• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Hate to see this Judge retire

jodywy

Well-known member
http://thewesterner.blogspot.com/
Judge won't reconsider order on 'roadless rule'
A federal judge in Wyoming won't reconsider his nationwide order blocking a Clinton-era ban on road construction in nearly 60 million acres of national forest. U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer on Monday denied a request from the federal government to reconsider his order last August declaring the so-called "roadless rule" invalid nationwide. Brimmer's is the latest in a series of conflicting court decisions that have put the roadless rule's legal status in doubt. Citing the conflicting court opinions, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack last month issued a directive reinstating the Clinton-era roadless rule for one year. The 2001 rule banned road-building and logging in more than 58 million acres of remote national forests, mostly in the West. Vilsack said last month that his interim directive provided clarity to help protect national forests until the Obama administration develops a long-term roadless policy. The directive gave Vilsack sole decision-making authority over all proposed forest management or road construction projects in designated roadless areas in all states except Idaho. Nevertheless, environmental groups on Tuesday promised to quickly pursue their pending appeal of Brimmer's ruling from last August. Brimmer's ruling ordered a permanent injunction against the federal government's roadless rule in response to a lawsuit filed by the state of Wyoming. Brimmer said the rule was enacted in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wilderness Act. "By violating NEPA, the USDA and the Forest Service neglected to consider all of the potentially negative environmental impacts the 2001 roadless rule would impose," Brimmer said in his ruling this week...AP
http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2009/06/17/news/wyoming/35-roadlessrule.txt
 

jodywy

Well-known member
Thought the liberals would be elated to see Judge Brimmer retire. A Judge that rules law over riders rules…. :? :?
 

Tex

Well-known member
jodywy said:
Thought the liberals would be elated to see Judge Brimmer retire. A Judge that rules law over riders rules…. :? :?

Jodywy, I lived in Idaho for a part of my life. One of the things many people from the east don't understand is that in many western states the government owns huge amounts which basically ties the land up as far as productive uses are concerned. Now don't get me wrong, I like that the public owns or controls so much land that we all get basically free.

That benefit does have to be weighed against the economic interests of the people who live there.

One also has to remember that some roads are pretty much permanent because of the low rainfall in places and some roads deteriorate rapidly because of grade. I have seen some of the original wagon track roads that went through Idaho and Nevada, for instance and some washed out after a summer thunderstorm.

I hope there can be a good balance that is struck here. It would be unfortunate to make some of our western states bear all the burden of having public land but few economic benefits that land produces. That is exactly what a flat limit on roads would do.

One also has to remember that roads cost a lot to build. People don't do it just for fun. There have to be reasons. Most of the reasons have centered on logging and mining which provide local jobs. This is where judgment has to be employed.

Tex
 

jodywy

Well-known member
But the road less rule closed some roads, and made a unmandated wilderness area, and under the Wilderness Act Wyoming was protected from new wilderness designation after Teton Park took up so much private and mutable use lands
NEPA policy requires hearings and comment, and consideration of community and culture.
The road less rule thus did not fallow the law.
True there are places there should not be roads but the rule was more a move toward making wilderness areas, and power to protect them as such with out going thru congress. It would shut down mining, timber, gas and oil development, plus hurt grazing (making it harder to maintain improvements).
 
Top