Forest Service
Information on Appeals and Litigation Involving Fuels Reduction Activities Gao ID: GAO-04-52 October 24, 2003The federal fire community's decades old policy of suppressing wildland fires as soon as possible has caused a dangerous increase in vegetation density in our nation's forests. This density increase combined with severe drought over much of the United States has created a significant threat of catastrophic wildfires. In response to this threat, the Forest Service performs activities to reduce the buildup of brush, small trees, and other vegetation on national forest land. With the increased threat of catastrophic wildland fires, there have been concerns about delays in implementing activities to reduce these "forest fuels." Essentially, these concerns focus on the extent to which public appeals and litigation of Forest Service decisions to implement forest fuels reduction activities unnecessarily delay efforts to reduce fuels. The Forest Service does not keep a national database on the number of forest fuels reduction activities that are appealed or litigated. Accordingly, GAO was asked to develop this information for fiscal years 2001 and 2002. Among other things, GAO was asked to determine (1) the number of decisions involving fuels reduction activities and the number of acres affected, (2) the number of decisions that were appealed and/or litigated and the number of acres affected, (3) the outcomes of appealed and/or litigated decisions, and (4) the number of appeals that were processed within prescribed time frames.
In a GAO survey of all national forests, forest managers reported that in fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 818 decisions involved fuels reduction activities covering 4.8 million acres. Of the 818 decisions involving fuels reduction activities, about 24 percent were appealed--affecting 954,000 acres. However, of the 818 decisions, more than half, 486 decisions, could not be appealed because they involved activities with little or no environmental impact. Of the 332 appealable decisions, 194 (about 58 percent) were appealed. There can be multiple appeals per decision. In addition, 25 decisions (3 percent) affecting about 111,000 acres were litigated. For 73 percent of the appealed decisions, the Forest Service allowed the fuels reduction activities to be implemented without changes; 8 percent required some changes before being implemented; and about 19 percent could not be implemented. Of the 25 litigated decisions, 19 have been resolved. About 79 percent of appeals were processed within the prescribed 90-day time frame. Of the remaining 21 percent, the processing times ranged from 91 days to 240 days. The Forest Service, in commenting on a draft of this report, generally agreed with the report's contents. Their specific comments and our evaluation of them are provided in the report.
GAO-04-52, Forest Service: Information on Appeals and Litigation Involving Fuels Reduction Activities
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-52
entitled 'Forest Service: Information on Appeals and Litigation
Involving Fuels Reduction Activities' which was released on October 29,
2003.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
October 2003:
FOREST SERVICE:
Information on Appeals and Litigation Involving Fuels Reduction
Activities:
GAO-04-52:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-52, a report to congressional requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
The federal fire community‘s decades old policy of suppressing
wildland fires as soon as possible has caused a dangerous increase in
vegetation density in our nation‘s forests. This density increase
combined with severe drought over much of the United States has
created a significant threat of catastrophic wildfires. In response to
this threat, the Forest Service performs activities to reduce the
buildup of brush, small trees, and other vegetation on national forest
land. With the increased threat of catastrophic wildland fires, there
have been concerns about delays in implementing activities to reduce
these ’forest fuels.“ Essentially, these concerns focus on the extent
to which public appeals and litigation of Forest Service decisions to
implement forest fuels reduction activities unnecessarily delay
efforts to reduce fuels.
The Forest Service does not keep a national database on the number of
forest fuels reduction activities that are appealed or litigated.
Accordingly, GAO was asked to develop this information for fiscal
years 2001 and 2002. Among other things, GAO was asked to determine
(1) the number of decisions involving fuels reduction activities and
the number of acres affected, (2) the number of decisions that were
appealed and/or litigated and the number of acres affected, (3) the
outcomes of appealed and/or litigated decisions, and (4) the number of
appeals that were processed within prescribed time frames.
What GAO Found:
In a GAO survey of all national forests, forest managers reported the
following:
* In fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 818 decisions involved fuels
reduction activities covering 4.8 million acres.
* Of the 818 decisions involving fuels reduction activities, about 24
percent were appealed”affecting 954,000 acres. However, of the 818
decisions, more than half, 486 decisions, could not be appealed
because they involved activities with little or no environmental
impact. Of the 332 appealable decisions, 194 (about 58 percent) were
appealed. There can be multiple appeals per decision. In addition, 25
decisions (3 percent) affecting about 111,000 acres were litigated.
* For 73 percent of the appealed decisions, the Forest Service allowed
the fuels reduction activities to be implemented without changes; 8
percent required some changes before being implemented; and about 19
percent could not be implemented. Of the 25 litigated decisions, 19
have been resolved.
* About 79 percent of appeals were processed within the prescribed 90-
day time frame. Of the remaining 21 percent, the processing times
ranged from 91 days to 240 days.
The Forest Service, in commenting on a draft of this report, generally
agreed with the report‘s contents. Their specific comments and our
evaluation of them are provided in the report.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-52.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click
on the link above. For more information, contact Barry T. Hill at
(202) 512-9775 or hillbt@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
The Number of Decisions Involving Forest Fuels Reduction Activities and
the Number of Acres Affected:
The Number of Decisions Involving Forest Fuels Reduction Activities
Appealed and Litigated and the Amount of Acreage Affected:
Outcomes of Appealed and Litigated Decisions and the Identities of
Appellants and Plaintiffs:
The Number of Decisions That Were Processed Within Prescribed Time
Frames:
The Types of Fuels Reduction Treatment Methods Identified in the
Decisions, the Acreage Affected, and How Frequently These Decisions
Were Appealed:
Types of Contracts Used in Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities
and How Frequently Decisions Involving the Contract Types Were
Appealed:
Number of Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities in the Wildland-
Urban Interface and Inventoried Roadless Areas and How Frequently the
Decisions Were Appealed:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Decisions and Acres, by Forest Service Region:
Appendix III: Forest Service Appeals and Litigation of Decisions with
Fuels Reduction Activities, by Forest Service Region:
Appendix IV: Appeal Outcomes for Decisions with Fuels Reduction
Activities, by Forest Service Region:
Appendix V: Litigation Outcomes for Decisions with Fuels Reduction
Activities, by Forest Service Region:
Appendix VI: List of Appellants and Litigants for Each Forest Service
Region:
Appellants, by Region:
Litigants, by Region:
Appendix VII: Appeal Processing Time Frames for Decisions with Fuels
Reduction Activities, by Region:
Appendix VIII: Fuels Reduction Methods and Appeals, by Forest Service
Region:
Appendix IX: Types of Contracts Used in Decisions with Fuels Reduction
Activities and How Frequently They Were Appealed, by Region:
Appendix X: Decisions in Wildland-Urban Interface and Inventoried
Roadless Areas:
Appendix XI: Survey Questions to National Forests:
Appendix XII: Comments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture:
Tables:
Table 1: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities and Acreage Affected,
by Decision Type, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 2: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities That Were Appealed
and Acreage Affected, by Decision Type, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 3: Litigated Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities and Acreage
Affected, by Decision Type, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 4: Summary of Possible Decision Outcomes and Factors That Can Lead
to the Outcomes:
Table 5: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities and the Acreage
Affected, by Treatment Methods, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 6: Analysis of Appeal Rates, by Type of Fuels Reduction Treatment
Method, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 7: Analysis of Acreage Affected by Appeals for Each Type of Fuels
Reduction Treatment Method, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 8: Analysis of Appeal Rates by Each Type of Contracting Mechanism,
Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Table 9: Litigation Outcomes, by Forest Service Region, Fiscal Years
2001 and 2002:
Table 10: List of Appellants, by Forest Service Region, Fiscal Years
2001 and 2002:
Table 11: Interest Groups and Private Individuals Appearing as
Litigants, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Figures:
Figure 1: Lands Managed by the Forest Service, by Region:
Figure 2: National Environmental Policy Act Process:
Figure 3: Frequency of Appeal Outcomes and Dispositions:
Figure 4: Forest Service Appeals Process, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Figure 5: Members of Fire Crew Igniting a Prescribed Burn with Drip
Torches:
Figure 6: Prescribed Fire Being Used for Fuels Reduction:
Figure 7: Bulldozer Piling Thinned Trees (Machine Piling):
Figure 8: Use of Chain Saw to Mechanically Thin Trees:
Figure 9: Frequency of Service, Timber Sale, and Stewardship Contracts
Used in Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities, Fiscal Years 2001
and 2002:
Figure 10: Wildland-Urban Interface Area:
Figure 11: Inventoried Roadless Area:
Figure 12: Total Decisions and Acres, by Forest Service Region, Fiscal
Years 2001 and 2002:
Figure 13: Appeal Rates and Litigation, by Forest Service Region, Fiscal
Years 2001 and 2002:
Figure 14: Outcomes of Appeals of Decisions with Fuels Reduction
Activities, by Forest Service Region, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Figure 15: Appeal Processing Time Frames for Decisions with Fuels
Reduction Activities, by Region:
Figure 16: Treatment Methods and Appeals, by Region, Fiscal Years 2001
and 2002:
Figure 17: Types of Contracts Used in Decisions with Fuels Reduction
Activities and How Frequently Decisions Involving the Contract Types
Were Appealed, by Region, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Figure 18: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities in the Wildland-
Urban Interface and Frequency of Appeals, by Region, Fiscal Years 2001
and 2002:
Figure 19: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities in Inventoried
Roadless Areas and Frequency of Appeals, by Region, Fiscal Years 2001
and 2002:
Letter October 24, 2003:
Congressional Requesters:
Human activities--especially the federal government's decades-old
policy of suppressing all wildland fires--have resulted in dangerous
accumulations of brush, small trees, and other vegetation on federal
lands. This vegetation has increasingly provided fuel for large,
intense wildland fires, particularly in the dry, interior western
United States.
The scale and intensity of the fires in the 2000 wildland fire season
made it one of the worst in 50 years. That season capped a decade
characterized by dramatic increases in the number of wildland fires and
the costs of suppressing them. These fires have also posed special
risks to communities in the wildland-urban interface--where human
development meets or intermingles with undeveloped wildland--as well as
to watersheds and other resources, such as threatened and endangered
species, clean water, and clean air.
The centerpiece of the federal response to the growing threat of
wildland fires has been the development of the National Fire Plan. This
plan, jointly developed by the Department of Agriculture and the
Department of the Interior, advocates a new approach to wildland fires
by shifting emphasis from the reactive to the proactive--from
attempting to suppress wildland fires to reducing the buildup of
hazardous vegetation that fuels fires. The plan recognizes that unless
these fuels are reduced, the number of severe wildland fires and the
costs associated with suppressing them will continue to increase.
Implementation of the National Fire Plan began in fiscal year 2001;
full implementation of the plan is expected to be a long-term,
multibillion-dollar effort.
Reducing the buildup of hazardous forest fuels is typically
accomplished through a number of treatment methods. Most often, federal
land managers use controlled fires (prescribed burns) or mechanical
treatments such as chainsaws, chippers, mulchers, and bulldozers. Other
means of reducing fuels buildup include using livestock grazing and
herbicides. On federal lands, these activities are managed by five
agencies--the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Bureau of Land Management, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs--all within
Interior, and the Forest Service within Agriculture.
The first year that the National Fire Plan was in effect, the Congress
substantially increased funding for hazardous forest fuels reduction
for both the Forest Service and Interior agencies--from $117 million in
fiscal year 2000 to $400 million in fiscal year 2001. The Congress
continued this increased funding level for 2002 and 2003. Since the
National Fire Plan began emphasizing the need to reduce forest fuels
buildup and the Congress began to support this initiative with
substantially increased funding, questions have been raised about
whether the agencies' ability to implement forest fuels reduction
activities is being unnecessarily delayed by administrative appeals and
litigation of its land management decisions. Concerns have focused on
the Forest Service, which, among the federal agencies involved in
implementing the National Fire Plan, receives, by far, the largest
portion of the funding--over 50 percent in fiscal years 2001 and 2002.
Further, the scope of the Forest Service fuels reduction needs is much
broader than those of the other federal agencies. Under current rules,
members of the public are permitted to appeal and/or litigate the
implementation of Forest Service decisions within certain prescribed
time frames and under certain circumstances.
In this context, you asked us to develop national data on Forest
Service fuels reduction activities. Specifically, for fiscal years 2001
and 2002, you asked us to determine (1) the number of decisions
involving fuels reduction activities and the number of acres affected;
(2) the number of decisions that were appealed and/or litigated and the
number of acres affected; (3) the outcomes of the appealed and/or
litigated decisions and the identities of the appellants and
plaintiffs; (4) the number of appeals that were processed within the
prescribed time frames; (5) the types of fuels reduction treatment
methods identified in the decisions, the acreage affected, and how
frequently these decisions were appealed; (6) the types of contracts
used for implementing fuels reduction activities and how frequently
decisions, including each type of contract, were appealed; and (7) the
number of decisions involving fuels reduction activities in the
wildland-urban interface and inventoried roadless areas[Footnote 1] and
how frequently these decisions were appealed. In addition to providing
the national data in response to each objective, you also asked us to
provide regional data. This letter provides the national data. The
regional breakdown for the seven objectives is shown in appendixes II
through X.
In conducting our review, we used a Web-based survey of all 155
national forests[Footnote 2]. The survey focused on all Forest Service
decisions with fuels reduction activities that were issued in fiscal
years 2001 and 2002. We obtained a 100 percent response rate from the
national forests. We also tested the accuracy and reliability of the
information provided in the responses and found that the information
was generally reliable. Appendix I provides details on the scope and
methodology of our review.
When we provided you with preliminary information on the results of our
survey on May 14, 2003, we had not yet completed our data reliability
checks.[Footnote 3] Accordingly, we noted in that interim report that
some of the information could change in our final report. In fact, now
that our reliability checks have been completed, some of the
information provided in our interim report has changed slightly.
However, the relationships among the numbers have not materially
changed. In our interim report, we also noted certain other limitations
that still apply. Specifically, the survey information is self-
reported. Accordingly, we were not able to independently ensure that
all decisions were reported. In addition, the Forest Service does not
have a common definition of "fuels reduction activities." As a result,
if the Forest Service documentation explicitly stated that the purpose
of an activity was fuels reduction, we included it; if the
documentation did not include an explicit discussion of fuels reduction
activities, we did not include the decision in our analysis. Finally,
the Forest Service does not have a uniformly applied definition of the
"wildland-urban interface." Consequently, individual forests may have
their own definition or no definition at all, which could result in
inconsistent data.
Results in Brief:
In brief, the national forest managers reported the following:
* In fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 818 Forest Service land management
decisions involved fuels reduction activities. These decisions covered
4.8 million acres. Most decisions involved routine activities that had
little or no environmental impact.
* Of the 818 decisions involving fuels reduction activities, about 24
percent were appealed--affecting over 954,000 acres of fuels
treatments. However, of the 818 decisions, more than half (486
decisions) are excluded from the appeals process because they involved
activities with little or no environmental impact. Of the 332
appealable decisions, 194 were appealed--about 58 percent of the
appealable decisions. A decision can be appealed multiple times. In
addition, 25 decisions (about 3 percent) affecting about 111,000 acres
were litigated.
* For 73 percent of the appealed decisions, the Forest Service allowed
the activities to be implemented without changes; 8 percent were
allowed to be implemented with some changes; and about 19 percent were
not allowed to be implemented. Of the 25 decisions that were litigated,
19 have been resolved and 6 are ongoing. The parties settled 5
decisions, 9 were decided in favor of the plaintiffs, and 5 were
decided in favor of the Forest Service. Most of the appellants and
plaintiffs were interest groups.
* About 79 percent of all appeals were processed within the prescribed
90-day time frame. Of the remaining 21 percent, the processing times
ranged from 91 days to 240 days.
* Of the 4.8 million acres that were treated or planned to be treated,
prescribed burning was used on 3.2 million acres, and mechanical
treatments were to be used on 0.8 million acres. The forest managers
also reported using other methods, mostly firewood removal, on 1
million acres. Because the same acreage can be treated by more than one
method, the sum is greater than the total acreage treated or planned
for treatment. Decisions involving prescribed burning and mechanical
treatment activities were appealed at about the same rate.
* The Forest Service generally used three types of contracts to carry
out fuels reduction activities--service contracts, timber sale
contracts, and stewardship contracts. Service contracts are awarded to
contractors by the Forest Service to perform specific tasks to reduce
forest fuels, such as thinning trees or clearing underbrush. The Forest
Service awards timber sale contracts to individuals or companies to
harvest and remove trees from federal lands under its jurisdiction.
Stewardship contracts are essentially a combination of service and
timber sale contracts aimed at conducting on-the-ground restoration and
enhancement of landscapes with public and private entities. Service
contracts are the most frequent contracting mechanisms used--356 of the
818 decisions. Decisions using timber sale contracts and stewardship
contracts are the most frequently appealed.
* There were 462 decisions involving fuels reduction activities in the
wildland-urban interface. Of these, 169 decisions were appealable and
89 decisions were appealed--53 percent of the appealable decisions and
19 percent of all decisions. Seventy-six decisions involved fuels
reduction activities in inventoried roadless areas. Of these 76
decisions, 41 were appealable and 26 were appealed--63 percent of the
appealable decisions and 34 percent of all decisions.
We received comments from the Forest Service on a draft of this report.
The Forest Service generally agreed with the report's contents. The
agency provided us with clarifying and technical comments that we
incorporated into the report as appropriate. Comments from the Forest
Service are reproduced in appendix XII.
Background:
The 2000 and 2002 wildland fire seasons proved to be two of the worst
in over 50 years. During the 2000 fire season, almost 123,000 fires
burned more than 8.4 million acres and cost the federal government over
$1.3 billion. In 2002, almost 89,000 fires burned about 7 million
acres, an area larger than the states of Maryland and Rhode Island
combined. For decades, the federal wildland fire community pursued a
policy of suppressing all fires as soon as possible. Over the years,
suppressing fire in areas where it naturally occurred has caused an
increase in the volume of brush, small trees, and other vegetation. The
increase in such "forest fuels," combined with a severe drought in much
of the nation over the past few years, has increased the severity of
wildland fires. The result in some instances has been catastrophic. In
2002, the Rodeo-Chediski fire in Arizona, the Hayman fire in Colorado,
and the Biscuit fire in Oregon and California became the largest fires
in those states in more than a century.
To deal with this threat, the administration asked the Forest Service
and Interior to recommend how best to respond and how to reduce the
impacts of such fires in the future. The resulting report and the
associated implementation documents became known as the National Fire
Plan. This blueprint recommended that the Congress substantially
increase funding for several key activities, such as suppressing
wildland fires and reducing the buildup of unwanted hazardous forest
fuels. Of the federal agencies involved with helping to reduce the
threat posed by wildland fires, the Forest Service is by far the most
significant in terms of the broad range of forest activities that it is
responsible for and the public attention it receives. Compared with the
other federal land management agencies in fiscal years 2001 and 2002,
the Forest Service received more than half of all funding provided for
forest fuels reduction activities. For these fiscal years, the Congress
provided the Forest Service with $414 million for reducing hazardous
fuels--the other land management agencies received $381 million
combined.
The Forest Service is responsible for managing over 192 million acres
of public lands--nearly 9 percent of the nation's total surface area
and about 30 percent of all federal lands in the United States. In
carrying out its responsibilities, the Forest Service traditionally has
administered its programs through nine regional offices, 155 national
forests, 20 grasslands, and over 600 ranger districts (each forest has
several districts). Figure 1 shows a map of the national forests and
Forest Service regions.
Figure 1: Lands Managed by the Forest Service, by Region:
[See PDF for image]
Note: The Forest Service does not have a region 7.
[End of figure]
The National Environmental Policy Act requires the Forest Service, and
all other federal agencies, to assess and report on the likely
environmental impacts of any land management activities they propose
that significantly impact environmental quality. For example, certain
proposed Forest Service activities, such as fuels reduction projects,
timber sales, and grazing allotments, may require such environmental
analysis and reporting. More specifically, if a proposed activity is
expected to significantly impact the environment, the Forest Service is
required to prepare an environmental impact statement. If, however, a
proposed activity is unlikely to have a significant effect on the
environment, the Forest Service is not required to prepare an
environmental impact statement--such activities are classified as
categorical exclusions. When the Forest Service is not sure whether an
activity will have a significant impact on the environment, the agency
prepares an intermediate-level analysis called an environmental
assessment. If an environmental assessment determines that the activity
will significantly affect the environment, the Forest Service prepares
an environmental impact statement. (See fig. 2).
Figure 2: National Environmental Policy Act Process:
[See PDF for image]
Note: See U.S. General Accounting Office, Forest Service Decision-
Making: A Framework for Improving Performance, [Hyperlink, http://
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/RCED-97-71] GAO/RCED-97-71 (Washington,
D.C.: April 1997).
[End of figure]
Under certain circumstances, the public has a right to administratively
appeal Forest Service decisions.[Footnote 4] These appeals must be
evaluated by the Forest Service within prescribed time frames and could
result in decisions being reversed and the associated land management
activities being substantially revised or even cancelled. Generally,
the public can appeal decisions associated with environmental impact
statements or environmental assessments. Decisions associated with
categorical exclusions are generally not appealable. Further, as a
general rule, once the administrative appeals process is complete, the
public can litigate any decision, including categorical exclusions, in
federal court.
Controversy has surrounded this issue for some time. On the one hand,
critics have asserted that administrative appeals and litigation are
stopping or unnecessarily slowing the decision-making processes of the
Forest Service and their efforts to reduce forest fuels on federal
lands. They expressed the view that many appeals are "frivolous" and
brought for the purpose of frustrating, rather than improving, land
management actions, and that they greatly increase the costs of
managing the national forests. Supporters of the current process, on
the other hand, have responded that appeals have not been excessive or
unwarranted, that few appeals are frivolous, and that the current
process for handling appeals is adequate. Supporters further assert
that the Congress intended the federal land management process to
include administrative reviews of agency decisions to (1) ensure public
participation in the decision-making process and (2) ensure that agency
managers adequately consider the various factors and policies impacting
the environmental health of the nation's lands.
Recent administrative rule changes and legislative proposals modify or
would modify the current appeals process and exempt certain projects
from the process. In August 2002, the administration announced the
Healthy Forest Initiative, which has been controversial as well; some
regarding it as an effort to reduce unnecessary red tape and needless
delays and others considering it a tool to increase logging activity.
The initiative is intended to help reduce the threat of catastrophic
wildfires and improve the health of the national forests by, among
other things, streamlining the planning and appeals processes. In
particular, recent administrative rule changes modify the appeal
procedures and establish new categorical exclusions for certain fuels
reduction projects. The Congress is also considering legislation to,
among other things, exempt certain fuels reduction activities from the
existing appeal requirements. The bill would require the Secretary of
Agriculture to issue regulations establishing a separate administrative
process to address disputes concerning these projects.
The debate surrounding the Healthy Forest Initiative centers on the
extent and frequency of appeals and litigation of fuels reduction
activities. However, because the Forest Service does not have a
national database to track both its decisions involving forest fuels
reduction activities and the extent to which they were appealed or
litigated, we were asked to develop this information. The information
in this report provides these data for fiscal years 2001 and 2002.
The Number of Decisions Involving Forest Fuels Reduction Activities and
the Number of Acres Affected:
For fiscal years 2001 and 2002, the national forest managers reported
that there were 818 decisions involving forest fuels reduction
activities. These decisions affected almost 4.8 million acres of
national forest land. Most of these decisions were excluded from
detailed environmental impact analysis because the Forest Service
determined that they had little or no significant impact on the land.
Number of Decisions:
Of the 818 decisions involving forest fuels reduction activities, the
forest managers reported that 52 of the decisions (about 6 percent)
were expected to have significant environmental impacts, thus requiring
the preparation of environmental impact statements. About 280 of the
decisions (about 34 percent) initially had the potential for some
environmental impact and required the preparation of environmental
assessments. All of the remaining decisions (486 or about 59 percent)
involved activities that had no or only minor environmental impacts
and, as such, were categorically excluded from documentation in an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
In reporting these data, it is important to emphasize that the Forest
Service does not have a uniform definition of a fuels reduction
activity. The lack of a uniform definition is an important limitation
because it could affect the consistency of the data reported to us by
the national forests in terms of which activities are identified as
fuels reduction projects. Accordingly, if the supporting Forest Service
decision documents explicitly stated that the purpose of the activities
was fuels reduction, we accepted the decision. However, if the decision
documents did not include an explicit discussion of fuels reduction, we
did not accept the decision. Many activities have the practical effect
of reducing forest fuels, but the purpose may be for something other
than fuels reduction. For example, a tree thinning activity may reduce
fuels, but the stated purpose of the project may be to treat an insect
infestation. If so, fuels reduction would not be a designated purpose
of the activity, and the decision was not included in our analysis. In
addition, a commercial timber harvest will reduce fuels by removing
trees, but the stated purpose may be commodity production. If so, the
decision was not included in our analysis. If the commercial timber
sale or thinning activities included a stated purpose of reducing
fuels, the decision was included in our analysis.
Amount of Acreage Affected:
The forest fuels reduction decisions for fiscal years 2001 and 2002
covered almost 4.8 million acres of national forest land. Of the 4.8
million acres, the forest managers reported that 0.3 million acres
(about 7 percent) involved activities that were expected to have
significant environmental impacts, thus requiring the preparation of
environmental impact statements. About 1.5 million acres (about 31
percent) involved activities that initially had the potential for some
environmental impact and required the preparation of environmental
assessments. All of the remaining acreage (3.0 million or about 62
percent) involved activities that had no or only minor environmental
impacts and, as such, were categorically excluded from preparation of a
detailed environmental impact analysis.
There are a few limitations to the acreage data. The 4.8 million acres
does not correspond to the number of acres actually treated in fiscal
years 2001 and 2002. Once a decision is made and documented, there are
many reasons that activities covered by decision may be delayed or not
implemented, including funding availability, personnel availability,
weather conditions, and administrative appeals or litigation. In
addition, the national forests may have submitted more than one
decision with activities on the same area of land. Therefore, the 4.8
million acres may include overlapping acreage. Further, the national
forest managers reported decisions involving personal firewood
activities, including one large project from the Tonto National Forest
in Arizona that could potentially skew the acreage data. Under the
personal firewood program, forest managers designate areas where the
public can obtain a wood cutting permit and gather firewood for
personal use. Forest managers can identify all of the acreage available
for firewood removal under this program as fuels reduction activities.
However, it is possible that the public may collect only firewood that
is easily accessible, such as near roads and trails, rather than
covering the entire designated area. One decision from the Tonto
National Forest in Arizona designates 1 million acres as eligible for
firewood removal. These 1 million acres are 21 percent of the total
acreage reported as treated or planned to be treated for fuels
reduction activities for all national forests. According to Forest
Service officials, it is unlikely that the public will remove fuels
from all 1 million acres.
Table 1 shows the number of decisions with forest fuels reduction
activities, the amount of acreage affected, and their environmental
impact significance.
Table 1: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities and Acreage
Affected, by Decision Type, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Decisions/Acres: Number of decisions; Little or no environmental impact
(categorical exclusions)[A]: 486; Uncertain environmental impact
(environmental assessments)[B]: 280; Significant environmental impact
(environmental impact statements): 52; Total[C]: 818.
Decisions/Acres: Percentage of total decisions; Little or no
environmental impact (categorical exclusions)[A]: 59; Uncertain
environmental impact (environmental assessments)[B]: 34; Significant
environmental impact (environmental impact statements): 6; Total[C]:
99.
Decisions/Acres: Number of acres (in thousands); Little or no
environmental impact (categorical exclusions)[A]: 2,989; Uncertain
environmental impact (environmental assessments)[B]: 1,489;
Significant environmental impact (environmental impact statements):
315; Total[C]: 4,793.
Decisions/Acres: Percentage of total acres; Little or no environmental
impact (categorical exclusions)[A]: 62; Uncertain environmental impact
(environmental assessments)[B]: 31; Significant environmental impact
(environmental impact statements): 7; Total[C]: 100.
Source: GAO data and analysis.
[A] One activity covered by a categorical exclusion treats
approximately 1 million acres under an annual program to allow private
individuals to collect firewood.
[B] Although the forest managers analyzed the proposed activities in an
environmental assessment because the expected environmental impacts
were uncertain or potentially significant, in every case, the result of
the environmental assessment was a determination that the proposed
activities had no significant impact on the environment.
[C] Percentage totals may not add to 100 percent due to rounding.
[End of table]
Appendix II provides a summary of the number of decisions and the
acreage affected for each of the nine Forest Service regions.
The Number of Decisions Involving Forest Fuels Reduction Activities
Appealed and Litigated and the Amount of Acreage Affected:
Of the 818 decisions involving forest fuels reduction activities, 24
percent were appealed. However, more than half were not subject to
appeal because they were categorically excluded from documentation in
an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment. Overall,
of the 818 total decisions, 332 were appealable because they had
environmental impacts that were either uncertain or significant and
required the preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement. Of these 194 (58 percent) were
appealed. These appealed decisions affected about 950,000 acres. In
addition, 25 decisions (about 3 percent of all decisions) were
litigated. The litigated decisions affected about 111,000 acres.
Number of Decisions and Amount of Acreage Appealed:
In fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 486 (59 percent) of all decision
involving fuels reduction activities were not subject to
appeal.[Footnote 5] The remaining 332 decisions involved forest fuels
reduction activities that were generally more controversial because
they were expected to have significant environmental impact or
initially had the potential for significant environmental impacts. Of
the 332 appealable decisions, 194 were appealed affecting over 950,000
acres. Table 2 summarizes the number of decisions appealed by decision
type and the number of acres affected.
Table 2: Decisions with Fuels Reduction Activities That Were Appealed
and Acreage Affected, by Decision Type, Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002:
Decisions/Acres: Number of decisions; Little or no environmental impact
(categorical exclusions)[A]: 486; Uncertain environmental impact
(environmental assessments)[B]: 280; Significant environmental impact
(environmental impact statements): 52; Total for all decisions: 818;
Total for appealable decisions[A]: 332.
Decisions/Acres: Number of appealed decisions; Little or no
environmental impact (categorical exclusions)[A]: 3; Uncertain
environmental impact (environmental assessments)[B]: 146; Significant
environmental impact (environmental impact statements): 48; Total for
all decisions: 197; Total for appealable decisions[A]: 194.
Decisions/Acres: Percentage of decisions appealed; Little or no
environmental impact (categorical exclusions)[A]:
