Spring 2000 Volume 9, Number 1
EPA Continues To Move Ahead With TMDL Rules
by National Woodland Owners Association
Hello! Is anybody home at EPA? One can't help but wonder after the events of recent months. As reported in earlier issues of WOODLAND REPORT and NATIONAL WOODLANDS, EPA is having a tough go selling anyone on the merits of their Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) rules. The public hearings have gone against them in a stunning way ... woodland owners have rallied to the cause in big numbers. But EPNs response in only slightly modifying counter proposals makes one wonder if they are listening of all!
Is EPA just not getting it? What is going on? The short answer is democracy at work. Read that "government and environmentalists battling it out in court," always a poor place to find areas of agreement and streamline procedures. The resulting political process isn't pretty, especially here in Washington, D.C. at 'ground zero".
The roots of the controversy trace to the Clean Water Act and its amendments. Everybody is for clean water, no debate here. Congress assigned administration of the Act to EPA, after exempting agriculture (but not forestry). It was EPA people who developed the silvicultural exemption(404) that we are fighting to protect, not the Congress ... an important fact often overlooked. Why did they change their mind? The short answer is: because the courts told them to.
In a series of important cases brought by the environmental community in their effort to assure that the U.S. has clean, swimmable water the government failed to convince the courts that they were doing enough. In short, the courts said 'we are ordering you to do better.' With billions of dollars already being spent to clean point sources (storm drains, sewer plants, drainage fields, etc.), EPA turned to non-point sources, fields, forests, and roads. With agriculture off-limits (the exemption), roads and woodlands took the hit. The result TMDLS. Whether this was EPA’s best shot or not, we probably will never know, but the resulting controversy has certainly brought everyone's attention to the problem. The forest industry quickly grasped that EPA:s proposed solution - however well intentioned - would not work. Working with a nationwide network (including NWOA and many of our state affiliates) they mobilized thousands of landowners to nine forums and public hearings in the south. Fourteen more are planned including other regions.
Initial readings of the results suggest that EPA didn't fully understand the success of voluntary and mandatory Best Management Practices (BMPS) in place nationwide. There is little evidence that forestry operations are a significant source of water pollution. Unfortunately people still think that logging, especially clearcutting, makes for dirty water. That may be the reason EPA stands by their proposed rules.
It is widely believed in Congress and elsewhere that EPA is exceeding their statutory authority, but until somebody comes up with a better solution the debate continues. The Congress has responded with several drafts of legislation, at least one of which has a chance passing. Another positive sign is that 36 Senators have requested EPA to delay implementation until they can enact new legislation. What can you do? WRITE!! Postcard Packets are available by calling NWOA 1-800-GRO-TREE