April 29, 2009

Book Review: Our Unprotected Heritage: Whitewashing the Destruction of Our Cultural & Natural Envrionment

Our Unprotected Heritage: Whitewashing the Destruction of our Cultural and Natural Treasures takes a hard look at the interplay between the preservation of our heritage (both cultural and natural) and unabated development. Written by Thomas F. King, this book begins by exploring the myth that the US government has laws that protect our natural places. I know firsthand about this assumption recalling when my parents first visited me in the west. Like many Americans, my parents assumed that US National Forests were protected land. They were shocked to see the destructive clearcuts that were taking place in the early 90s.

King divides environmental laws into two categories: bright green laws and light green laws. Bright green laws apply to everyone (more or less), involve "hard-and-fast quantitative criteria", and are enforceable. Light green laws, such as National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), apply to federal agencies and their are rarely enforceable consequences, such as jail time or fines, for violations. They are supposed to be self-enforcing, and they involve subjective criteria.

NEPA has long been thought of as the champion of the environment, and in my experience, it often works. I have seen NEPA stop destructive "salvage" logging sales in old growth forests that were not harmed by mild fire. I have also seen NEPA be skirted, such as in projects for forest stand improvement under the guise of fire prevention. Instead of looking at each project individually, including endangered species, statewide projects fell under one NEPA review.

King identifies five problems with our current environmental impact assessment (EIA) and cultural resource management (CRM):

Specialist hired to complete reports have a vested interest in seeing projects completed because they work for the clients that hire them.

Federal agencies view EIAs and CRMs as hurdles they need for "clearance" to projects rather than taking their responsibilities seriously.

Agencies overseeing these these assessments (Council on Environmental Quality and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation) have no real authority.

The EIA and CRM systems are not transparent and offer limited opportunities for participation.

We have accepted the system they way it is and don't demand change.

King offers solutions to fix the system, namely strengthening NEPA by keeping it politically and publicly prominent, so that we can truly move towards effective environmental policy. We must revise NEPA and "amend the US Constitution to give environmental protection the status of fundamental law."