Dear Editor,
I attended the recent Open House regarding the Monongahela National Forest’s Draft Deer Creek Environmental Assessment intended to inform the public about this project, only to find myself confounded by maps that were almost indecipherable and filled with technical jargon. Terms like “Replace Aquatic Organism Passage,” “Soil Restoration on Existing Linear Features,” “Riparian Underplantings,” “Targeted Northern Hardwood and Spruce Release,” and “New Administrative Use Two Track” were utterly meaningless to me and I would guess to many other attendees without a background in forestry. I finally (through speaking with very friendly staff) decoded that “New Administrative Use Two Track” simply means… building a road. “Replace Aquatic Organism Passage” means… replacing culverts. “Targeted Northern Hardwood and Spruce Release” means… cutting old growth trees that are taller than other trees to give the spruce trees more light. How are we supposed to engage with and understand the true impacts of these actions when they are shrouded in such opaque language?
The public deserves transparency. We need clear communication about what this project entails and its environmental impacts. The proposed actions (from what I was able to make out) entail a loss of old-growth trees, vital habitats, and crucial carbon sinks. If this proposal proceeds, there will be clear cutting operations, some conducted by helicopter, and the use of herbicides to remove “undesirable” trees. The American Forest Foundation has highlighted that clearcutting and similar practices lead to significant reductions in forest resilience and ecological stability.
The operations proposed in Project #60882, particularly the use of heavy machinery and helicopters, have the potential to generate significant noise pollution. This could disturb local wildlife, including nocturnal species that are particularly sensitive to noise. Additionally, the increased noise levels could negatively affect the quality of life for residents who value the tranquility of our rural environment.
In my opinion, we need more public outreach, including additional Open Houses with accessible language and straightforward explanations. The public comment period should be extended to allow adequate time for informed feedback.
I call upon everyone to really look into this project and understand any impacts on our community. Learn more here: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/mnf/?project= 60882 (link to comment or object is https://cara.fs2c.usda.gov/Public//CommentInput?Project=60882). Project contact information: Thomas Craig, Box 67, Bartow, WV 24920, phone: 304-538-4446, email: Thomas.Craig@usda.gov
Please note that the comment period ends by end of day June 14th, 2024.
Sincerely,
Miriam Weber
Green Bank
Editor;
The regulatory and environmental industrial complexes have become self- licking ice cream cones that continue to grow from year to year in cost, complexity, and time lost.
Don’t get me wrong, some regulation and permitting is required to protect consumers, the environment and prevent chaos.
Unfortunately, we have reached a point where many bureaucracies that have grown up in these areas have become self-serving profit centers for regulators and their contractors. Let’s take the area of environmental reviews as an example. These are done by companies that take an incredible amount of time and at great cost in many cases just recycle previous documents.
During my time working for DOD I had many duties and responsibilities, among those was insuring the review of environmental documents for Operational Security concerns. I and my staff reviewed over 17,000 during a fifteen-year period and I also participated directly in public meetings and other elements of the process, so I got to see how this worked or should I say did not work firsthand.
The man hours that went into the preparation and review of these documents was epic and added little value to protecting the environment. You do not need a six-figure document that takes months to prepare to determine whether a can of hazardous material found on a range needs to be properly disposed of. An example that hits close to home is the time being wasted in bringing high speed internet to our communities on environmental assessments for putting up fiber on existing poles. Determining that this buildout has no significant impact should take one day, the current protracted process is just a waste of money and delays this project with no value added for the community or environment.
Permitting is another area that requires reform. As I stated, some permitting has value but the massive amount of time required for this process is in many cases intentionally inflated and just allows bloated bureaucracies to grow their work force.
Bill Maher noted in one of his dialogues that, living in California, it has taken him several months to get a permit for a shed to house the batteries for his solar power system. Some high-speed fiber projects in our state are stuck in permitting, maybe the governor can light a fire under some of his employees and at the federal level and get this done in a timely fashion.
It is time that the US did a spring cleaning at both the Federal and Local Level of all these bureaucracies and requirements improving efficiency, eliminating feel good requirements and those designed to enrich the industrial complexes that have grown up.
We can do a better job of protecting the environment and save money at the same time if we reform this mess.
Living here we are fortunate that we do not have to deal with many of these unproductive regulatory requirements, let’s keep it that way.
Joe Kaffl
Hillsboro
