An Open Letter to all Americans who wish to Contribute to keeping America's Public Lands Administered by the Forest Service ... Wild and Undeveloped.

To: Americans who want to help maintain what's left of America's unspoiled public land

On November 7, 2006, America voted to reject the "corporations first at any cost" policies of President Bush. This includes his past appointments of industry employees to lead government land management agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service. Prior to their appointments, these industry employees lobbied the same agencies they now control, to extract (mine, graze, and log) much more natural resources than could be removed on a sustainable basis. Mark Rey was handpicked by the Bush Administration to oversee the U.S. Forest Service as Undersecretary of Agriculture for Natural Resources & Environment. Rey was sworn in on October 2, 2001. His appointment drew high praise from timber industry officials who hoped to benefit from Rey's history and connections with the industry.

I watched from the inside as Rey's tragic policies unfolded on a daily basis. Forest Service managers still implement them without question. It will take congress time to purge the many unacceptable Bush land management agency appointments. However, for each week that Rey controls Forest Service policy, our public land suffers. For the sake of those unborn Americans who will want to experience unspoiled, undeveloped public land, we cannot wait! Please write letters to your Senators and Representatives asking them to replace Mark Rey sooner in their important actions as they begin the 110th session of congress in January 2007. America needs someone to lead the Forest Service who really cares about maintaining the proper functioning of the forest and grassland ecosystems. If you are a national forest user enjoying the scores of recreational activities available on public land, please write to assure that those opportunities will remain. If you are a current or retired Forest Service employee, identify that you are (or were) employed by the Forest Service in the letter to your elected official. You are in the unique position to know 1) exactly how the public land is being plundered, and 2) the many false justifications the Forest Service uses on the general public to get away with it.

Mark Rey's Past Actions that might be Mentioned in your Letters

• In 1997, Mark Rey stated that clear-cut logging, while "not aesthetically uplifting" is "compatible with rain forest ecology" and that the practice is "relatively comparable" to windstorms. (Sunset Magazine, 11/1997)
• In 1991, Mark Rey stated: "Claims that our forests are being overcut are simply not true. Not one forest in the entire national forest system has come close to meeting the timber harvest levels called for in its forest plan." (Mark Rey, letter to The New York Times, October 23, 1991). In 2000, Mark Rey stated: "Our public lands are now under the protection of sweeping laws, like the Endangered Species Act, enforced by powerful federal agencies. There is no emergency that warrants this unilateral exercise of executive authority." (speech given at UC Berkeley in October 2000)
• In 2004, Mark Rey stated: the "Bush administration is doing its part to safeguard Tongass forest." Rey defended removal of the roadless protection rule from the Tongass calling it a "responsible solution that protects the environment." (February 2, 2004 letter to the Star Tribune)
• In 2000, Mark Rey ignored the legally mandated 45-day public appeals process and unilaterally approved logging in a fragile post-fire area in Montana's Bitterroot National Forest. U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy stopped the logging and rebuked Rey for dodging the public appeals process. The judge called it "an extralegal effort to circumvent the law."
• In 1995, Mark Rey authored the salvage timber sale rider that exempted national forest logging from all environmental laws. (National Journal, 1996)
• In 1991, Rey stated: "With this insane proposal the government has placed the interest of owls above the interest of thousands of logging families and communities." (Wall Street Journal, 1991). This statement was in response to a 1991 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal to designate 11.6 million acres of the Pacific Northwest as prime northern spotted owl habitat. In 1997, Mark Rey participated in writing a version of the National Forest Management Act that would have 1) eliminated citizen oversight of public land timber sales, and 2) made logging levels mandatory, while at the same time making environmental standards simply unenforceable "policies." (National Journal, 1997) Luckily, this tragic version of the NFMA never became law. In 1991, Mark Rey opposed ‘Option 9,' a plan to designate habitat in the Pacific Northwest for the endangered northern spotted owl.
• As a congressional staff member, in 2000 Mark Rey helped develop a plan to stall the Clinton Roadless Initiative until the new Bush Administration could take office, by requiring a congressional oversight committee to investigate how the policy came about. This effectively delayed implementation for at least a year. (Oregonian, 2000) Mark Rey was the primary author of the Bush 2005 planning regulations. Any forest plan completed under these new regulations will be worthless to Forest Service managers. The 2005 regulations eliminate the single most important legal requirement for protecting wildlife in the national forests ... the requirement to maintain viable populations of native species. There would be absolutely no analysis of environmental effects of the Forest Service's proposed forest plans. The Administration argues that there is no need to consider environmental effects of a forest plan because they are too speculative and are better evaluated through site-specific project planning (such as timber sales). This ignores the fact that forest plans make critically important choices about overall management direction and environmental safeguards. The Rey rule ignored the advice of the Committee of Scientists to improve the scientific credibility of the forest planning process. The 2005 rule downplays the importance of ecological sustainability by giving equal consideration to logging and other economic activities. Lastly, the 2005 regulations specifically prohibit the inclusion of mandatory natural resource standards. In forest plans approved and used prior to 2005, these standards served as invaluable sideboards for District Rangers. For example, there were maximum project-generated sediment standards to keep the streams from getting muddy. Now, with no standards the public land is subject to "anything goes" management.
• In December 2006, Mark Rey stated: "The system of laws governing public land management in the United States is disjointed and archaic. Laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act Zero Discharge Standard are absolutist proscriptions. Laws are tools to enable decision makers in doing their job, and these tools are dull and inefficient." (Clark Fork Chronicle, December, 7, 2006)
• Mark Rey thought up the tragic new forest planning rule finalized by the Forest Service on 12/12/06 that categorically excludes the all-important nationwide forest plan revisions from the NEPA. Without an EIS, the public will have little to no opportunity to comment on the new plans. This exemption from NEPA allows the Forest Service to adopt, revise, or amend its forest management plans without considering any alternatives, or the analyzing the environmental consequences of the plan to the forest.

Mark Rey is an intelligent man. He has been using his intelligence to deceive America into allowing him to create hundreds of thousands of corporate industrial tree farms on your public land. Please write your Senator and Representative and politely ask them to have Mark Rey replaced as soon as possible.

Sincerely, Richard Artley, retired Forest Service employee
dartley@connectwireless.us

AWR issues Action Alerts to encourage participation in the public process. Government departments, agencies, and employees must include public comments in their decision making process. Your voice counts!

Contact Information:

• White House
  
  
• House of Representatives
  
  
• Senate