[Geysers] Vista Clearing : The Offical Burden. ( Robert Johnson)

[Robert C. Johnson]

  I've been involved with quite a few Forest Service actions over the years, and I believe its' likely that any actions taken in the park would have to follow the same Federal guidelines.

 

  Officials are required by law to produce formal documents justifying pretty much any action they may take that has to do with the environment.  These documents can take three different forms :

 

  Environmental Impact Statement ( EIA )

 

    This is the Big Kahuna of all reports, and must involve detailed surveys for endangered species, reports from a variety of specialists, and can run hundreds of pages and take hundreds of man-hours to produce.  I used to be able to tell you what set of circumstances and level of impact (both social and environmental) called for the production of an EIA, but (perhaps thankfully) I've forgotten.  Suffice it to say, putting one together is a nightmare, and officials want to do everything in their power to *avoid* having to do an EIA.

 

   Environmental Assessment  ( EA )

 

   This is the most common one, and is what is produced for pretty much all timber sales or construction projects.  New parking lots, vegetative treatments within campgrounds, trail building, things of that nature all require an EA.  Once again, such papers must go through several drafts, require the input of various specialists, and require public notice and public comment at each stage of the process.  Anyone can file an official appeal (I've filed several in my day) and things then grind to a halt because the process requires that they deal with you and your concerns.   EAs also can run hundreds of pages, require specialist's reports, and can take many man-hours to put together. But officials are used to putting them together.  If they want to play it safe, this type of report is likely what would be required for the vista clearing that's being talked about.

 

  Categorical Exclusion  ( CE )

 

   This is the one they love.   Basically it contends that the action has so little environmental or social  impact that it can be excluded from either of the above processes.  Or....that's the position they would be taking, I mean.  Very few actions can cut the mustard and qualify for a CE, but my guess is that this is what they would initially try and go for in the instances of "vista clearing" we are talking about.   None the less, it does involve producing a document and producing justifications that they feel would stand up to an appeal, should any citizen care to express concern.

 

   So whatever action takes place......to be legal it requires a big pile of time and paperwork.  Plus as may have been mentioned before, anything that involves "esthetics" is seen as nebulous enough to give them major heartburn just thinking about it.

 

      The one loophole in all of this is if they can reasonably contend that there is a safety issue.  As a result.....officials just love safety issues and will set them forth at any opportunity.   Boy, that gravel in front of the Inn does not give those lodgepoles a very stable place to get their roots into, and as a result they could fall over at any time......if you follow me. 

 

   And since we, in our expert wisdom, should, or may have realized the potential for danger....but we did nothing.....if they were to fall on someone.....we could be sued.

 

    This is the absolutely gold-plated line of reasoning when it comes to cutting trees.  Innumerably better than anything involving esthetics.

 

Then, of course, there is the : "Send Jim and Ed out there and pray to God that no one notices "  type of action. 

 

   My guess is that this is what was going on with the fellows who were taking the axes to the trees which were mentioned in an earlier post. I suspect that they were not using chainsaws, not because of the fumes, but people would notice them walking with them and possibly ask questions, and because the noise might attract wider attention. Officials can and do get their ass in a serious sling if someone decides to report this kind of stuff to anyone higher up.  To be legal, they should have had a CE, I suspect.

 

   In any case, hopefully some of the above will explain why officials choose to ignore concerns like this.  The beurocratic paperwork, and the time and money involved in producing it, is potentially titanic in relationship to the perceived gains.  Particularly if it involves trees or vegitation and the fuzzy area of esthetics and if there was no organised public call for the action.  

 

    In such instances, where the actions are small and of reasonable benefit, a midnight raid by person's unknown is probably what most officials would pray for.

 

    Robert Johnson, Bend Oregon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20090304/377065a7/attachment.html>