Murphy DEP Ramping Up Destruction Of NJ Forests
DEP Uses Twisted Climate Logic To Justify Burning And Logging NJ Forests
DEP Has Declared PreEmptive War On NJ Forests
Despite a failed legislative initiative by Senate Environment Committee Chairman Smith to reform NJ DEP’s flawed forest management policies and practices based on credible forest ecological and climate science, DEP is plowing ahead with an expanded program to burn and log NJ’s forests and is using sham climate justifications, scare tactics, and slogans to do so: (NJ DEP press release today):
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Forest Fire Service’s annual prescribed burning program is ramping up as part of a proactive strategy to mitigate the risk of more frequent and intense wildfires in a changing climate…
“Prescribed fire not only fosters resilience and diversity in the landscape, but also helps to safeguard our communities,” Commissioner LaTourette said. “By executing planned prescribed fires throughout New Jersey’s wooded areas, we are limiting the risk of a catastrophic release of carbon during a wildfire.”
In addition, DEP is launching an expanded public relations and propaganda effort to “educate” the public who oppose these destructive DEP projects – the arrogance is stunning:
As part of that plan, a new online information portal is designed to help the public understand and reduce fire risk, Commissioner Shawn M. LaTourette announced today.
This garbage comes from an Agency who has refused to act to truly prevent damaging wildfires by restricting new development and retrofitting existing development in DEP mapped high wildfire hazard areas, see:
DEP has produced no NJ based peer reviewed studies and data to support DEP’s alleged justification to “limiting the risk of a catastrophic release of carbon during a wildfire”.
DEP has no forest carbon storage and sequestration monitoring data or methodology to quantify carbon implications of either controlled burns or wildfires. Their analyses are purely theoretical and lack science and data support, see:
DEP fails to consider the environmental impacts of – including on air quality – and the risks of accidental wildfires caused by their “prescribed burn” program. There is no environmental impact statement that analyzes the program or unintended ecological impacts, see:
Its all speculative bullshit, see:
The DEP can act with impunity, because: 1) the Legislature eliminated liability for damages caused by a prescribed burn; 2) DEP does not have to comply with any permit requirements or environmental standards, including public participation (Facebook, Instagram and Twitter posts and web portals don’t cut legal mustard); and 3) the DEP has co-opted and has the support of some conservation groups, see:
I again demand that Legislators conduct oversight, but given Senator Smith’s failed forestry reform effort, I don’t expect even the courtesy of a reply:
Dear Legislators – Please conduct oversight hearings on these DEP plans. Allow the public to participate in DEP decisions that are destroying our forest resources. Force DEP to justify their “management” with site specific (NJ) science, conduct an open planning process with formal public participation and judicial review, and respond to public comments.