Subject: SW BIODIVERSITY ALERT #77
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SOUTHWEST BIODIVERSITY ALERT
#77
5/22/97
SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY
silver
city, tucson, phoenix, san diego
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.
MEDIA: TUCSONAN PROTEST TREE-CUTTING ON CANYON'S NORTH RIM
2.
MEDIA: ENVIRONMENTALISTS SUE IN BID TO PROTECT RIVERS
3. COURT
ORDERS PROTECTION OF GNATCATCHER HABITAT- ANOTHER BLOW
TO
CLINTON ADMIN. USE OF VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS TO CIRCUMVENT
ESA
*** *** ***
***
MEDIA: TUCSONANS PROTEST TREE-CUTTING ON CANYON'S NORTH
RIM
The following article appeared in the Tucson Citizen on May
22,
1997.
Tucsonans protest tree-cutting on Canyon's North Rim by
Rhonda
Bodfield
Protesters from a Tucson-based environmental group
stormed a
ranger station yesterday near the Grand Canyon and
locked
themselves together by the neck to demand the Forest Service halt
a
logging project on the North Rim.
Two people ended up on the roof of
the Kaibab National Forest
ranger station near Fredonia, just south of the
Utah border, and
displayed a banner that stated, "Stop clear-cutting the
Grand
Canyon."
Fiver others locked themselves together at their necks
with bicycle
U- locks- lying on the lobby floor in a pinwheel formation with
heads
toward the center - making it difficult for police to drag them
away.
About 25 other protesters talked to tourists in the parking lot
about a
timber salvage of 3,500 acres. The land which borders Grand
Canyon
National Park, was part of 53,000 acres burned last
summer.
"The environmental laws were bypassed with this timber sale, and
the
people were shut out of the decision making process for the
forest
they love. This is our last recourse," said Michael Robinson,
a
spokesperson for the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity.
The
protest followed a four-day seminar on civil disobedience
sponsored by the
Montana-based Ruckus Society.
Robinson said the decision to protest was
made around a campfire
Tuesday night, with the only debate being whether to
protest in
the forest to stop the logging trucks themselves or whether
to
"occupy" the ranger station where the decisions are made.
Virginia
Gibbons, a public affairs specialist with the North Kaibab
Ranger District,
said officials planned to negotiate with the protesters
because they were
peaceful.
But she said the situation escalated about three hours later
when it
was time to close and the protesters refused to leave.
Gibbons
said the office offered a meeting with regional decision-
makers out of the
Albuquerque office, but said the protesters would
not disperse without
assurance that their concerns would be
addressed.
One of the
protesters on the roof voluntarily descended and was
arrested. The second did
not and had to be taken down from the roof.
Robinson said the police
officer sprayed one of the locked-together
protesters with Lysol. The woman
was given oxygen after having an
allergic reaction, but she refused to leave
to get medical attention.
The Town Marshall's office in Fredonia, near
the Utah border, did not
return calls seeking comment.
Robinson was
disturbed by the law officer's tactics, because he said
the protesters were
passive and non-violent.
The Forest Service contends it is allowing the
dead and dying trees to
be cut in an effort to reseed the area faster, but
the Southwest Center
has appealed two of the largest timber sales.
The
Center said the Forest Service has overestimated the mortality
rates of the
trees, and that the sale will leave an ugly scar and destroy
animal
habitat.
A decision on the appeals has been reached, but Dave Clark,
a
spokesperson for the Kaibab District, refused to release it until
today.
Clark said about 50 people protested the sale in October,
distributing
stickers that said, "Salvage logging sucks" and waiving placards
that
stated, "Don't kill the Kaibab." Protesters left after being
asked
several times, he said.
_____ _____
_____ _____
MEDIA: ENVIRONMENTALISTS SUE IN BID
TO PROTECT RIVERS
The following article appeared in the Silver City
Sun-News on May
22, 1997. A similar A.P. article appeared in the Albuquerque
Journal.
Environmentalists sue in bid to protect
rivers
ALBUQUERQUE - A lawsuit filed Wednesday by an
environmentalist
group alleges three New Mexican national forests
failed to take steps to
protect rivers within forest boundaries.
The Southwest Center for
Biological Diversity says about 300 miles
of river on those forests are
eligible for protection from dam
building, road encroachment, mining and
logging. The Tucson,
Arizona-based group contends the forests failed to
monitor
eligibility of the rivers for federal protection.
It based its
claim on the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. The
lawsuit, filed here in
U.S. District Court names as defendants the
Cibola, Lincoln, and Gila
national forests.
Art Morrison, spokesperson at the U.S. Forest Service's
Southwest
regional office in Albuquerque, said the agency had not received
the
lawsuit, and he couldn't comment on it.
However, Morrison also
said river protection proposals, among
numerous matters, can be submitted
during forest plan revisions.
He said the Cibola is currently undergoing
the revision process, the
Gila forest plans to start the process later this
year and the Lincoln
is scheduled for it in 1998.
Southwest Center
spokesman Kieran Suckling said Congress created
the law to balance dam
building and other national forest construction
projects with recreation and
conservation.
"We're losing recreational opportunities, archeological
sites, clean
water, and endangered species," Suckling said. "There is no
excuse
for ignoring America's most important river protection
law."
However, Morrison said unless Congress designates a stretch of
river
as wild, the protected designation would allow limited
logging,
mining, and other activities.
"The real purpose of the law is
to maintain free-flowing ecology
associated with rivers," he said. "It has
more to do with dams and
recreation, fisheries and riparian
issues."
The Southwest Center identified several New Mexico rivers
and
tributaries for possible inclusion:
* Cibola National Forest: Las
Huertas Creek, Juan Tabo Creek,
Canon Media, Water Canyon, Indian Creek, Lobo
Creek.
* Gila National Forest: Gila River (west, east and middle
forks),
Sapillo Creek, Mogollon Creek, White Water Creek, Trout
Creek.
* Lincoln National Forest: Sacramento River, Rio Penasco,
Agua
Chiquita Creek, Blue Water Creek.
Suckling said the lawsuit seeks
to protect about 150 miles of river in
the Gila National Forest, and about 75
miles in each of the other two.
If protection is recommended, it's not
guaranteed. Morrison said while
the Forest Service can recommend rivers for
federal protection, only
Congress enacts such protection.
Morrison
said a 1993 study of Arizona determined 1,290 miles of
river and stream in
national forests were eligible for possible
protection, but only 700 miles
were recommended for protection.
At present, only 46 miles in Arizona are
actually protected he said.
But Morrison said Congress never funded a
special study for New
Mexico unlike Arizona.
In New Mexico, Morrison
estimated there could be as many as 2,300
miles of river and stream eligible
for possible protection.
Currently there are 35 miles of protected rivers
within New Mexico
national forests, including parts of the Chama, Rio Grande,
east fork
of the Jemez River, and the Pecos River, Morrison
said.
Attorneys from the Taos-based Western Environmental Law
Center
have take the case and won't charge for its services,
Suckling.
"People who do not like more protection won't like this act,"
he said.
"But it won't have a huge or new impact on the way we're
protecting
our forests."
The act's application could have an effect on
cattle grazing on public
lands, Suckling said, based on a similar lawsuit
brought to federal
court in Oregon.
"Up to recently, cattle grazing
was not considered under this law," he
said. "The Oregon case said cattle
could be removed from a river."
Officials from the Gila national forest
said they could not comment
about pending
litigation.
_____
_____ _____ _____
COURT ORDERS
PROTECTION OF GNATCATCHER HABITAT- ANOTHER BLOW TO
CLINTON ADMIN. USE OF
VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS TO CIRCUMVENT ESA
In a 2-1 vote, the 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals has ruled that the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must
designate critical habitat for
the threatened California gnatcatcher. It
rejected an argument by the
Service that the Natural Communities Conservation
Program is a substitute
for formally protected critical habitat under the
ESA. According to the
court:
"The NCCP alternative cannot be
viewed as a functional substitute for
critical habitat designation. CH
designation triggers mandatory
consultation requirements for federal
agency actions involving CH.
The NCCP alternative, in contrast is
purely a voluntary program that
applies only to non-federal
land-use activities. The Service itself
recognized at the time of its
final listing decision that 'no
substantive protection of the coastal
Cali gnatcatcher is currently
provided by city/county enrollments in
the NCCP."
The designation of critical habitat has the potential to alter
the
recently completed San Diego Multi-Species Conservation Plan.
The
lawsuit was brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC). Separate
petitions to list the California gnatcatcher under
the ESA were filed by Dave
Hogan, Desert Rivers Coordinator for the
Southwest Center and by
NRDC.
Kieran
Suckling
ksuckling@sw-center.org
Executive
Director
520.733.1391 phone
Southwest Center for Biological
Diversity 520.733.1404 fax
http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/sw-center
pob 17839, tucson, az 85731