35.3 Opportunities
Service Organic Act. However, these laws are now
employed by federal agencies to build support for
ecosystem management, a distinct departure from
past practice (Keiter, 1998). Another important development involves the fact that courts utilize relevant clauses of such statutes not only to support
ecosystem management, but also to encourage
agency use of comprehensive ecological assessments in natural resources management and planning (Bada, 1995).
Although such developments are relatively recent, the next real hurdle is for the body of law governing private lands to absorb the lessons of ecology. Even this development seems possible, with
private land increasingly regarded as a vital component of an interconnected ecological system that
confers important benefits for the public good
(Keiter, 1998). The November 1998 elections provide significant evidence of advances in this direction, as voters in state and local jurisdictions
around the nation approved over 200 initiatives involving ecologically based planning laws and openspace preservation efforts. As these changes unfold,
ecological assessment will gain in importance as a
tool in support of practical conservation decisions
at multiple spatial scales.
35.3.2 NEPA Evolution
Enacted in 1970, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is our "basic national charter for
protection of the environment" (42 U.S.c.). At the
heart of the statute is the requirement that federal
agencies prepare an environmental assessment
(EA) or detailed statement of the environmental effects of any proposed action that may significantly
affect the quality of the human environment. If the
agency finds no potential significant impacts, no
further action is required; if significant impacts are
anticipated as a consequence of the action, a full
environmental impact statement is required. Although federal agencies are required to take a thorough look at environmental consequences of a proposed action, they are not required to choose the
least environmentally harmful alternative based
on this information (Keiter and Alder, 1997).
Throughout its first 20 years of existence, this absence of substantive provisions prompted many to
criticize NEP A as a primarily procedural law with
little real power to remedy environmental ills
(Keiter, 1990; Fogleman, 1993). Over the last several years, however, public understanding ofNEPA
has evolved. Application of the policy has entered
a new stage, leading many to perceive it as an im521
portant tool for implementing ecosystem management.
One element of the case for NEP A's relevance
to implementing ecosystem management rests on
the language and procedural provisions contained
in the original statute and its implementing regulations (Keiter, 1990). For example, the purpose of
the original act (as amended in 1975) is to "prevent
or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere" and "enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to
the Nation," language that may be interpreted as
being consistent with ecological approaches to biodiversity protection. Similarly, NEPA regulations
mandate consultation among federal agencies; consideration of possible conflicts between proposed
actions and the objectives of federal, state, regional,
and local land-use plans and policies; and recognition of the requirements of other laws governing
public lands and resources. Another supportive aspect entails the specific requirement that environmental assessments and impact statements undertaken in the context of NEPA "utilize a systemic,
interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and
the environmental design arts in planning and in
decisionmaking which may have an impact on
man's environment" [NEPA, section 102(2)(A)].
Finally, one hallmark ofNEPA implementation has
been its public participation requirement and its use
as an opening for inserting public input into dialogue over environmental policy implementation.
In some measure, these procedural requirements
may facilitate the interorganizational cooperation,
integrated interdisciplinary analysis, and public
participation necessary for undertaking ecological
assessments and implementing ecosystem management.
For many observers, the real breakthrough in
NEPA implementation is just emerging and involves advances in the types of situations to which
NEP A and its EA requirements can be applied.
Some areas, such as cumulative impacts assessment, are specifically identified in the original
statutory language. Cumulative impacts generally
refer to effects arising from multiple activities in a
given region that overlap spatially or multiple perturbations from a single, repeated activity over time
(Lane, 1998; Beanlands, 1995). In the NEPA context, cumulative impacts refer to "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable future actions" (40 CFR
sec. 1508.7). Whether it be through atmospheric
nutrient deposition from multiple sources, "leap-
Service Organic Act. However, these laws are now
employed by federal agencies to build support for
ecosystem management, a distinct departure from
past practice (Keiter, 1998). Another important development involves the fact that courts utilize relevant clauses of such statutes not only to support
ecosystem management, but also to encourage
agency use of comprehensive ecological assessments in natural resources management and planning (Bada, 1995).
Although such developments are relatively recent, the next real hurdle is for the body of law governing private lands to absorb the lessons of ecology. Even this development seems possible, with
private land increasingly regarded as a vital component of an interconnected ecological system that
confers important benefits for the public good
(Keiter, 1998). The November 1998 elections provide significant evidence of advances in this direction, as voters in state and local jurisdictions
around the nation approved over 200 initiatives involving ecologically based planning laws and openspace preservation efforts. As these changes unfold,
ecological assessment will gain in importance as a
tool in support of practical conservation decisions
at multiple spatial scales.
35.3.2 NEPA Evolution
Enacted in 1970, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is our "basic national charter for
protection of the environment" (42 U.S.c.). At the
heart of the statute is the requirement that federal
agencies prepare an environmental assessment
(EA) or detailed statement of the environmental effects of any proposed action that may significantly
affect the quality of the human environment. If the
agency finds no potential significant impacts, no
further action is required; if significant impacts are
anticipated as a consequence of the action, a full
environmental impact statement is required. Although federal agencies are required to take a thorough look at environmental consequences of a proposed action, they are not required to choose the
least environmentally harmful alternative based
on this information (Keiter and Alder, 1997).
Throughout its first 20 years of existence, this absence of substantive provisions prompted many to
criticize NEP A as a primarily procedural law with
little real power to remedy environmental ills
(Keiter, 1990; Fogleman, 1993). Over the last several years, however, public understanding ofNEPA
has evolved. Application of the policy has entered
a new stage, leading many to perceive it as an im521
portant tool for implementing ecosystem management.
One element of the case for NEP A's relevance
to implementing ecosystem management rests on
the language and procedural provisions contained
in the original statute and its implementing regulations (Keiter, 1990). For example, the purpose of
the original act (as amended in 1975) is to "prevent
or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere" and "enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to
the Nation," language that may be interpreted as
being consistent with ecological approaches to biodiversity protection. Similarly, NEPA regulations
mandate consultation among federal agencies; consideration of possible conflicts between proposed
actions and the objectives of federal, state, regional,
and local land-use plans and policies; and recognition of the requirements of other laws governing
public lands and resources. Another supportive aspect entails the specific requirement that environmental assessments and impact statements undertaken in the context of NEPA "utilize a systemic,
interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and
the environmental design arts in planning and in
decisionmaking which may have an impact on
man's environment" [NEPA, section 102(2)(A)].
Finally, one hallmark ofNEPA implementation has
been its public participation requirement and its use
as an opening for inserting public input into dialogue over environmental policy implementation.
In some measure, these procedural requirements
may facilitate the interorganizational cooperation,
integrated interdisciplinary analysis, and public
participation necessary for undertaking ecological
assessments and implementing ecosystem management.
For many observers, the real breakthrough in
NEPA implementation is just emerging and involves advances in the types of situations to which
NEP A and its EA requirements can be applied.
Some areas, such as cumulative impacts assessment, are specifically identified in the original
statutory language. Cumulative impacts generally
refer to effects arising from multiple activities in a
given region that overlap spatially or multiple perturbations from a single, repeated activity over time
(Lane, 1998; Beanlands, 1995). In the NEPA context, cumulative impacts refer to "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable future actions" (40 CFR
sec. 1508.7). Whether it be through atmospheric
nutrient deposition from multiple sources, "leap-