FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jacqueline Vaughn, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Northern Arizona University, (928) 523-8224, Jacqueline.Vaughn@nau.edu.

FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA - With federal wildfire legislation that would severely restrict and harm the public’s ability to participate in decisions concerning America's public lands expected to be considered by the full House Resources Committee on April 30, new reports from researchers at Northern Arizona University shine some much-needed light on the administrative appeals process.

The reports by the Ecological Restoration Institute at Northern Arizona University are designed to systematically document and analyze the outcomes and impacts of administrative appeals from January 1, 1997 to September, 30, 2002 on the formulation and implementation of fuel reduction/ecological restoration projects. Such an analysis has not been previously conducted, despite the political attention appeals are receiving from policymakers, the public and the media. The findings include:

• For such a politically contentious issue, there has been no comprehensive and systematic analysis of the outcomes of the appeals process, even though selected anecdotal evidence is being abundantly cited and used as the basis for policy changes.
  
  
• In order to answer basic questions such as: How many appeals are processed by the Forest Service annually, who the appellants are, and type of projects being appealed the researchers found it necessary to construct their own database of Forest Service appeals.
  
  
• Appeals are on a significant downward trend since peaking in 1998.
  
  
• Overall the appeals process has been used by a broad range of interests from grazing permittees, timber companies, concerned local residents, and conservation groups.
  
  
• Roughly one-third of appeals are filed by ordinary citizens participating in the democratic process.
  
  
• Researchers were unable to determine if appeals cause project delay since 62% of the appeals do not include an original filing date.
  
  
• The Administration and members of Congress are using the "repetition of unconfirmed data" to "demonize environmental groups" and "attach a desired solution to a predetermined problem."

"People have a difficult time believing and understanding that this information has not been compiled before now. One would assume the Forest Service would have complete records on appeals and litigation. They don't. There are bits and pieces at the local, regional, and national level," said Jacqueline Vaughn, a political science professor at Northern Arizona University. "There is clearly a need for more analysis and evaluation of appeals and their role in Forest Service decision making. We hope this project will better inform public discussion about the future of appeals."

CLICK FOR PDF VERSION OF THE REPORTS:

Show Me the Data! (.pdf approx 120KB)
Analyzing USDA Forest Service Appeals (.pdf approx 530KB)