Post by Woody Williams on Oct 6, 2006 13:58:55 GMT -5
From the TRCP....
On September 20, U.S. District Court Judge Elizabeth Laporte issued a decision rescinding the 2005 Roadless Rule issued by President Bush and reinstating the 2001 Roadless Rule issued by President Clinton. Laporte's ruling was based on an opinion that the National Environmental Policy Act had not been adhered to because the environmental impacts on forests of removing the protection of the 2001 Rule had not been determined.
The 2001 Roadless Rule granted blanket protection to 58.5 million acres in inventoried roadless areas in National Forests and Grasslands in 38 states, whereas the Bush 2005 Roadless Rule replaced the 2001 Rule and allowed state governors to petition for individual state-specific rules to manage inventoried National Forest roadless areas in their state. Unless the Laporte decision is challenged, full protection of 58.5 million acres in inventoried roadless areas will be restored and the state petition process will be thrown out – but it will be challenged and legal wrangling in federal court will continue.
For example, Wyoming officials asked a federal district judge in Cheyenne on Friday, September 22, to revive a 2003 ruling that enjoined the Clinton-era Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The ultimate management fate of unroaded areas in our National Forests and Grasslands remains uncertain. Despite the Laporte ruling, it is expected that in the coming year, the state petition process will go forward in some form. Stakeholders will again be asked to register their opinions regarding roadless area management, just as they have in the processes that formed many of the governors' petitions – some of which have yet to be submitted. TRCP will therefore continue to provide information to you regarding opportunities to express your views on roadless area management.
Over the past year, TRCP has informed hunters and anglers in several western states on avenues within the state petition process under the 2005 Roadless Rule for voicing their opinion on roadless area management to their governor. Many hunters and anglers subsequently sent a letter or e-mail to their governor voicing their preference on roadless area management or showed up for meetings.
Sportsmen have played a strong and important role in the formation of state petitions so far, expressing well-informed opinions derived from their time hunting and fishing in roadless areas. When you receive new Info Grams or Action Grams from TRCP on how to follow up on this and continue making the voice of sportsmen heard on roadless area management, please read them and take action so that hunters and anglers' views are factored into this difficult, ongoing natural resource management debate.
On September 20, U.S. District Court Judge Elizabeth Laporte issued a decision rescinding the 2005 Roadless Rule issued by President Bush and reinstating the 2001 Roadless Rule issued by President Clinton. Laporte's ruling was based on an opinion that the National Environmental Policy Act had not been adhered to because the environmental impacts on forests of removing the protection of the 2001 Rule had not been determined.
The 2001 Roadless Rule granted blanket protection to 58.5 million acres in inventoried roadless areas in National Forests and Grasslands in 38 states, whereas the Bush 2005 Roadless Rule replaced the 2001 Rule and allowed state governors to petition for individual state-specific rules to manage inventoried National Forest roadless areas in their state. Unless the Laporte decision is challenged, full protection of 58.5 million acres in inventoried roadless areas will be restored and the state petition process will be thrown out – but it will be challenged and legal wrangling in federal court will continue.
For example, Wyoming officials asked a federal district judge in Cheyenne on Friday, September 22, to revive a 2003 ruling that enjoined the Clinton-era Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The ultimate management fate of unroaded areas in our National Forests and Grasslands remains uncertain. Despite the Laporte ruling, it is expected that in the coming year, the state petition process will go forward in some form. Stakeholders will again be asked to register their opinions regarding roadless area management, just as they have in the processes that formed many of the governors' petitions – some of which have yet to be submitted. TRCP will therefore continue to provide information to you regarding opportunities to express your views on roadless area management.
Over the past year, TRCP has informed hunters and anglers in several western states on avenues within the state petition process under the 2005 Roadless Rule for voicing their opinion on roadless area management to their governor. Many hunters and anglers subsequently sent a letter or e-mail to their governor voicing their preference on roadless area management or showed up for meetings.
Sportsmen have played a strong and important role in the formation of state petitions so far, expressing well-informed opinions derived from their time hunting and fishing in roadless areas. When you receive new Info Grams or Action Grams from TRCP on how to follow up on this and continue making the voice of sportsmen heard on roadless area management, please read them and take action so that hunters and anglers' views are factored into this difficult, ongoing natural resource management debate.
