Healthy Forest Initiative: Is It Really Healthy?

As people of the twenty-first century, we are all too familiar with the frequent occurrence of wildfires in our nation's forests. Each year millions of acres of woodlands are destroyed in brutal scorches. It has been estimated that 190 million acres of rangelands in the United States are highly susceptible to catastrophic fires (www.doi.gov/initiatives/forest.html.). About a third of these high-risk forests are located in California (www.sfgate.com). These uncontrollable blazes not only consume our beautiful forests but also the wildlife, our homes and often the lives of those who fight the wildfires. The frequency of these devastating fires has been increasing over the years. In fact, in the years 2000 and 2002, it has been reported that the United States has faced its worst two years in fifty years for mass destruction fires (www.doi.gov/initiatives/forest.html.). The increased natural fuels buildup coupled with droughts have been a prevailing factor in contributing to our wildfires and unhealthy forests (www.blm.gov/nhp/news/releases/pages/2004/pr040303_forests.html). Due to the severity of these wildfires, several regulations and guidelines have been implemented to save our forests. In fact, the President himself has devised a plan in order to restore our forests and prevent further destruction of our woodlands.

In August 2002, President Bush launched his revolutionary campaign against wildfires known as the Healthy Forest Initiative (HFI). The President's dynamic plan centers on preventing massive forest fires by thinning the dense undergrowth and brush commonly seen in our national forests. The thinning will occur in priority areas that are in close proximity to homes and watersheds. The Healthy Forest Initiative also aims at developing a more efficient response method to disease and insect infestations that sabotage our forests. Finally, if fully enacted, the Healthy Forest Initiative would provide the loggers with what is known as "goods for services". This will compensate the loggers for the financial burden that will surface as a result of this aggressive thinning (http://www.sierraclub. org/forests /fires/healthyforests initiative.asp). In order to promote the progress of his Healthy Forest Initiative, in 2003 President Bush announced the Healthy Forest Restoration Act. This act took the main issues discussed in the Healthy Forest Initiative a step further. Bush plans to make a collaborative effort with federal, state, tribal, and local officials to protect our woodlands against future infernos. The act also calls for more public participation in reviewing any actions taken in lieu of the Healthy Forest Initiative. Furthermore, Bush wants to restore the land that has already been destroyed by wildfires and help to recover the threatened and endangered species that were affected by the fires (http://www.whitehouse.gov /infocus/ healthyforests. html).

There are many positive's associated with Bush's attempt to revolutionize the way in which we deal with wildfires. According to Bush, one of the main positives to his Healthy Forest Initiative is that thinning would eliminate the excess fuel present in our overcrowded forests. There once was a time when an acre of land contained 25-35 trees. Nowadays, more than 500 trees can be found in just one acre of land (www.doi.gov/initiatives/forest.html.). Having this many trees in a limited space allows for dangerous undergrowth and overcrowding. It has also increased the forest's vulnerability to disease and drought (www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/12/fs0405.html. ). These unhealthy conditions provide fuel for the massive wildfires that have been known to consume our nation's forests. By following through with the President's plan, our overcrowded forests would be "thinned" resulting in the removal of much of the fuel and would in turn minimize the possibility of fierce wildfires. In addition, the thinning project would not include the use of any herbicides, pesticides, or the construction of new roadways. The exclusion of these materials allows for a more "natural" thinning. Also, resorting to thinning as a method of controlling the wildfires opens up many jobs for firefighters (www.doi.gov/initiatives/forest.html.). Furthermore, another plus for President Bush's HFI is his plan for dealing with the financial burden that will follow such restoration/prevention activities. When people hear of the President's new plan for handling the wildfire situation, the first thing that comes to mind is "How will the President pay for such services?" Surprising to many, Bush has a legitimate strategy to pay for the thinning. Bush titles his financial plan "goods for services." Instead of paying loggers to cut down and burn our overcrowded forests, the President has an arrangement that would allow the loggers to keep the wood and sell it as their own. This strategy eliminates increasing taxes on citizens to pay for the HFI. It also helps keep the economy going. Finally, the HFI wants to eliminate the red tape on forest restoration. "Restoration and preventative measures should not be so complex that they hinder the timely action needed to address the environmental crises associated with wildfires (www.usda.gov/news/releases/ 2003/12/fs0405.html.)." Lost time means lost wildlife and forests.

Although Bush's plans for promoting healthy forests seem to have many beneficial effects for the environment, as with any other political issue, there are many people who oppose the plan. One consequence of the HFI is focused around the thinning of the overcrowded, potentially hazardous forests. Aforementioned, Bush plans on thinning out the overcrowded forests that are near homes in order to prevent the possibility of a wildfire damaging our communities. However, "thinning primarily around homes is not a cure all" (www.sfgate.com.). A fiery blaze would not stop burning because there is a "fuel break" or a "small clearing" in the land (www.sfgate.com). The thinning may reduce the possibility of wildfires damaging our homes, but it cannot be a 100% assurance of protection. Also, the thinning would add to the air pollution. All of this "intentional" burning would produce smoke that would travel for miles and contaminate the air. Furthermore, the reduction of natural wildfires works against the well being of the wildlife. There are many species that depend on fires