The National Forest Protection and Restoration Act (HR 1396)

One-hundred and one years ago, in 1897, Congress made a very unwise decision. A rider was attached to the Interior Appropriations bill, opening national forests to timber sales for the first time. Before that they were protected. The result has been habitat destruction, agency corruption and lawlessness, floods, mudslides and enormous losses to taxpayers.

In 1990, National Geographic estimated that over 95% of America's old-growth forests have been cut down and hauled to the mill. More recent reports estimate that 97% has been logged. If we do not act now, soon our children and grandchildren may have little or no opportunity to visit these pristine areas. Furthermore, according to an independent study, later deemed accurate by the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. Forest Service spent $791 million in taxpayer dollars to subsidize timber companies in their efforts to destroy our natural heritage. Not one dollar was returned to the treasury.

In an effort to stop this environmentally destructive and fiscally irresponsible practice, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Congressman Leach (R-IA) introduced the National Forest Protection and Restoration Act (HR 2789). This important legislation would stop logging on the national forests, and redirect these subsidies into worker retraining, revenue-sharing payments for counties, and grants for development of tree-free paper and construction alternatives.

The National Forest Protection and Restoration Act makes perfect economic, as well as environmental sense. By no longer subsidizing the logging industry, we could provide more than $25,000 in worker retraining for each public lands timber employee and still have more than $200 million left over to reduce the federal deficit in the first year alone. By stopping logging in national forests, these areas could be used for recreational use. The United States Forest Service reported that the recreational industry provides 30 times as many jobs and 30 times as much income as logging. So, converting these areas to recreational use would not only preserve them, but would contribute to the growing popularity of camping, hiking, hunting and fishing.