Background
President Bush has endorsed wildfire legislation that passed the House of Representatives on May 20, 2003 (HR 1904), and the Senate is expected to consider wildfire legislation this fall.

Fails to Focus on Community Protection
The Administration's bill falls far short of what should be the primary goal of any wildfire legislation - protecting communities and keeping people safe from the risks of wildfire. The Bush-backed measure does not provide the funding needed to protect communities and instead uses the fear of fire to gut bedrock environmental laws and tip the scales of justice in our courts. The bill also focuses solely on federal lands, but studies show that 85 percent of the land surrounding communities most at risk from wildfire is private, state, or tribal - not federal.

Cuts the Heart Out of National Environmental Safeguards
The Administration bill gives the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management the authority -- when developing logging projects -- to sharply curtail environmental safeguards by eliminating the development and review of alternative actions that would be less harmful to forests. The consideration of such alternatives is currently required under the National Environmental Policy Act. Federal courts have called this consideration of alternatives the very "heart of NEPA."

Cuts the Public Out of the Process
The Administration's bill abolishes citizens' statutory right to appeal Forest Service hazardous fuels projects provided by the Appeals Reform Act. It would exempt all projects from the existing public comment and administrative appeals process and require the Forest Service to develop another, undefined process for resolving public objections. It also sets extremely short deadlines for the public to file legal challenges and places new restrictions on how public comments are submitted.

Undermines America's Independent Judiciary
The House bill tries to place these forest projects ahead of any other civil or criminal case before the courts. Courts would be required to renew preliminary injunctions of logging projects every 45 days and courts would be pressured to issue a final ruling on a case within 100 days. The bill is based on false assumptions about the impact of environmental reviews and legal appeals of fuel reduction projects. Three independent studies (two from the GAO and a Northern Arizona University report) have concluded that the vast majority of fuel reduction projects proceed in a timely manner, even when questions are raised by citizens, industry, recreation groups, conservationists or other interested parties.

Tips the Scales of Justice
The Administration's bill tips the scales of justice in favor of logging interests and the Forest Service by attempting to instruct judges to give special weight to the agency's views, potentially even after a project has been found in violation of the law. Analysts call this an astounding and possibly unprecedented change in American legal standards.

Provides More Subsidies For the Timber Industry
In FY 2002, the Forest Service spent $362 million to subsidize commercial logging on National Forests. This bill would authorize an additional $125 million in taxpayer subsidies.