The Fleischman et al. (2020a) article on US Forest Service (FS) implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) correctly identified a decline in the number of NEPA analyses, but several conclusions were not supported by the data used. After analyzing their and other relevant data, we reached substantially different conclusions. Using FS budget data, we found budgets supporting NEPA analyses to be flat to increasing. Likewise, using FS accomplishment data, we found several FS land-management activities increased as others remained flat or decreased. The three types of NEPA analyses took statistically significant different times to complete, and time to complete analyses declined little over 15 years. We also found that litigation rates varied substantially by NEPA analysis type, resource purpose, and FS region. Conducting NEPA analyses is a necessary step in federal land management. However, resources invested in NEPA analyses represent an opportunity cost, and the success of the FS is better measured by on-the-ground accomplishments rather than number of NEPA analyses produced.

中文翻译：

---

对《林业杂志》文章的回应：“美国林务局实施国家环境政策法案：快速、多变、很少诉讼和下降”

Fleischman 等人。(2020a) 关于美国林务局 (FS) 实施国家环境政策法案 (NEPA) 的文章正确地确定了 NEPA 分析数量的下降，但所使用的数据不支持一些结论。在分析了他们和其他相关数据后，我们得出了截然不同的结论。使用 FS 预算数据，我们发现支持 NEPA 分析的预算持平到增加。同样，使用 FS 成就数据，我们发现一些 FS 土地管理活动有所增加，而其他活动则持平或减少。这三种类型的 NEPA 分析花费了具有统计学意义的不同时间来完成，并且完成分析的时间在 15 年多一点下降。我们还发现，诉讼率因 NEPA 分析类型、资源用途和 FS 地区而异。进行 NEPA 分析是联邦土地管理的必要步骤。然而，投资于 NEPA 分析的资源代表了机会成本，并且 FS 的成功更好地通过实地成就而不是产生的 NEPA 分析的数量来衡量。