[MPWG] US forest service public comment process

[Cafesombra at aol.com]

>From Forest Watch (in Vermont USA):  www.forestwatch.org

FOREST SERVICE DECIDES MASS COMMENTS ARE OKAY
 
The U.S. Forest Service has abandoned a 2002 proposal to not accept chain 
emails and other forms of mass mailing in its public comment process. Draft 
changes to planning rules for the National Forest Management Act had included a 
proposal to accept only "original substantive comments." Environmentalists and 
public advocacy groups had denounced the plan, which would have allowed the 
Forest Service to ignore form letters, emails sent from websites and other 
"duplicative" types of communications. The final planning rules, expected in the next 
few weeks, will not include this provision. 
 
The Forest Service has repeatedly asserted that the public comment collection 
process for forest plans and other management decisions is not a public 
"vote." A recent analysis of public comments submitted on the Bush plan to withdraw 
roadless area protection for Alaska's national forests confirms that the 
agency gives little consideration to the preponderance of public opinion. 
 
The Heritage Forests Campaign examined 250,000 comments on the Forest 
Service's plan to do away with the Clinton Administration's roadless protection 
policy as it applies to the Tongass and Chugach national forests. About 99 percent 
of comments opposed the proposal. However, the vast majority of comments were 
submitted as form letters. 
 
The Forest Service retreat from its proposal to change the comment process is 
a victory for the public, but largely symbolic without greater commitment on 
the part of the agency to base agency decisions on public interest, science, 
and conservation priorities. Obtaining this deeper institutional change is the 
long-term work of conservation groups, citizen advocates, and all those 
committed to a more democratic and sustainable society. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20040109/4778dcd8/attachment.html>