Protect Our Woods logo
Protect Our Woods
Working to preserve our rural heritage and quality of life in
southern Indiana since 1985
Home

Site Map

Contact Us
 

Home

News & ALERTS

Issues

Forum

Archives

Conservationist's Alternative

Klawitter Memorial  

Downloads

Join Us

About Us

Contact Us

Site Map

Links  



ALERT - December 4, 2006:  Protect Our Woods joins allies to submit a response to the Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the German Ridge Restoration Project in Hoosier National Forest

11. Standards and Guidelines

In the German Ridge FEIS and DSFEIS, the Forest Service refers to standards and guidelines for the mitigation of effects of logging and burning on bats, birds and other creatures as well as on soil erosion and other things. See for example, Page 40 of the German Ridge FEIS.

Any meaningful analysis of cumulative effects would have to rely on the Forest Service following guidelines and standards for different management areas in a predictable and reliable way.

However, since the German Ridge project is tiered to the HNF Plan, the predictable and reliable following of guidelines and standards by the Forest Service is not guaranteed.

The HNF Plan states (LRMP p. 3-2):

Guidance includes standards and guidelines.

     •    Standards are shown with an asterisk. These must be implemented to achieve Forest goals and
          objectives. Deviation from a standard requires an amendment to the Forest Plan.

     •    Guidelines (shown without an asterisk) should be implemented in most cases to achieve the goals
          and objectives. Deviation from a guideline does not require a Forest Plan amendment, but the
          rationale must be disclosed in the project decision documents. In some cases a guideline grants
          permission.

We believe this violates NFMA and the NFMA Regulations. Guidelines were legally enforceable under the previous Forest Plan, and now it seems, at least in the mind of the Forest Service’s mind, that they are not. This point was argued by Heartwood on the Mark Twain National Forest and conceded by the Forest Service. There is no explanation for this major change. There should be a supplement to the DSFEIS and to the Hoosier LRMP that explains the likely effects on the environment of them not being enforceable.

With this guidance on guidelines, they are meaningless. If they are discretionary, they do not have to be followed. We note this does not even require the Forest Service to disclose to the public that the guidelines will not be followed until after the Decision is made.

The HNF EIS needs to assume all guidelines will not be followed unless the Plan is changed to once again require them to be followed.  Currently, when the HNF EIS compares Alternative 1 to Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5, it always acts like guidelines have to be followed in all alternatives. It never discloses the environmental consequences of not having to follow the guidelines. It simply contends they will always be followed.

While the HNF EIS discusses alternatives, a comparison of having to follow guidelines and not having to follow them is not being conducted. .

Likewise, the German Ridge DSFEIS at this point does not include an analysis of the effects of the unenforceability of some of the HNF Plan guidelines. The lack of enforceability, and the discretion of the Forest Service in following/not following certain guidelines, may result in different environmental impacts compared to a situation where guidelines have to be followed and are enforceable. The DSFEIS needs to address the effects of this new approach of the HNF Plan towards guidelines in its effects on the German Ridge Project.

Whatever environmental impact analysis or cumulative impact analysis has actually been done for the German Ridge project, cannot be relied on as accurate for the simple reason that the assumed adherence to guidelines and standards is not enforceable. Therefore, environmental impacts, as well as cumulative impact analysis, need to be analyzed again in consideration of the unenforceability of the HNF Plan standards and guidelines.

Click here for Part 12 Deficiencies of Cash Flow Analysis

Protect Our Woods
PO Box 352
Paoli, Indiana 47454


Home  |  News  |  Issues  |  Forum  |  Archives  |  Conservationist's Alternative  |  Klawitter Memorial  
|  Downloads  |  Join Us  |   About Us  |  Contact Us  |  Site Map  |  Links  |