In 1994, a predecessor of AFRC successfully challenged the so-called "Gang of Four", the forest scientists that crafted the NW Forest Plan for not complying with FACA. Northeast Oregon Elk Biologist Jack Ward Thomas, who later became Chief of the Forest Service under President Clinton, kept his meetings closed to the public in violation of FACA. During a deposition in the case, Thomas stated that he shredded garbage bags full of the scientists' work product each evening.
Thomas was concerned that preliminary information regarding the Gang of Four's plans for the Northwest's National Forests might impact the nation's financial markets. Although destroying the documents was illegal, Thomas was correct that his forest plan which decimated dozens of rural communities and timber industry firms and workers, did impact financial markets.
AFRC NEWS January 28, 2011
On January 25, AFRC and the Carpenters Industrial Council (CIC), a labor group representing lumber and plywood workers, filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Washington, DC challenging the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) failure to follow the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) in the work being done to revise the 2008 spotted owl recovery plan and critical habitat designation.
FACA requires advisory committees, that are not composed entirely of federal employees, to be “fairly balanced” in their membership; that they conduct their business in open meetings; and that written records be kept and open to public inspection. There are specific procedures that an agency must go through before an advisory committee can begin to meet.
The FWS has been using two groups that AFRC believes should be placed under FACA: a Primary Modeling Team and a Modeling Advisory Group. These groups have been working since 2009.
On November 10, 2010, AFRC and CIC sent a letter to Ken Salazar, Secretary of Interior, asking that FWS remedy the problem and not use the advisory groups in the meantime. At year’s end, AFRC received a response from the FWS Oregon office stating their belief that the groups come under an exemption for “recovery teams” in the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
The Draft Revised Recovery Plan proposes for the first time going outside federal land for habitat to preserve the owl, but presents no scientific basis to believe this is necessary or will result in increased owl numbers. The modeling being done by these advisory groups has not been shared with other groups, including the timber industry and environmental organizations. There has been no review or critique of the modeling results to date, and because of this AFRC believes it is vital that light be shed on how FWS and these groups are going about their work.
The FWS announced that they intend to release the Final Recovery Plan in mid-February. It is uncertain how much focus will be placed on the impact of the barred owl on spotted owl populations and the risks of catastrophic wildfire and windthrow. These two factors were shown to be the greatest threat to the spotted owl in the 2008 recovery plan.
The lawsuit asks the court the block the FWS from citing or using any of the recommendations made by the two advisory committees. /Ann Forest Burns
No comments:
Post a Comment