I'm concerned that the vague language “minimize” cutting of old growth forests will not be able to stand up in court if a case is brought. I'm concerned that the word “minimize” will basically allow old growth cutting because it's a subjective word that is at the mercy of the political leanings of the judge
Hi @Kirstin Stiebel-Schoonover. I would just say that Fix Our Forests is clearly aimed at more efficient implementation of fireshed management projects and not at clearcutting forests. And the US Forest Service similarly wants to protect, not clearcut forests, as I think was clear from watching the Senate Agriculture Committee hearing on the bill, with US Forest Service's Acting Associate Chief Chris French as the witness.
I also think if the Trump administration wants to encourage clearcutting, they can find better ways to do so than with Fix Our Forests, which is not a good vehicle for that purpose given its clear language and requirements.
But if you're not comfortable supporting the bill, that's also fine. There are honest disagreements about it, and we're just explaining why CCL staff believe it's a really good bill, but we don't expect everyone to feel the same way.
Search Forums
Forum help
Select a question below
CCL Community Guidelines
- Discuss, ask and share
- Be respectful
- Respect confidentiality
- Protect privacy
CCL Blog Policy Area Categories
- Price on Carbon
- CBAM
- Clean Energy Permitting Reform
- Healthy Forests
- Building Electrification and Efficiency