[PCA] SL Trib 9/18/07 article - ongoing discussion re: fire/reseeding issues

[Craig Dremann]

Dear Tony and All,

Thanks for your mention of the Salt Lake Tribune 9/18/07 article on the
BLM reseeding after fires.  I love the quote that:

"Richard Mayol, spokesman for the environmental group Grand Canyon 
Trust, said land mangers should use extreme caution in planting 
nonnative species such as forage kochia and the approved [exotic
perennial invasive] grasses, 'because there could be unintended
consequences.' "  

Could one of the consequences, be that the seeding of exotic invasive
seeds is illegal under NEPA and FLPMA?

When BLM sows exotic perennial invasive seeds onto public lands, without
ever writing the legally required NEPA documents---it might be useful to
point out to that Tribune reporter, that the agency when it sows
millions of pounds of exotic invasive seeds annually onto public lands,
has been just challenging some environmental in the West to file a huge
hairy lawsuit about the exotic invasive seeding.

I write about this problem at
http://www.ecoseeds.com/juicy.gossip.six.html about how sowing exotic
invasive seeds after fires without writing the NEPA documents.

Whenever a government agency sows millions of pounds annually of
persistent exotics that would permanently convert Endangered, Threatened
and sensitive species habitat to exotic plants that only domesticated
grazing animals can utilize, and would permanently interfere with native
ecosystem functions,
would be defined as a "project" under the National Environmental Policy
Act ("NEPA"). 

BLM has violated NEPA, by failing to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement ("EIS") for their Great Basin exotic invasive seeding
projects.

The law requires that the BLM examine and assess the significant
environmental impacts which the exotic invasive seeding projects will
have, individually and cumulatively. NEPA requires that federal agencies
conduct a complete and objective evaluation of beneficial and ADVERSE
environmental impacts resulting from a proposed action, and all
reasonable alternatives. 

Of course, the reasonable alternative to the use of persistant invasive
exotics, or even cultivars of native plants, is to only use local native
seeds.

Additionally, BLM's implementation of the exotic invasive seeding
projects, violates the mandate of the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act ("FLPMA"), that BLM must manage the public lands for multiple use
and sustained yield, and will further violate the applicable land use
plans for the affected BLM lands.

It has been argued in previous court cases, that the Administrative
Procedure Act ("APA"), 5 U.S.C. ß 701 et seq. allows plaintiffs to seek
judicial relief, reversing and remanding BLM's approval for this type of
project. 

In addition, because BLM intends to imminently proceed with
the seeding projects after fires without preparing any NEPA documents,
causing irreparable ecological and other harms to plaintiffs and the
public, plaintiffs could seek immediate injunctive relief preventing
implementation of the projects until the Court has heard the case.

Sincerely,  Craig Dremann, Redwood City, CA (650) 325-7333