Good read on public land use

BigHornyRam

New member
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
433
Location
T Falls, MT
March 15, 2003
Interior official pitches President Bush's plan to manage public land

By SHERRY DEVLIN of the Missoulian

Public lands can, should and will be used to sustain rural communities and to strengthen local economies, the Interior Department's assistant secretary for land and minerals management told foresters meeting in Missoula on Friday.

"Policymakers need to recognize the fundamental relationship between public land management and communities," said Rebecca Watson, an attorney who worked for a Helena law firm before being appointed assistant secretary by President Bush.

Libby is proof of the role public lands can - but sometimes don't - play in keeping a community strong, Watson told the annual meeting of the Montana and Inland Empire chapters of the Society of American Foresters. When Stimson Lumber Co. closed its mill in Libby this winter, 300 people lost their jobs and the town lost $14 million in annual payroll.

"Many of the millwrights, supervisors and electricians have already left the area for jobs in other places, but what happens to those who remain?" she asked. "Can a job at the local grocery store or in tourism meet their needs? Montanans know the answer is no."

Watson, whose duties include oversight of the Bureau of Land Management, said she went to Washington intent on making a difference by changing the "divisive, litigious dialogue" that was occurring in the West and by managing public lands in a way that supports sustainable, healthy rural communities.

She found part of the answer in the Healthy Forests Initiative unveiled by Bush last August, at the height of a wildfire season that saw 7.2 million acres of forest land burn - and thousands of people evacuated in Colorado, Arizona, Oregon and California.

"Heroic fighting of fires after they start is not enough," Watson told the foresters. "We need to look at the causes of our susceptibility to fire. One reason fires are burning hotter and faster is because of drought. Another reason is a century of forest practices that we now know were wrong."

The Healthy Forests Initiative seeks to improve the health of 190 million acres of federal forest and range lands by clearing the thickets of trees and undergrowth left after nearly a century of fire suppression on those lands, Watson said.

As proposed by Bush, the initiative would give federal land managers the tools they need to quicken the pace of forest thinning, she said - by eliminating the right of citizens to administratively appeal forest health projects, limiting the scope of environmental reports, insisting on early public participation, and hurrying the inter-agency consultations needed to satisfy the Endangered Species Act.

Citizens could still take their complaints about specific projects to court, but Congress would ask judges to give greater consideration to the long-term risks of harm to people, property and the environment if forests are not thinned.

And while environmental groups have assailed the proposed plan as "logging without laws" and have said the changes would remove citizens from the decisionmaking process, Watson said she believes the proposed changes are "modest."

"They are not logging without laws," she said. "They do not change the substantive requirements of any environmental laws. Neither do they eliminate public participation or citizens' rights to appeal or litigate. We believe these changes will help us restore the health of our forests and range lands, and reduce the risks to our communities in a more meaningful time frame."

And while the war on terrorism, homeland security and the impending war against Iraq are the Bush administration's priorities, the state of the nation's forests remains an important part of the agenda in Washington, Watson said. "The federal family is making progress in implementing the president's Healthy Forests Initiative."

But she said she needs the foresters' help, as they have the "expertise, experience and commitment to the sustainability of America's forests."

In fact, the professional group's annual meeting is focused on "the active management of federal lands for sustainable forest ecosystems in the northern Rockies." On Friday, that included presentations for and against commercial logging on public lands, then Watson's luncheon talk.

"This administration," she said, "believes that economic use is not only compatible with conservation, but conservation is dependent on a healthy, vibrant economy. When our economy is strong, our communities are strong and we care for the environment and can afford to invest in its conservation."

The SAF's meeting continues Saturday morning at the Holiday Inn Parkside with presentations by Lolo National Forest supervisor Debbie Austin and Jim Burchfield, director of the University of Montana's Bolle Center for People and Forests.
 
Total political BS. It will just give logging companies free reign to rape the forests and the taxpayers to pay them for doing it. Just a payback for political campaign contributions and support.


Dont give a rats ass about the lumber company closing down. Sux to be them. If they cant make a profit without government assistance then they need to not be a viable company. The workers can always train to do another type of work or move to where there is work. Thast is the way it is done where companies dont get welfare from the government.


But as for the fire prevention scheme. I have read in various articles that the logging practices are also accountable for the various spreading of fires. Dont they also cut down the older growth and trees that are more apt to resist fires? Then they will leave the low profit trees just laying there? Now the taxpayer will have to pay for them to remove the stuff they left behind before? Maybe not the same company but has to be a better way to do it.

You go from one extreme (Clinton era/liberal) to another extreme (Bush/conservative). And neither one will ever get it right.
frown.gif
 
Its kind of funny, when a mill closes in MT or anywhere else its the FS that takes the blame, its environmentalists that take the blame. But who is REALLY to blame? Thats easy, the timber companies.

The fact is, Montana simply cant sustain the amount of harvest that it takes to operate a bunch of mills in MT. Any decent lumber mill is a timber gobbler, running through timber way faster than it can be grown. Most timber companies in MT realize that, and thats why mills shut down. MT's economy has always suffered because of the "rape and run" methods of mining and timber companies.

In Montana, and much of the interior west rotation age is 80-120 years...thats a long time to grow a tree. Its also very easy to over-harvest.

Another thing thats never considered is that the gross over-harvest of Plum Creek, Champion, etc. has left the FS with little latitude in cutting whats left. The FS is bound by law to manage for multiple use and multiple resources. Therefore, if Plum Creek decides to nuke all the timber from their lands, the FS by law, must keep its stands intact to preserve water sheds, wildlife security, view sheds, etc. etc. The state forests also suffer from Plum Creeks over-harvesting, they are bound by the same laws.

So, while its convienant and easy to blame the FS its not very realistic to do so. If companies like PC had cut at a half-assed sustained rate IE: non-declining even flow, then more FS sales would be allowed. Thats a fact. Unfortunately, what they've (PC, Champion, etc) done is forced the FS into a corner by their constant thought of "maximizing profit."

They have raped their own private lands then blame the FS for a lack of trees? For Christ sake, why cant they harvest at a rate to sustain themselves? Simple, they couldnt set record numbers for profit. They could still make money, but just not gross amounts like they do by accelerating harvest.

On the fuels reduction program, I think its a good idea, but harvest should be restricted to those areas in urban/wildland interface areas. It should also be limited to removal of the smallest diameter trees, leaving the larger trees, IMO.
 
Maybe all those out of work loggers can become firefighters. I've seen it done before.
wink.gif


Oak
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,567
Messages
2,025,360
Members
36,235
Latest member
Camillelynn
Back
Top