调整联邦环境政策,承认火灾的作用

IF 3.6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Sara A. Clark, Jenna N. Archer, Scott L. Stephens, Brandon M. Collins, Don L. Hankins
{"title":"调整联邦环境政策,承认火灾的作用","authors":"Sara A. Clark, Jenna N. Archer, Scott L. Stephens, Brandon M. Collins, Don L. Hankins","doi":"10.1186/s42408-024-00301-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Enactment of the Clean Air Act (CAA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), three of the primary federal environmental laws, all coincided with the height of fire suppression and exclusion in the United States. These laws fail to acknowledge or account for the importance of fire in many fire-adapted and fire-dependent ecosystems, particularly in the American west, or the imperative for fire restoration to improve resiliency and reduce wildfire risk as identified by western science and Indigenous knowledge. We review the statutory and regulatory provisions of these federal laws to identify how the existing policy framework misaligns with the unique role of fire in ecosystems and with Tribal sovereignty, identify specific barriers and disincentives to beneficial fire use, and propose specific policy reforms. The CAA, the ESA, and NEPA inhibit the use of beneficial fire as they are founded in a policy framework that treats fire restoration and maintenance as a federal action or human activity, rather than as a natural, baseline, or keystone process. The emergency exceptions in these policies reduce accountability and incentivize the wrong kind of fire, and compliance creates a perverse outcome by disincentivizing fire restoration. Further, these federal policies impede Tribal sovereignty. Modifications to these laws would better enable fire restoration in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems, reduce wildfire risk, and ultimately meet the statutes’ core purposes. Federal agencies and Congress should reform regulatory frameworks to explicitly recognize fire as a baseline, natural, or keystone process, such that restoring fire in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems at levels not significantly exceeding pre-1800 fire return intervals is not treated as a federal or agency action. Further, non-Tribal governments should not attempt to regulate cultural burning, as it is a retained right of Indigenous peoples.","PeriodicalId":12273,"journal":{"name":"Fire Ecology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Realignment of federal environmental policies to recognize fire’s role\",\"authors\":\"Sara A. Clark, Jenna N. Archer, Scott L. Stephens, Brandon M. Collins, Don L. Hankins\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42408-024-00301-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Enactment of the Clean Air Act (CAA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), three of the primary federal environmental laws, all coincided with the height of fire suppression and exclusion in the United States. These laws fail to acknowledge or account for the importance of fire in many fire-adapted and fire-dependent ecosystems, particularly in the American west, or the imperative for fire restoration to improve resiliency and reduce wildfire risk as identified by western science and Indigenous knowledge. We review the statutory and regulatory provisions of these federal laws to identify how the existing policy framework misaligns with the unique role of fire in ecosystems and with Tribal sovereignty, identify specific barriers and disincentives to beneficial fire use, and propose specific policy reforms. The CAA, the ESA, and NEPA inhibit the use of beneficial fire as they are founded in a policy framework that treats fire restoration and maintenance as a federal action or human activity, rather than as a natural, baseline, or keystone process. The emergency exceptions in these policies reduce accountability and incentivize the wrong kind of fire, and compliance creates a perverse outcome by disincentivizing fire restoration. Further, these federal policies impede Tribal sovereignty. Modifications to these laws would better enable fire restoration in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems, reduce wildfire risk, and ultimately meet the statutes’ core purposes. Federal agencies and Congress should reform regulatory frameworks to explicitly recognize fire as a baseline, natural, or keystone process, such that restoring fire in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems at levels not significantly exceeding pre-1800 fire return intervals is not treated as a federal or agency action. Further, non-Tribal governments should not attempt to regulate cultural burning, as it is a retained right of Indigenous peoples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fire Ecology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fire Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-024-00301-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fire Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-024-00301-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国颁布《清洁空气法》(CAA)、《濒危物种法》(ESA)和《国家环境政策法》(NEPA)这三部主要的联邦环境法时,正值美国灭火和排火的高峰期。这些法律没有承认或考虑到火在许多适应火和依赖火的生态系统中的重要性,尤其是在美国西部,也没有承认或考虑到西部科学和土著知识所确定的恢复火灾以提高恢复能力和降低野火风险的必要性。我们审查了这些联邦法律的法定和监管条款,以确定现有政策框架如何与火灾在生态系统中的独特作用以及部落主权不一致,确定有益用火的具体障碍和抑制因素,并提出具体的政策改革建议。民用航空法》(CAA)、《环境安全法》(ESA)和《国家环境影响评估法》(NEPA)抑制了有益火灾的使用,因为它们所依据的政策框架将火灾的恢复和维护视为一种联邦行为或人类活动,而不是一种自然的、基准的或关键的过程。这些政策中的紧急例外情况降低了责任感,激励了错误的用火方式,而遵守这些政策又会抑制火灾的恢复,从而造成不正常的结果。此外,这些联邦政策还妨碍了部落主权。修改这些法律可以更好地恢复依赖火源和适应火源的生态系统,降低野火风险,并最终实现法规的核心目的。联邦机构和国会应改革监管框架,明确承认火灾是一个基线、自然或关键过程,从而使依赖火灾和适应火灾的生态系统中的火灾恢复水平不明显超过 1800 年以前的火灾重现间隔时间不被视为联邦或机构行为。此外,非部落政府不应试图管理文化燃烧,因为这是土著人民保留的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Realignment of federal environmental policies to recognize fire’s role
Enactment of the Clean Air Act (CAA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), three of the primary federal environmental laws, all coincided with the height of fire suppression and exclusion in the United States. These laws fail to acknowledge or account for the importance of fire in many fire-adapted and fire-dependent ecosystems, particularly in the American west, or the imperative for fire restoration to improve resiliency and reduce wildfire risk as identified by western science and Indigenous knowledge. We review the statutory and regulatory provisions of these federal laws to identify how the existing policy framework misaligns with the unique role of fire in ecosystems and with Tribal sovereignty, identify specific barriers and disincentives to beneficial fire use, and propose specific policy reforms. The CAA, the ESA, and NEPA inhibit the use of beneficial fire as they are founded in a policy framework that treats fire restoration and maintenance as a federal action or human activity, rather than as a natural, baseline, or keystone process. The emergency exceptions in these policies reduce accountability and incentivize the wrong kind of fire, and compliance creates a perverse outcome by disincentivizing fire restoration. Further, these federal policies impede Tribal sovereignty. Modifications to these laws would better enable fire restoration in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems, reduce wildfire risk, and ultimately meet the statutes’ core purposes. Federal agencies and Congress should reform regulatory frameworks to explicitly recognize fire as a baseline, natural, or keystone process, such that restoring fire in fire-dependent and fire-adapted ecosystems at levels not significantly exceeding pre-1800 fire return intervals is not treated as a federal or agency action. Further, non-Tribal governments should not attempt to regulate cultural burning, as it is a retained right of Indigenous peoples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Fire Ecology
Fire Ecology ECOLOGY-FORESTRY
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
7.80%
发文量
24
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Fire Ecology is the international scientific journal supported by the Association for Fire Ecology. Fire Ecology publishes peer-reviewed articles on all ecological and management aspects relating to wildland fire. We welcome submissions on topics that include a broad range of research on the ecological relationships of fire to its environment, including, but not limited to: Ecology (physical and biological fire effects, fire regimes, etc.) Social science (geography, sociology, anthropology, etc.) Fuel Fire science and modeling Planning and risk management Law and policy Fire management Inter- or cross-disciplinary fire-related topics Technology transfer products.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信