Newscasts

PNS Daily News - April 24, 20140 


Among the issues featured on our nationwide rundown; new details on FCC proposed plans for net neutrality and your access to the internet fast lane; educators consider alternative methods to increase racial diversity on campus in response to the Supreme Court; and “Earth Week” efforts to boost the number of solar powered homes.

Court Ruling the Final Destination for Roadless Rule Journey?



August 6, 2009

ST. PAUL, Minn. - The national forest roadless rule may have reached the end of its journey. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled the original rule is back in place - tossing out the Bush administration decision to repeal the rule's protections for about 60 million acres nationwide. Minnesota contains about 62,000 acres, mostly in the Superior National Forest.

Jane Danowitz, public lands program director with Pew Environment Group, says backers of the original rule are now looking for an official declaration from the White House.

"The ruling is really a game-changer in what has been at least a decade-old fight to save the nation's last undeveloped forests."

The Obama administration called a "time out" in June on development activity in roadless areas, pending court decisions and further review of the issue. Opponents of the rule still say it unfairly limits forest activities, and there is some question about whether the court's ruling has implications for Minnesota, which is outside the Ninth Circuit.

The rule has generated almost a decade of controversy, with some logging, mining, and motorized recreation interests crying "foul" over development restrictions. Danowitz says the rule has had strong public support from the beginning because it preserves public land for hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding and other recreation.

"Where there hasn't been controversy, and where there has been agreement, is that these national forests need protection."

The Ninth Circuit covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.
Idaho is not affected by the appeals court decision because a state rule already is in place.

Art Hughes, Public News Service - MN
 

More From Public News Service