the Forest Service's proposal "completely unacceptable." Adding, "The project is moving so quickly that it is impossible to provide meaningful comments," Lance is demanding a standard extension of 120 days to allow for dissemination of information about the proposal, so that Idahoans can have the chance to formulate their opinions of the project. Lance's frustration began in October when the Forest Service issued a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement that would lead to the end of all multiple use of millions of acres of National Forest land around the country. Approximately eight million of those acres are in Idaho. The Forest Service limited the comment period on what President Clinton calls "one of the largest land preservation efforts in American history" to just 60 days -- an unusually short amount of time, since most comment periods for such government projects range from three to four months. "This announcement was an abrupt departure from the Forest Service's previous efforts to manage land in a collaborative manner with affected state and local governments," Lance said. "Idaho was given no advance notice of the October announcement and was provided no meaningful opportunity to respond." The state's 17-page lawsuit declares that the 60-day comment period was insufficient notice, that the information provided to states about the roadless project was inadequate -- the state has not yet been told which specific acreage will be affected by the project -- and requests an extension to allow state government officials to formulate their response to the project. The Forest Service maintains a website intended to inform the public about its roadless project, which, according to a spokesman for Lance, was still under construction the day the comment period ended. The site says the project will "restrict certain activities, such as road construction and reconstruction in the unroaded portions of inventoried roadless areas." The website also contains the following statement: "We propose to establish procedures and criteria to be used by each forest to determine what activities are consistent with the important values associated with roadless areas of all sizes -- inventoried or not -- that maintain or enhance social or ecological attributes." According to the Forest Service, "[Americans] do not have the resources to take care of our existing 380,000-mile road system. For example, we receive only about 20% of the funding needed to fully maintain roads. The backlog of road reconstruction and maintenance work is about $8.4 billion. Many have questioned if we should build new roads into pristine roadless areas if we can't take care of the road system that already exists. "Building new roads into roadless areas to more easily manage the resources, for example, to thin overstocked stands of trees, is expensive," says the site. "Costs include environmental and engineering analysis as well as the costs of dealing with the controversy including appeals, lawsuits. In addition, roads may contribute to resource degradation. We believe that we should be investing our limited time and resources into projects that have broader support, are less costly, and have fewer environmental impacts than building new roads in roadless areas." Critics, however, believe the project will leave forests neglected. "The Roadless Areas Policy threatens the health and safety of our National Forests by denying access, not only for recreationists, but more importantly for resource management and firefighting," said Trudy Thomas, veteran political commentator and affiliate of Paul-Revere.org. Two-thirds of Idaho's 52 million acres are owned by the federal government, much of which is in trust to help fund the state's public schools. "I'm extremely concerned about what this proposal could mean for Idaho's children," said Kempthorne. "If the Clinton administration has its way, many of our state's public trust lands could be severely devalued -- which directly affects the foundation for school funding in our state. The way to prevent that is for the federal government to put all of the information on the table, so everyone has an opportunity for thorough review and comment. So far, that clearly hasn't happened." Six other state attorneys general have complained to the Forest Service -- those of Arizona, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. Idaho is second to Alaska in terms of acreage affected by the project, which has just short of 12 million acres set aside by the Forest Service. Montana has 5.1 million acres being evaluated and California may see 4.3 million acres of its land permanently sealed to road development. The Forest Service is expected to complete its environmental impact report in the spring of 2000, when it will be submitted for public comment. **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
