westerman, b Rep 0 1%
###### Speaker Westerman? Natural Resources chair floated for post.
BY Kelsey Brugger, Emma Dumain | 10/19/2023
omg: http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/bruce-westerman
2017 Score
Lifetime Score
0%
1%
-=-=
MSN --> NO LNX
House makes bipartisan effort to renew Trump's Great American Outdoors Act, restore national parks
Members of Congress are engaged in a bipartisan effort to renew President Donald Trump's legacy "Great American Outdoors Act" to help restore national parks and historic sites, with funding having expired roughly a year ago.
The initial bill, passed and signed into law in 2020, is considered one of the most significant conservation laws in decades and permanently mandated $900 million in annual funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund and created the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund.
Jet Ski Ports For Sale
Jet Ski Ports For Sale
EZ Dock
EZ Dock
·
Sponsored
call to action icon
In total, the law allocated up to $1.9 billion a year through fiscal 2025 to tackle a multi-billion-dollar backlog in deferred maintenance by repairing crumbling roads, outdated water systems, trails, and facilities managed by the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Indian Education, and other American land agencies.
Great American Outdoors Act 250:
The new legislation, introduced by Arkansas GOP Rep. Bruce Westerman, seeks to build on the 2020 legislation by extending the $1.9 billion order for another five years, but it also has new funding mechanisms, such as a foreign visitor fee and lease sales that have already taken place under the "One Big Beautiful Bill."
Westerman recently on the "Just The News, No Noise" TV show pointed out the large bipartisan support for the legislation and said it's now a matter of putting the legislation up for a vote when the House returns after the midterms.
Related video: 3 big changes coming to national parks in 2026 (The Weather Channel Video)
The Weather Channel Video
3 big changes coming to national parks in 2026
2026 brings big changes to America's national parks.
The legislation advanced in June when it was approved by the House Committee on Natural Resources, of which Westerman is the chairman.
"In our country, where we have a hard time agreeing on a lot of things, most people support our national parks," Westerman also said last week. "This is a very popular piece of legislation, something President Trump supports. ... It's something we really need to come together on and do something good for our country here in the 250th year anniversary.
"We're seeing people that are anxious to invest in our parks," he continued. "Not necessarily to make a big return, but to keep these parks in good shape for the future because they're so beloved by so many Americans. It's a great thing to be associated with if you're helping to create more access and to make these experiences better."
The lawmaker said the legislation has over 250 cosponsors and is supported by more than 180 organizations nationwide.
2-1/2 in. FNPT SS Threaded Flange
Zoro.com
·
Sponsored
call to action icon
The website Govtrack.us shows a total 260 cosponsors – 130 Republicans and 131 Democrats including Debbie Dingell, of Michigan; Jared Golden, of Maine, and Jim Costa, of California.
Westerman also emphasized that the legislation stretches beyond the national park system to include 15% of the budget to the United States Forest Service, 5% to U.S. Fish and Wildlife and 5% to the Bureau of Indian Education.
"If you like to hunt on National Wildlife Refuges, these funds help make those experiences better," he said. "They help make hiking and camping experiences in the national forest better ... We know that when people have a positive experience ... you develop these expectations of what your trip's going to be, and you want reality to exceed the expectation.
"Unfortunately, now some of these areas are in such maintenance disarray that the expectation exceeds the actual experience," he continued. "So we want to make sure that going forward, that the expectations that Americans have when they visit their public lands are met by reality that's even greater than the expectation."
Mens Supportive Walking And Running Shoes, Blue / 7
My Game Tables
·
Sponsored
call to action icon
Fixing the infrastructure:
Colorado GOP Rep. Gabe Evans emphasized the legislation's role in addressing the maintenance backlog at national parks and highlighted the parks' role in the American economy and the economy of the local communities surrounding and supporting the parks.
"These are things like visitor centers, or the trailheads, or the restrooms, or something just as simple as making sure that the water fountain works," he said on last week's "Just The News, No Noise. "This piece of legislation that I helped to introduce, what this does is it invests $1.9 billion every year for the next five years, to be able to go and fix that infrastructure, and we know that fixing that infrastructure is incredibly important."
Evans also said the legislation through the infrastructure repairs is expected to bring in $26 billion in revenue for the parks, the majority of which will come from the foreign tourists who visit national parks.
Montana Republican Rep. Troy Downing said one of the top priorities for infrastructure repairs is Yellowstone National Park, where crews are working to construct a bridge over the Yellowstone River.
"I brought my staff very recently, within the last month, down to Yellowstone Park, and we met with the superintendent, and we looked at some of the projects going on," he said. "The bridge they're building over the Yellowstone River right now is an incredible upgrade to what was there before, and is something that's going to be there for you know generations in the future."
Downing said Yellowstone has done roughly 400 projects through the Legacy Restoration Fund and that about $115 million of the $8.7 billion in federal funding through the legislation has gone to Montana.
Yellowstone itself needs $523 million for paved roads, $218 million for housing, $211 million for water systems and $74 million for sewerage, a 2025 federal inventory shows, according to the Daily Montanan.
"The numbers are big, but this investment is going to return dividends from more usage, more people spending money, not just in the parks but in the gateway communities, the states around, and coming to this country to see these jewels that we have," Downing said. "So we need to make sure that they're safe, presentable, and we're dealing with all that deferred maintenance."
Misty Severi is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage.
-=-=
-=-=
seriously? kneejerk autoresponse? "what about...?" scam?
https://theconversation.com/green-baiting-lawmakers-are-accusing-environmentalists-of-doubling-as-foreign-agents-98924
green-baiting
Two congressional committees led by prominent Republicans are looking into whether some U.S. environmental groups are acting on behalf of foreign countries.
As an environmental lawyer and professor with ample international experience, this probe troubles me. I’m concerned that these efforts may mark the start of an attack on free speech that discourages efforts to improve American environmental policies.
The probe
News of this investigation broke when Rep. Rob Bishop, who chairs the House Committee on Natural Resources, and Rep. Bruce Westerman, who leads the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, formally notified the Natural Resources Defense Council of their concerns in early June.
Their letter accused the NRDC, one of the nation’s biggest environmental groups, of criticizing U.S. environmental policies while engaging in “self-censorship” regarding China and the “ruling Chinese Communist Party.” If it is acting as an agent for Chinese interests, the lawmakers said, the group should register as such as required by law.
Their letter also requested information related to the group’s disclosure policies.
Bishop and Westerman sent the Center for Biological Diversity a similar query pertaining to that environmentalist group’s advocacy regarding the U.S. military base in Okinawa, Japan.
And the two Republicans have asked the Pentagon for details and documents regarding the nonprofits suing the military on environmental grounds. The lawmakers acknowledged that these lawsuits may “represent sincere and justified concerns about the effect of federal actions on the environment.” But they also speculated that “foreign adversaries” can perhaps leverage these legal actions to “reduce U.S. defense capabilities.”
Bob Deans, the NRDC’s director of strategic engagement, denied that it was doing a foreign country’s bidding. Instead, “we work on behalf of every American to protect our people against dangerous pollution and leave our children a livable world,” he said.
Rather than just refute the allegations, Center for Biological Diversity Executive Director Kierán Suckling questioned the motives for this investigation. He called on Bishop “to release all communications between himself and industry groups seeking to destroy America’s natural heritage” and suggested that the Utah Republican was attacking conservation groups at the behest of fossil fuel companies.
The probe could spread to other environmental groups, The Hill reported.
Chinese activities
The NRDC is a U.S.-based nonprofit with offices around the globe with an official mission“to ensure the rights of all people to clean air, clean water, and healthy communities.”
The group’s priorities in China are generally the same as what it calls for in America and elsewhere: boosting energy efficiency, cutting coal consumption, and cleaning up ports and waterways.
I am somewhat familiar with the NRDC’s work in China because I traveled there in 2014with two other U.S. environmental lawyers at the NRDC’s request. The group had asked us to meet on an informal basis with Chinese government officials. The purpose of these meetings in Beijng was to explain how the U.S. government handles violations of environmental laws and damages to natural resources. In light of China’s own “war on pollution,” their government was looking for good models and guidance.
The National People’s Congress subsequently amended Chinese environmental laws, incorporating some of the concepts we discussed – all of which were modeled on the U.S. legal system.
There was no hint or suggestion during those meetings that our access to Chinese officials was conditioned on anyone speaking favorably of China’s environmental efforts. Nor was there any reason to expect the NRDC to take any particular political stance back home in the U.S. because of those interactions.
Not surprisingly, the NRDC has complimented China for strengthening its environmental laws. But the NRDC has also criticized China’s staggeringly dirty air and water and its vast greenhouse gas emissions.
At the same time, the NRDC has gone out of its way to oppose the Trump administration’s environmental deregulation policies – like most of the nation’s big green groups.
Okinawa dugongs
The Center for Biological Diversity allegedly inappropriate overseas activities have to do with dugongs. The endangered marine mammals, which resemble manatees, inhabit the waters surrounding the Okinawa Islands.
The center, which opposes U.S. military plans to build a new American airbase in Henoko Bay, has been leading coalitions of U.S. and Japanese environmental groups that have filed lawsuits that have delayed and could prevent the planned airbase construction.
:{Japanese protesters objecting to American military construction in Okinawa are concerned about the potential impact on dugongs, marine mammals that resemble manatees.:(style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background:transparent"):}: :{:(style="margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;vertical-align:baseline;background:transparent"):}:AP Photo/Shizuo Kambayashi
The letters to both green groups call on them to comply with the Foreign Agents Registration Act. That law requires all people and organizations acting in the U.S. on behalf of foreign countries to register with the Justice Department as foreign agents.
Failing to do this is a crime, but prosecutions have been rare since 1966. The case against former Trump presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his aide Rick Gates, who are accused of violating this act, is the biggest in years.
I believe that requiring these groups to register as foreign agents might hamper their work within the U.S. for two reasons. First, policymakers and lawmakers might suspect that they were more interested in working on behalf of foreign governments and interests than protecting the environment. Second, there could be repercussions in terms of these nonprofits’ funding, finances and reputation.
This new GOP strategy can be compared to red-baiting, the practice of persecuting and undermining people by accusing them of being communists, socialists or anarchists, that began in the Cold War. I believe these Republicans are “green-baiting” environmental groups to persecute them. At the same time, they are casting doubt on the real goals of these groups’ advocacy, thereby undermining it.
Ultimately, the most dangerous thing about this probe may have to do with free speech rights. Because praising a foreign country’s environmental record while criticizing U.S. policy is possible without committing treason, the only rationale I can find for this investigation is that it might stifle environmentalists.
antifa arson 9/20
...
On the September 14 edition of Special Report with Bret Baier, correspondent John Roberts provided cover for Trump’s outright denial of climate change by calling it a “glaring difference of opinion” with California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. Later on in the show, Fox News politics editor Chris Stirewalt attempted to pass off Trump’s clear climate denial as a problem for both sides of the political aisle, calling his response an example of “why people hate our system, because when bad things happen, the two parties want to pick and choose what’s to blame. … Instead, what they hear is politicians picking and choosing the things they like from the menu.”
This strategy of partisan obfuscation also has precedent on Fox: During California’s 2019 fire season, Fox & Friends responded to Newsom criticizing Trump’s assault on climate action by bringing a talk show host with no background in science, Mike Slater, to explain why “liberal policies are really to blame” for that year’s massive wildfires in California.
Jumping to blame “forest management” practices for the fires, while generally ignoring the role of climate change
On the September 14 edition of Your World with Neil Cavuto, Cal Fire Assistant Deputy Director Daniel Berlant dropped a rare example of climate truth on Fox:
DANIEL BERLANT (CAL FIRE): In California, there really is no debate that our fire seasons are getting longer. We are seeing larger fires and more explosive fires. In fact, on average right now, our fire season is on average 75 days longer than they were just four decades ago. And so, you know, we can debate all we want, but I can tell you here on the ground, we are seeing fires that are incredibly destructive and incredibly fast moving.
But right after this segment, guest host Sandra Smith interviewedRep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) to downplay climate’s role in the fires and instead promote “sound scientific management” of forests and his Trillion Trees Act, which climate scientists say is absolutely not a way of solving climate change, as the best solutions to worsening wildfires.
...
On the September 13 edition of Fox & Friends Weekend, co-host Jedediah Bila briefly discussed a story accusing a supposed left-wing activist of deliberately setting fires:
JEDEDIAH BILA (CO-HOST): Another man is accused of setting a fire near a Washington highway. A report says he is a regular attendee of defund police rallies in Seattle. That last detail unfolding [is] pretty amazing. It is really incredible to see.
…
WILL CAIN (CO-HOST): These arsonists, as of yet we do not know exactly their ties to any extremist organizations or what their motivations might be, but I think one thing is clear: We now know many of these fires in the West were set intentionally. What does that reveal, Pete? What it reveals is the brazen political monopolization of a tragedy by people like Gov. Gavin Newsom who quickly jumped out and blamed these fires on climate change. There’s no tragedy, there’s no moment too soon to jump and advance your political agenda and pin awful events on your political opponents.
While discussing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s recent climate speech on the September 14 edition of The Ingraham Angle, host Laura Ingraham brought up arson unprompted, asking, “Did Biden anywhere in that speech lay out his solution to prevent any wildfires in the future or the people who are actually intentionally setting them in California, including antifa?”
Her guest, Victor David Hanson, glossed over this comment and directed his ire at Biden for even considering to blame climate change for the fires.
The mentions by Fox hosts are particularly irresponsible and egregious given that several days earlier both The Intercept and The New York Times reported that these claims were unfounded and that local law enforcement were “pleading with the public to stop calling 911 to pass on unfounded rumors that antifascist political activists have intentionally set the blazes.” On social media, the arson rumors have been pushed by a number of far-right accounts and groups including QAnon, which the FBI identifies as a domestic terrorism threat. It is alarming that Fox is undermining law enforcement and continuing to align itself with dangerous factions in spreading such conspiracy theories.
Fox has, and continues to be, the main purveyor of climate denial in the United States. It’s no surprise that their minimization of climate change’s role in this year’s western wildfires is lazy, cheap, and similar to Murdoch-owned Australian media’s role in downplaying climate change from earlier this year; we can expect to see more of it in the future.
...Forest Unlimited
The potentially disastrous Westerman bill, **H.R. 2936** , ironically called the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017, passed the House by a vote of 232 to 188 on November 2, 2017 and is now on its way to the Senate. It was sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), a licensed forester.
So why is this disastrous – surely we all want resilient forests? But no, this is a logging bill, that promotes logging on public lands, guts current environmental protections, undercuts the public process, and is masquerading as a bill to promote forest management and reduce fire risk. It would allow logging in massive units of 10,000-30,000 acres with greatly reduced oversight.
:{
}:
H.R. 2936 has nothing to do with fire protection. “The top fire scientists and an ever-increasing contingent of scientists armed with over a century of fire data and decades of their own research, are spreading the word: Logging far from homes and communities destroys forests and their processes, and does nothing to protect homes or communities.” (Maya Khosla, filmmaker, “Firewise” – interviews with firefighters).
Studies by Alex Syphard, Ph.D. of the Conservation Biology Institute, and others, have shown that while defensible space of up to 100 ft around homes can protect homes and communities from fire, massive fuel reduction and fire suppression efforts further from communities, do not.
“It makes no sense to clear-cut miles away from a community,” says Tim Ingalsbee, director of Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics and Ecology. “We just have to make homes more fire-resistant, and we know how to do that.”
The bill ignores all the new science. It will be discussed in Senate sessions very soon. Please contact your US Senator now, to oppose HR 2936 or any other pro-logging bill that would be promoted as a “compromise.” Sen. Barrasso (R-WY) is working with some others to attempt this. Urge your Senators to strongly oppose any bills that would in any way further weaken environmental laws to promote logging on our federal public land
==
http://origin.lcv.org/article/lcv-launches-244k-ad-campaign-urging-gianforte-stop-assault-public-lands/
...Gianforte Voted To Expand Oil And Gas Drilling On Federal Land. According to a CQ report on a House Natural Resources Committee markup session: “The House Natural Resources Committee advanced Wednesday a Republican-backed effort to expand oil and gas drilling on federal land and offshore after a series of Democratic amendments meant to ensure environmental protections were defeated. Republicans blocked 11 Democratic amendments to the bill (HR 4239), which moved out of committee, 19-14, along party lines.” Gianforte was among the Republicans voting to favorably report the bill. [CQ Committee Coverage, House Natural Resources Markup 11/8/2017]
Greg Gianforte Voted To Undermine Sustainable Forest Management Practices. Representative Bruce Westerman (R-AR) sponsored H.R. 2936, the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017, which would severely undermine sustainable forest management policies and roll back critical environmental safeguards for our nation’s forests. :{H.R. 2936 would allow large-scale timber projects to skip needed environmental reviews and would expand exclusions ideally meant for non-controversial forest management practices. Additionally, H.R. 2936 reduces public participation and input in the environmental review process, waives the ability for citizens to challenge harmful logging projects in court, and limits the rights of citizens to recover attorneys’ fees when they prevail in court. On November 1, the House approved H.R. 2936 by a vote of 232-188. Gianforte voted YES. The pro-environment position was NO. :(style="background-color:#ffffff;"):}:[House Vote #598, 11/1/2017:{; }:LCV 2017 Scorecard:{]}:
...
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00035527
Bruce Westerman
Representative (R - AR)
First Election: 2014
Next Election: 2018
TOP INDUSTRIES 2017 - 2018
Forestry & Forest Products
$83,923
Air Transport
$37,000
TOP CONTRIBUTORS 2017 - 2018
Majority Cmte PAC
$10,000
Lockheed Martin
$7,000
SELECT A CYCLE
2018
SELECT A PROFILE
Campaign Committee Only
Leadership PAC Profile Only
Campaign Committee & Leadership PAC Combined
Campaign Committee Fundraising, 2017 - 2018 LAST REPORT: 09/30/2017
Raised:
$495,303
Spent:
$217,867
Cash on hand:
$621,970
Debts:
$0
Top Contributors, 2017 - 2018
Contributor Total Individuals PACs
Majority Cmte PAC $10,000 $0 $10,000
Lockheed Martin $7,000 $0 $7,000
Transportation Intermediaries Assn $7,000 $0 $7,000
Maxwell Hardwood Flooring $6,300 $6,300 $0
Berkshire Hathaway $6,000 $0 $6,000
Top Industries, 2017 - 2018
Industry Total Individuals PACs
Forestry & Forest Products $83,923 $32,923 $51,000
Air Transport $37,000 $0 $37,000
Building Materials & Equipment $22,400 $12,900 $9,500
Leadership PACs $22,000 $0 $22,000
Health Professionals $21,250 $17,750 $3,500
...
Bruce Westerman is a top recipient from the following industries in the 2017 - 2018 election cycle:
- Forest Products (#2)
Top 20 Industries contributing to Campaign Committee
:{Download .csv file:(style="margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline;box-sizing:inherit"):}:
Top:
20100
20
| Industry | Total | Individuals | PACs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Forestry & Forest Products | $83,923 | $32,923 | $51,000 |
| Air Transport | $37,000 | $0 | $37,000 |
| Building Materials & Equipment | $22,400 | $12,900 | $9,500 |
| Leadership PACs | $22,000 | $0 | $22,000 |
| Health Professionals | $21,250 | $17,750 | $3,500 |
| Oil & Gas | $17,750 | $4,750 | $13,000 |
| Retired | $17,450 | $17,450 | $0 |
| Railroads | $17,000 | $0 | $17,000 |
| Crop Production & Basic Processing | $16,500 | $3,500 | $13,000 |
| Construction Services | $11,500 | $3,000 | $8,500 |
| Lawyers/Law Firms | $10,450 | $7,450 | $3,000 |
| Misc Transport | $10,000 | $0 | $10,000 |
| Commercial Banks | $9,950 | $5,450 | $4,500 |
| Electric Utilities | $9,500 | $0 | $9,500 |
| Agricultural Services/Products | $9,000 | $0 | $9,000 |
| Insurance | $8,250 | $2,250 | $6,000 |
| Retail Sales | $8,000 | $0 | $8,000 |
| General Contractors | $6,500 | $3,000 | $3,500 |
| Food Processing & Sales | $6,400 | $6,400 | $0 |
| Candidate Committees | $6,000 | $0 | $6,000 |
| Lobbyists | $6,000 | $6,000 | $0 |
| Trucking | $6,000 | $0 | $6,000 |
Sector Totals
abcdefhiklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefhiklmnopqrstuvwxyz$0$24K$48K$72K$96K$120KAgribusinessCommunications/ElectronicsConstructionDefenseEnergy & Natural ResourcesFinance, Insurance & Real EstateHealthLawyers & LobbyistsTransportationMisc BusinessLaborIdeological/Single-IssueOtherIndividualsPACs
| Sector | Total | Individuals | PACs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agribusiness | $118,573 | $43,073 | $75,500 |
| Communications/Electronics | $4,500 | $0 | $4,500 |
| Construction | $40,400 | $18,900 | $21,500 |
| Defense | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Energy & Natural Resources | $28,500 | $5,000 | $23,500 |
| Finance, Insurance & Real Estate | $30,600 | $16,600 | $14,000 |
| Health | $23,500 | $20,000 | $3,500 |
| Lawyers & Lobbyists | $16,450 | $13,450 | $3,000 |
| Transportation | $72,500 | $500 | $72,000 |
| Misc Business | $31,150 | $12,650 | $18,500 |
| Labor | $5,000 | $0 | $5,000 |
| Ideological/Single-Issue | $34,700 | $2,700 | $32,000 |
| Other | $20,700 | $20,700 | $0 |
==
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2936
Congress, Trump Exploit Fire Tragedy to Promote Logging Agenda
By Chad Hanson
In the wake of the October 2017 fires in Northern California, which resulted in the loss of so many lives and homes, people affected by the tragedy are grieving and bewildered. Many people are searching for answers about what caused the fires, and a way forward to prevent similar loss of life and property.
It's frustrating, then, to watch Republican leaders in Congress and the Trump administration politicizing the recent tragedy as they push for a sweeping elimination of environmental laws on our national forests and other federal public lands to increase logging and backcountry fire suppression under the guise of community protection. On Nov. 1, the House voted 232-188 to allow for more "salvage logging" and other forms of tree-cutting on federal properties. According to the Associated Press, House Speaker Paul Ryan said the bill was needed to protect the nation's federal forests "from the kind of devastation that California experienced."
Wrong. Even a cursory examination of the science of forest ecology reveals that this plan would not only destroy vast acreages of public forests, but would also put communities at even greater risk.
The fires that occurred last month in California were in low-elevation foothill ecosystems dominated by oak woodlands and grasslands. The fires were far away from any national forests or other federal public lands. Eviscerating environmental laws on federal forestlands would do nothing whatsoever to help the affected communities now or in the future. Instead, what the tens of millions of Americans living in rural communities within fire-adapted ecosystems really need is for federal and state lawmakers to focus on directly protecting homes and lives from wildland fire.
The science is clear on how best to do this, and it involves a few basic steps. Most important, we need to help homeowners make their homes far more fire-safe. This includes measures such as using fire-resistant roofing and siding, installing rain gutter guards (to prevent flaming embers from landing in a dry bed of pine needles and leaves accumulating in rain gutters); using a fine-wire mesh on exterior vents to prevent embers from floating into interior spaces like attics; and replacing wood decks with fire-resistant composites. Homeowners also need assistance to create "defensible space" within 60 to 100 feet around their homes, which involves removing most small trees and shrubs, removing lower limbs on mature trees, and annually raking up and removing small twigs, needles and leaves from the ground. (Clearing vegetation away from larger distances from homes offers no added benefit for home protection, research shows.)
Further, we need to create an infrastructure to notify communities when wildland fires occur so that people and their animals can evacuate quickly. When these steps are properly implemented, the vast majority of homes can and do survive wildland fire, and lives are saved. Finally, we must focus wildland fire suppression and management activities around homes and communities, rather than in backcountry forests.
But the current leadership in Congress appears more interested in trying to find some kind of cover for allowing for increased logging. The recently passed bill—deceptively named the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017, and which was sponsored by one of the biggest recipients of logging-industry campaign contributions in Congress, Bruce Westerman, an Arkansas Republican—would divert more resources away from protecting communities in order to give a windfall to logging corporations.
If the Senate passes this bill and it becomes law, the legislation would eliminate most logging regulations in national forests, and severely curtail public participation in federal forest management decisions, allowing clearcuts thousands of acres in size. What's more, the bill would prohibit federal judges from issuing temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions against illegal logging projects on our public lands, which means giant logging projects would be completed before any judge could enforce existing laws.
Unfortunately, Senate passage could happen. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) has introduced S. 2068, the so-called Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Act. Similar to HR 2936, this bill would exempt massive logging projects from environmental laws and public participation on our national forests, and would prevent federal judges from being able to enforce environmental laws. Barrasso issued a statement misleadingly claiming that this massive rollback of environmental protections was needed to "remove excess brush" from federal forests.
Environmental leaders in Congress, including Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) who is the Ranking Member on the House Natural Resources Committee, are calling HR 2936 a shameful "giveaway" to the logging industry. "The Americans across the West whose homes burned to the ground this year aren't interested in whether Congress can make timber companies a few extra bucks," Grijalva said.
These logging bills represent both an attack on our public lands and an assault on science. Both pieces of legislation are predicated on a political tale known as the "catastrophic wildfire" narrative, which is a classic example of the politics of fear. The basic premise of this narrative is that wildland fires are "destroying" our forests—and that more intensive and widespread logging will "save" them. But the notion that fire "destroys" forests has been refuted by hundreds of scientists and peer-reviewed scientific studies. The current science tells us, for instance, that even in the same forest types, the forests with the fewest environmental protections and the most logging burn more intensely, not less.
There is now a broad consensus among forest scientists that we have considerably less fire in our forests today compared to the natural levels that occurred prior to fire-suppression policies. And, though it may seem counterintuitive, hundreds of scientific studies have concluded that, in the patches where forest fires burn more intensely and kill most of the trees, the resultant "snag forest habitat" is actually some of the best and most important wildlife habitat in the western U.S.—comparable to old-growth forest in terms of native biodiversity and wildlife abundance.
We also need our public forests to help mitigate climate change, since protected forests absorb huge amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it in growing trees and shrubs. In fact, if we protected our national forests from logging, it would be like taking 13 to 24 million cars off the road.
But the Trump administration and its allies in Congress don't really care about science. They live in a world of "alternative facts" in which clearcuts the size of cities are promoted as fire management, ecological restoration, and climate-resilience measures. Their proposed solution to the risks of wildfire is to destroy the forest in order to save it.
Reposted with permission from our media associate SIERRA magazine.
==
https://www.ecowatch.com/national-forests-logging-bill-2505370570.html
no link
National Forests, Endangered Species Under Attack as House Republicans Pass Reckless Logging Bill
In a partisan vote, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation Wednesday that would devastate national forests by gutting endangered species protections and rubber-stamping huge logging projects. The final vote was 232 to 188.
HR 2936, sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), also limits public comment and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. Under the guise of reducing forest fires, the bill would increase unfettered logging across national forests and public lands, increase fire risk and harm forest health, while doing nothing to protect communities.
"This bill is a dangerous bait-and-switch that rewards the timber industry. It puts the health of our forests and wildlife in grave danger and ignores real solutions," said Randi Spivak, public lands program director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "It would green-light the worst forest management practices from decades ago, when reckless logging devastated wildlife, degraded rivers and ruined recreation opportunities for countless Americans."
Westerman's bill is a timber-industry wish list. Among other harmful provisions, it would allow rushed logging projects up to 30,000 acres—46 square miles—without public notice or scientific assessment of potential harm to the environment as required under the National Environmental Policy Act.
The bill would render forest plans meaningless, roll back measures designed to protect old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest, waive protections for waterways and water quality across the national forest system, promote harmful logging in otherwise protected roadless areas and force the Forest Service to ignore potential harm to thousands of imperiled species.
It would also give private landowners with easements on public land full ownership of that land and allow herbicides to be sprayed without reviewing the harm to water, fish and wildlife.
"The knee-jerk response from Republicans is always to gut our environmental laws, no matter what the issue is," said Spivak. "They're willing to sacrifice our wildlife, healthy streams and rivers, and vibrant public lands for private profit."
In the first four months of the 115th Congress, Republicans have introduced more than 80 bills that attack public lands, weaken environmental safeguards on those lands or turn over control to states and local governments. These attacks go against the wishes of most Americans, since the vast majority of voters across political parties support protecting and maintaining forests, national parks, monuments and other public lands and waters.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/house-committee-advances-legislation-attacking-national-forest-protections
key House committee Tuesday approved legislation that would devastate national forests by gutting endangered species protections, limiting public comment and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act and increasing unfettered logging across all national forests and public forests run by the Bureau of Land Management.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), would eliminate the Endangered Species Act’s requirements that the Forest Service ensure logging projects do not harm endangered wildlife and plants. TheHouse Committee on Natural Resources approved the measure along party lines.
“House Republicans are eager to let special interests destroy some of our most vital public lands, wildlife and watersheds,” said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “This bill would return forest management to the dark ages, when reckless logging devastated wildlife, degraded rivers and ruined recreation opportunities for countless Americans.”
The legislation is a timber-industry wish list. Among other harmful provisions, it would allow rushed logging projects up to 30,000 acres or 46 square miles without meaningful public involvement or scientific evaluation of harms. The bill would render forest plans meaningless, roll back protections under the Northwest forest plan designed to protect old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest, and force the Forest Service to ignore potential impacts to thousands of species of concern.
It would also give private landowners with easements over public land full ownership of that land and allow spraying of herbicides without review of harm to water, fish and wildlife.
The committee also voted along party lines to approve a separate bill sponsored by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) that would remove hundreds of acres from Alaska’s Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and strip the refuge’s wilderness designation to allow a road to be built through its heart. The road would destroy wildlife habitat, including fragile wetlands and marshes.
Young’s legislation would remove 206 acres from the Alaskan wildlife refuge in exchange for low-quality state lands. That would permit construction of a road connecting the towns of King Cove and Cold Bay. The Izembek National Wildlife Refuge is home to millions of migrating birds and important habitat for grizzly bears and salmon.
“Bulldozing a road through Izembek would devastate this breathtakingly beautiful wildlife refuge,” Hartl said. “Caribou and emperor geese would no longer have a home in a refuge created nearly 40 years ago to protect them. Wrecking this national treasure would deprive future generations of Americans of a vital piece of their natural heritage.”
In the first four months of the 115th Congress, Republicans have introduced more than 45 bills that attack public lands, weaken environmental safeguards on those lands or turn over control to states and local governments. These attacks come despite the fact that the vast majority of voters across political parties support protecting and maintaining forests, national parks, monuments and other public lands and waters.
...
Two Republican bills currently making their way through Congress should anger any American who cares about the nation's forests. Introduced this summer, both bills are pro-industry and anti-environment, and seek to eliminate public participation in federal decisions about forest management that could negatively impact local communities, ecological health and wildlife.
The first bill, HR 2647, the so-called Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2015, was introduced by Rep. Bruce Westerman of (R-AR-4). It passed the House and is now under consideration in the Senate. The other bill, S 1691, called the National Forest Ecosystem Improvement Act of 2015, was introduced Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY). Hearings held last month by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources were chaired by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who has consistently supported corporate interests over the environment and wildlife.
Both bills would suspend or weaken several federal environmental laws and clear the way for the timber industry to dramatically increase commercial logging across U.S. national forests.
Empowering corporations, disenfranchising citizens
Introduced on June 4, HR 2647 is a pro-industry bill that seeks to streamline the process by which commercial logging projects are managed by the federal government. One of the ways it wants to accomplish this is by limiting public debate on timber projects,effectively excluding the American public from their legal right to generate and review agency actions regarding forest management.HR 2647 appears to favor the rubber-stamping of industrial logging projects in national forests by establishing several worrisome environmental review requirement exclusions from such projects. These exclusions would effectively remove critical opportunities for American voters to participate in governmental decisions regarding how forests are managed by federal executive departments such as the Department of Agriculture and the Interior Department.
Specifically, HR 2647 would:
- Create new categorial exclusions from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
- Introduce provisions to limit opportunities for judicial review by creating attorneys' fee recovery provisions and binding requirements that would effectively impede access to the courts
- Lower the membership of resource advisory committees that advise the Forest Service on land use decisions, from 15 to six, which would significantly reduce the diversity of stakeholders.
Outdoor Alliance, a non-profit coalition that represents the interests of millions of Americans, said that the bill "elevates a single interest — timber — over the diverse activities that take place on national forests, including recreation."
==
Rep. Bruce Westerman - Campaign Finance Summary • OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00035527
1.
Comcast Corp: Summary | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000461
2.
Goldman Sachs: Summary | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000085
1.
2018 Top Donors to Outside Spending Groups | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/summ.php?disp=D
2.
Top Organization Contributors | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
2.
Wal-Mart Stores: Summary | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000367
1.
The Political One Percent of the One Percent in 2014: Mega Donors ...
https://www.opensecrets.org/.../the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent-in-2014-...
1.
Winning vs. Spending | OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/bigspenders.php
2.
National Republican Congressional Cmte to PACs ... - OpenSecrets
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pac2pac.php?cycle=2016&cmte=C00075820
1.
The 265 members of Congress who sold you out to ISPs, and how ...
https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/.../congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale
1.