the key issue here is independent science in good forest management. President Reagan used a committee of scientists, independent scientists, to promulgate his regulations. President Clinton did the same thing, through a 3-year period, to develop them. When the Bush administration got in, they swept aside that 3 years of effort, did not use any independent scientists, had a 2-day workshop with internal scientists, and that is it. And that is what the key here is, is they do not care about the science. They have an agenda and they are moving it down the road. Forest planning can be preventive in terms of fire, can be preventive if you let it work. But, as we know, many of these forest plans where speakers have talked, where they have been delayed, it has been because Congress has put in amendments delaying forest planning. So you cannot attribute all of that delay necessarily to the Executive Branch. But the key here today is President Bush, through his administration and his Forest Service chief, now seeking to promote forest planning rules without independent scientific review.
Tom Udall: “the key issue here is independent science in good forest management. President Reagan used a committee of scientists…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of independent science in forest management during a debate.
Share
More from Tom Udall
I thank Senator Bennet once again for the good work he is doing there. Just a couple of other words in closing, talking about the career employee scientists, the people who work at the BLM. The men and women who work at the BLM are public…
I thank you for the recognition, and I thank Senator Inhofe. I talked to him. I would ask unanimous consent, as Senator Paul did, to complete my remarks and unanimous consent to complete my remarks right here on the floor before we have…
I support a peaceful and prosperous Indo-Pacific region where democracies can thrive, with strong institutions, responsible actors, and close security, economic, and people-to-people ties.





